Evidence of meeting #21 for Public Accounts in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was agreements.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
David Sweet Conservative Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON
It said that you would be reporting on the progress beginning in spring 2008. Are we there?
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Well, we can do that, and we'll do it on an ongoing basis, probably through the website, and there may be some references that you can get through the performance report. There are over 80 obligations.
I think it would be helpful to members of Parliament to keep track of what's happened, because you wouldn't be characterizing it as an empty shell if you note that there were 91,000 square kilometres of land transferred, $300 million worth of money. There are all kinds of governance bodies up and running and functioning and giving the Inuvialuit people a voice in decision-making. And we'd be very candid about where there are deficiencies and issues.
Conservative
David Sweet Conservative Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON
Will you keep us up to date then through the DPRs?
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
We have to negotiate the format and the length of DPRs with Treasury Board, and we're down to under 30 pages, with hot links to websites, to characterize everything my department does. It's a bit of a challenge.
We will keep the public informed and parliamentarians informed. One of the accountability tools is that there are annual reports attached to most of the land claims agreements; many of them have a statute that Parliament passed for implementation. They require annual reporting. They're a joint report to the parties, and those reports, I think, could be more detailed and fulsome and more candid about where there are issues. They tend to be rather positive and rosy, and I think the reports would be more useful to Parliament if they were more candid.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you, Mr. Sweet.
Colleagues, we are now going to start the second round. We're going to have a round of four minutes, but I'm going to have to be fairly brutal on time.
Mr. Campbell, do you have a comment?
Then I'm going to go to Mr. Hubbard.
Assistant Auditor General, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
I think there have been several references to a disagreement. In an effort to try to be helpful, I would sort of offer the following. Mr. Wernick introduced a notion that there was a respectful disagreement between us. That was a surprise to me. In the subsequent articulation and discussion of that disagreement, I don't see that there is a disagreement.
I think there are two issues. One is who has ownership of the overall objectives and principles of the agreement. What I hear the department saying is it's not the department alone. We agree with that. We never said otherwise.
We believe that notwithstanding that ownership is shared, there should be a measurement of the progress towards attaining those principles. And the department agrees with that.
I would point out that in a recommendation in paragraph 3.85 we actually say “the department in consultation with” those other parties.
I just wouldn't want members to believe that there's a disagreement where I don't think there is one, unless Mr. Wernick still believes there is.
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
There isn't one any more--not on my watch.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Campbell.
Mr. Hubbard is next, for four minutes.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
Thank you again, Mr. Chair.
I asked before who was the lead on this file, and Mr. Sewell said he had a lead. I wonder if that person is in the room.
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
She's not here, sir.
Liberal
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
I'll appeal to the chair on this. This has been an issue with this committee. I'm the accountable deputy head, the ADM is sitting beside you, and the director general is sitting beside him.
Liberal
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
She's under my supervision.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
But the minister is your boss too. Have you briefed the minister thoroughly on your concerns about this report?
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
I understand that the minister was briefed directly by the Auditor General on it.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
I expect that you as deputy would also brief him on what you planned to do about it.
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
We have done that.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
That's what we're trying to do today.
When I read some of these statements and consider what we've had today in responses, I have to ask myself whether DIAND works for first nations people or for the best interests of other Canadians. I know I can't get an answer to that, but I wonder who DIAND works for.
It has always been my impression that the minister has to represent first nations people. It's his responsibility to see that they receive the benefits of our great Canadian nation--a nation they controlled until a few hundred years ago. If we don't take that as the ultimate responsibility of the department and the minister, I wonder how we as Canadians can have a government to maintain this country.
With the file, when you go back to 1983-84, I assume that before it was signed, other departments were involved in signing off on that agreement. Is that correct, or was it simply signed by DIAND and the Government of Canada? Was it signed off by Parks Canada? Was it signed off by Transport Canada? Was it signed off by the Department of National of Defence? Did all those deputy ministers sign a due diligence on this agreement before it was brought to the Governor in Council to be signed as good Canadians making an agreement with people in the north of our country?
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Every negotiating mandate and settlement is approved by cabinet.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
I'm not asking about that, Mr. Wernick. I'm asking if each department signed off on this agreement. I would think that the Department of Justice, for example, would be one of the departments that concluded the whole process. When you open that file and see the due diligence that was done in the 1980s, did other departments agree in that presentation that went to cabinet for approval?
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
It would not have been approved by cabinet if there had not been agreement by all the ministers in the room, and Parliament.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
I'm not asking that, Mr. Wernick. I'm asking, in terms of the file you have in your department that Mr. Sewell was responsible for under Mr. Roy, does the due diligence show that other departments...? DND, for example, was big there in 1983 and 1984. Did the Minister of National Defence or the deputy sign off, in due diligence, that he agreed with what your department negotiated?
Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
I don't have the cabinet records from 23 years ago. It would not have been approved by cabinet, nor indeed by Parliament, which passed limitation legislation, if there were problems with those departments.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
I still haven't heard from Mr. Sewell on the file. He has twenty-some files to manage. This file goes back to the early 1980s. Today he's dealing with National Defence, Parks Canada, and Transport Canada. Did those departments sign off on the file before it went to cabinet?