Public Accounts Committee on June 13th, 2006

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Ladies and gentlemen, at this point in time I'd like to call the meeting to order.

I want to welcome everyone here.

I want to welcome to the committee Mr. Michael Wernick. Michael is the new Deputy Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

He has asked to appear before the committee, and the committee certainly welcomes his presence. He was unable to attend the last meeting because of an emergency. The steering committee agreed that it is important to have the deputy here as part of the chapter we're writing on some of the issues surrounding the recommendations coming from the Auditor General's office dealing with the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

Mr. Wernick, I understand you have an opening statement. The floor is yours.

[Michael Wernick, Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

If it's all right with you, Mr. Chairman, I thought I'd take a few minutes--I promise to be brief--and then have an exchange with the committee.

The first thing I should do is thank you for the opportunity to come here today and for accommodating what were unforeseen circumstances last week.

As I said in my letter to you, I treat relations with parliamentary committees and Parliament very seriously. In all of my previous jobs I had very constructive relationships with the parliamentary committees overseeing the department. I've had many opportunities to appear at and work with parliamentary committees. I understand the importance of your work.

It really was a crisis situation last week. I think if any of you caught your BlackBerrys or your newswires, you will have seen that the situation in Caledonia got a lot better today. Barricades are being dismantled. I think the situation is improving by the hour.

It was my decision to attend the other meeting on short notice and not be here, and I unreservedly apologize to the committee for any inconvenience it has caused you in your work or your deliberations. I hope we can move forward today.

What I'd like is to very briefly, because I know you've had the opportunity to talk to the Auditor General and some of my officials, do a little treetop view of the comments on the Auditor General's report that was tabled last month and talk a little bit about the actions the department has taken, and, more importantly, intends to take, to address the recommendations that were raised in a series of reports over the last few years.

As the new Deputy Minister of a department that is responsible for spending several billion dollars each year to improve the living conditions of First Nations, Inuit and Métis, I can assure you that we all strive to attain the highest possible value from the money taxpayers entrust to us. And we adhere strictly to principles of probity and prudence. Money is spent honestly and wisely to further the purposes for which it is intended.

My department concurs with the Auditor General's identification of the seven critical factors that appear to enable the successful implementation of her recommendations. Specifically, the factors described in chapter 5 of the Status Report are, as you know: good coordination among departments; sustained attention to sound management practices; meaningful consultations with First Nations; building capacity within First Nations; an appropriate legislative base for programs; support for First Nation institutions; and recognition of INAC's potentially conflicting roles.

Mr. Chairman, I can assure you that these factors will guide and inform the design and implementation of policies and programs and services in the coming months and years.

Let me just move on to talk a bit about some of the specific issues that were highlighted in the Auditor General's report and talk about how some of these factors may come into play.

On the issue of mould in first nations housing, I accept entirely the challenge of bringing together, in my convening role, the three departments that have accountabilities on this file. What I have is the ability to convene, and I am going to be meeting with the president of CMHC later this week. My senior assistant deputy minister, Paul LeBlanc, whom you met last week, is pulling together an ADM's group, and there is a meeting taking place even this Friday of a working group between my department, CMHC, and Health Canada, and I can inform you that the Assembly of First Nations is involved in this exercise and is involved in shaping the framework, which we hope to turn very quickly into a concrete action plan moving forward.

So we are going to get our act together among the three departments, and I'd be happy to come back to the committee in the months ahead and report on the progress.

There's a lot to be done in that area, as you know. As the Auditor General pointed out, there are important things governments can do and important things that can be done in the community and by individual homeowners. There are issues to do with construction, with home maintenance, with practices of ventilation, and so on. We have a role to play as government and as funder. We will meet our responsibilities and help others to meet theirs.

There has been some improvement—not enough and not fast enough—but we are trying to ensure that on-reserve housing meets appropriate codes and standards, and we are trying to enforce the National Building Code in the construction of housing. It will be of importance in safeguarding the new investments taxpayers are going to fund in the renovation and creation of new housing and ensuring that these investments are not vulnerable to the mould issue.

We're working with first nations governments to raise awareness in the communities, to equip people with the knowledge and the tools and the actions they can take as occupants of housing to prevent and combat mould. Information material is being published and distributed. We're organizing training sessions in communities and bringing expert advice to bear.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

I'm sorry to interrupt you, but we generally restrict our opening comments to five minutes. Perhaps I can give you another minute to wrap up, and then we'll go right on with—

[Michael Wernick]

All right. I'll fast forward then.

In terms of the implementation of comprehensive claims agreements, we recognize implementation will be a huge part of the effectiveness. We've started an evaluation process around the impact of claims in communities. We have meetings going on with the parties to these claims. There's a national conference taking place in late June, and we're bringing to bear workshops and expertise on results-based management so that we move beyond strictly the legal obligations to the shared objectives these claims settlements represent.

I can report on progress regarding the food mail program perhaps, if that comes up in the questions. We are going through a review of the operations and the entry points, and there are pilot projects under way.

In terms of management controls and the reporting burden, we are trying to hack away at the underbrush of reporting, trying to reduce the number of national and regional reports, automate financial systems, and put in place more state-of-the-art transfer payment systems. As you know, the department works on hundreds of contribution agreements. A contribution agreement is money in exchange for reporting on what it was used for, so it's not surprising that there's a lot of reporting. We accept the challenge of pruning and simplifying this over the coming years and bringing new technology to bear, to automate and to make it as easy as possible for the recipients of funding.

I won't rehash the minister's priorities or the government's priorities. This subject was aired at the aboriginal affairs committee last week. I think he's been relatively clear on them, and therefore I and my department have our marching orders in terms of priorities going forward.

I think I'd close on the observation that the Auditor General's work is a very important management tool for us, very important in terms of shaping policy proposals and program design going forward.

I find her enunciation of seven principles or seven standards or success factors enormously useful going forward, including the one about having a modern legislative base for core programs. It's my impression, after three and a half weeks in the department, that the department is being asked to do an awful lot with antiquated legislation and financial tools, and that this committee's advice and the Auditor General's advice on the tool kit available to us as public service managers will be enormously helpful. Therefore, I look forward to working with the committee in the months ahead.

I'll conclude on that note, Mr. Chairman, to allow committee members an opportunity to put their questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Wernick.

We have allotted 45 minutes for this session, and I don't want to go over because we have three committee reports I'd like to get done this morning, if at all possible.

What I propose is one round of five minutes each.

Ms. Ratansi, five minutes.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

And thank you for being here.

When were you appointed as the Deputy Minister for Indian Affairs?

[Michael Wernick]

About a month ago.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

So regarding the questions I'll be asking you, you might say you were not there, but I still want to know if you guys can do something about it.

With $8 billion that the federal government invests, you have 360 programs targeted at the aboriginal communities. Why do you have 360 programs?

In your analysis, will you review those 360 programs to see if they are efficiently addressing the needs? Despite the fact that there are 360 programs, you still do not have programs comprehensively dealing with housing, health care, etc. They are still below the national average.

So can you give me an analysis of what were your first priorities when you took over?

[Michael Wernick]

I can give you—

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Wernick, I'm sorry to interrupt you.

I continue to caution the members that you have five minutes. We'll check your time off, Ms. Ratansi. We don't need three-minute preambles.

And Mr. Wernick, we do not tolerate long, rambling answers.

Keep the questions short, colleagues, and keep the answers brief, Mr. Wernick.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

I have three points. What is he doing with the 360 programs, the efficiency of them, and why are they still below the national average?

[Michael Wernick]

I'll try to be as quick as possible.

I believe the number is across the Government of Canada. That's a Treasury Board assessment of how many programs across the Government of Canada affect aboriginal Canadians.

My department runs many of them, but not all. There are other institutions like CMHC, which is in the housing business, that work with aboriginal communities. Health Canada is in the health business and works with aboriginal communities, and so on.

Is it as coherent as it could be? Absolutely not, and one of the challenges we have is effective partnerships. Indian Affairs and Northern Development was built around a core mandate of services to first nations communities. We're not very good at dealing with off-reserve and urban aboriginal issues. The only way we can reach some of those populations, or even do a good job on reserves, is to mobilize the expertise and talents of specialized departments.

My department is not in the health business. It is not CMHC, nor is it Industry Canada, in terms of broadband connectedness. One of my jobs is to try to lever and mobilize those efforts right across the Government of Canada.

It could be pruned; it can be rationalized—absolutely. That's why the Treasury Board exercise, which generated the 360-program inventory, and which I believe you're quoting, was launched

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

My last question is that you talked about how you're going to bring about efficiency. Regarding the consensus-based decision-making displayed at the Kelowna first ministers meeting, do you think that would have helped or would help? Have you got any comments or judgment on it?

[Michael Wernick]

I'm not going to comment on Kelowna per se. In any area of public policy, whether it's reform to employment insurance, or agriculture, or trade policy, consultation with the people affected is an important role. We have a job to do there, and so do parliamentarians.

In the world of aboriginal policy, there is a bedrock of recognized aboriginal and treaty rights, and legal obligations from the Supreme Court for consultations that make it doubly important to work and consult with the aboriginal peoples affected by our decisions. So if Kelowna is a proxy for engaging and consulting aboriginal peoples affected by our laws and policies, absolutely it would help.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

I would like to have my colleague ask another question.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

As a continuation on that, you indicate here on page 3 in your opening remarks, with respect to specific factors described to implement her recommendations...and you talked about good coordination among departments, and so forth. Aren't these all the guiding principles that were determined and discussed in the Kelowna discussions?

[Michael Wernick]

I'm not conversant, chapter and verse, with the Kelowna accord. I think there are things that were not in Kelowna.

Kelowna was a very important diagnostic of what was important: housing, education, economic development, relationships, and so on. We don't need a royal commission to tell us those are the important issues, and those are the priorities my minister set out at the aboriginal affairs committee.

There were issues that were not in Kelowna, such as on-reserve water, housing, and infrastructure. It didn't deal so much with the governance issues, which the previous governments attempted to take on in terms of putting first nations governments on a more modern basis. So there are other issues that can be added to the mix.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

But speaking in terms of the implementation of the seven points discussed here, aren't they consistent with the guiding principles that were the driving force in the Kelowna accord? I see similarities, and that's what I'm trying to get at. The point is that—

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Bains keeps referring to the Kelowna accord. I didn't think it was actually an accord. The deputy minister just refers to Kelowna—

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

No, he said Kelowna accord. You can check the blues. He said Kelowna accord. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but he said Kelowna accord.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Can we have that tabled so that we can follow your line of questioning?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

It was part of the fiscal update last fall.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Could I get everyone's attention, please? Normally, this would be ruled out of order, because it's getting into policy.

Mr. Williams, the response Mr. Prentice and the previous deputy minister gave referred to the dialogue and the agreements that were set out in Kelowna. They went on for four chapters. Obviously Mr. Prentice was extremely impressed with the agreements and dialogues that arose out of Kelowna, as was Mr. Horgan. Because of the answer they gave to the observations and recommendations from the Auditor General, the question is relevant. There is something that happened in Kelowna that impressed somebody.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

[Inaudible--Editor]...in the spirit of the question. It is that we're going forward and we want to find solutions. We want to make sure we address these issues. I think the Kelowna accord is a key stepping stone towards finding these solutions.

I just want to get your feedback on the Kelowna accord and the principles that were discussed. Are they valid principles that will help with the implementation going forward in the areas with respect to the recommendations you've outlined here?

[Michael Wernick]

My comment would echo what Minister Prentice said at the previous committee. What happened in Kelowna in terms of a diagnostic of the issues—bringing all levels of government to the table, bringing the whole federal government around the table to cooperate, the focus on measurable, clear objectives, targets, and reporting—is absolutely a basis on which to go forward. I believe Mr. Prentice said that.

The spirit of rolling up our sleeves and trying to tackle the conditions of first nations and aboriginal peoples is absolutely something to go forward with. I'm not going to get into the semantics of accord or not accord, and who signed what and who's bound by what. There were political undertakings more than legal undertakings. I think everybody has said it's a basis on which to move forward, whether or not it's more in the spirit than the letter of the agreement, and the priorities my minister set out at the aboriginal affairs committee last week are very similar.