Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 12th, 2009

[Michael Wernick]

Well, we're waiting for budgets to pop up to know if we have the resources to proceed with these agreements, because they require some upfront investment to get the new services going.

As we were saying earlier, we're quite confident that this will change the pattern of cases and lead to savings later. Until I saw the budget of just a month ago, I didn't know for sure whether, or how fast, we'd be able to proceed this year. We got enough to do at least one more province, and probably two more, this year.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

I'm concerned then with the follow-up. First we have the Auditor General's report, and you have your own in-house evaluations and audits. You alluded earlier...of course, you have to bring forward per se to be able to deal with this.

I noticed in the Auditor General's report, on page 35, the following: “It began a comprehensive validation exercise in February 2008 to be completed by December 2008.” Well, that is past. What is the status of it?

[Michael Wernick]

On the validation exercise, I will turn to Ms. Johnston.

[Odette Johnston]

We've been meeting with first nations. We started meeting with them in December to go over the validation. We're expecting to be completing that in March.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Fine. So this committee could expect to see a report should we ask for it.

[Odette Johnston]

On the performance measurements, yes.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Thank you very kindly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Kramp.

Monsieur Desnoyers, pour quatre minutes.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I, like some of my colleagues, find some elements of this report devastating. I have a few questions about this.

We are dealing with 8,300 children taken into care. We hear that regular investigations are being carried out on 297 persons, to be specific, and this affects more than 103,000 persons inside. Is there any estimation of the cost of these investigations? Is it or is it not a part of the sum of $270 million committed to the program?

We note that the birth rate among aboriginal peoples is increasing much more rapidly than the birth rate in Canada in general. The funding formula is based on the fact that 6.6% of children live on-reserve, whereas the true figure could be as high as 28%. Therefore, the allotted budgets may well have to be substantially adjusted.

I have other concerns about this. We hear that funds committed to community infrastructure and housing were taken and transferred to the child care program. This is significant, in view of the fact that the entire current program is not monitored in any way and has practically no accountability. As we look at this program, we note that it is a kind of free-for-all. What will finally come out of all this for the children?

There is no analysis with specific figures to inform us of the impact on children. As we heard, there are no evaluation indicators either. This is worrisome. A great deal of money is involved, whereas, on the other hand, very little information is forthcoming from the department.

Finally, I would like to discuss the connection between Health Canada and yourselves. This seems to give rise to serious disputes that have a significant impact on the children. I would like to have some examples of the impact of these kinds of problems when they arise. If there are disputes or issues that last for years, what will happen to the children's health? The whole picture of governance that involves Health Canada and yourselves, with regard to health, is a major issue.

I just put several questions to you all at the same time.

[Michael Wernick]

They are very good questions.

Regarding the situation with Health Canada, I can tell you that we have solved the problem of the implementation of the solutions.

As for the accountability model, it is not a free-for-all. As I tried to explain, these agencies work in step with provincial legislation. Thus, activities in Quebec are governed by the legislation adopted by the Assemblée nationale du Québec. If any problems arise, a Quebec minister has the needed authority to solve the problem.

There are all kinds of responsibilities toward provinces. There is also a certification process. The agencies must be certified according to international standards.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

We know how things work in Quebec. This report deals with Canada in general. Therefore, my questions are also general and have to do with the rest of Canada.

[Michael Wernick]

You noted that there was a free-for-all, but not as far as accountability is concerned. There is a dual accountability toward the provinces and toward us. There may have been a lack of coordination in the past, but the agency is very much accountable for the delivery of services. And as this is a provincial area of jurisdiction, the first level of accountability for the agency is the provincial minister.

The 6% does not represent the program's rate of growth. As I said, expenditures have gone up enormously over the past 15 years. We always pay the bills with an eye to the best interests of the children. This is the reason why the costs went up to nearly $150 million.

Perhaps I did not catch all your questions.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

You have taken funds out of those budgets and committed them to children in care. What happens to infrastructure and to housing? You did not answer that question.

[Michael Wernick]

This is the financial framework we have been working with since 1995. We have an envelope for on-reserve services. Some services are limited to a growth rate of 2% per year. If something goes over this rate, we have to get the funds from another envelope. We have been living with this for the past 15 years.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Desnoyers.

Mr. Weston, you have four minutes.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I would like to use Mr. Shipley's microphone, please.

Thank you, Madam Fraser, for this report. Through its far-reaching nature, many deficiencies have been outlined, for sure, as well as some aspects of hope.

The problems are very frustrating, Mr. Wernick. They're constitutional, they're demographic, they're fiscal, and they're administrative. I authored a report on self-governance to the Canadian Bar Association. I've been in the courts acting for aboriginal people. I didn't know there were 38 departments responsible for administering the different aspects. It's unbelievable.

I see three levels of interest. First, I think for the next 50 to 100 years, issues of self-governance will be the most important constitutional issues in Canada, and therefore this is relevant to all Canadians. Second, children are involved, and they are Canada's future. It's been said that it takes a village or a community to raise a child. Well, all Canadian parents have to be concerned about your report and all these kids who are mentioned in your report as the most vulnerable. And, third, there are three first nations in the riding that I have the honour to represent: the Sliammon, the Sechelt, and the Squamish, all of whom have different issues. I've been in close consultation with them on treaty issues relating to the Sliammon; the allocation of revenues for natural resources with the Sechelt; and in terms of access to credit with the Squamish.

You talk about the many shortcomings, and those are clear for us to see. I think it's worth noting that there have been accomplishments. You referred to some of them. This government has made major investments to address priority areas such as education, women, children, families, water, and housing. These were all in Budget 2008 as well as Budget 2007 and Budget 2006. Then in Budget 2009, there's $1.4 billion allocated over three years for aboriginal priority issues, including schools, health programs, safe drinking water, housing, community services, and training.

You note that there have been advances in various provinces, including New Brunswick, Manitoba, British Columbia, and Alberta. In terms of housing, this government has made major investments--of more than a billion dollars--in housing on and off reserves in the north. And then, as Mr. Saxton mentioned, there was the iconic apology on the residential schools issues.

Let me get to my question.

Here is my first question, Mr. Wernick.

You said that the old battles over jurisdictions are less and less relevant, given the fact that the provinces have jurisdiction in certain specific fields related to the provision of care.

Would you clarify the division of powers between the two levels of government, federal and provincial?

[Michael Wernick]

Do you mean in this sector, or in general? This is a far broader question.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

For both, if you can.

[Michael Wernick]

Thank you for the question.

There's a long answer, which the chair won't let me give.

So very briefly, on child protection, we have what I would call two streams of accountability. One is accountability to the child protection ministries and ministers in the provinces for the services, and those are delegated authorities that can be withdrawn. They operate under the child welfare legislation of each province.

They are also, quite rightly, accountable to you, as federal parliamentarians, for federal dollars that go to finance them, and you're quite right to ask what results are obtained for the federal contributions. So there's that dual accountability.

On your first point--and you're going to have to remind me of the middle one--there are many departments and agencies involved in services and programs for aboriginal people. I don't think that's a bad thing if the specialists in an area pay some attention to aboriginal communities.

My advice to parliamentarians would be to try not to create little mini specialties within an enormous INAC with 10,000 employees. It's much better to have the people who know skills and training at HRSD pay attention to aboriginal labour force issues, to have people at Public Safety who know policing to work on aboriginal policing issues, to have people at Health Canada who know about substance abuse and drug problems, which exist in wider society, work on aboriginal communities. It's not necessarily a bad thing.

But what you buy for that is the problem that was raised by most of you, which is how do you keep track of all the pieces, and does it add up? That's a real challenge. I'm still going to try to get Ms. Fraser to comment on that, because I think that's a fundamental problem with carving up responsibilities into departments on complex issues.

I probably missed your middle question. Will you remind me?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Well, we're into the time pretty good here, so I--

[Michael Wernick]

Perhaps I'll leave it that then.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Christopherson, four minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I have a number of questions. We won't have time for back and forth, so I'll just load them up to you, and if you'll be good enough, you can respond for me.

Time may be tight, Chair, but a couple of these would be appropriate for the Auditor General to chime in on, too, in terms of her thoughts on some of these, but I leave that--

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Don't hesitate to ask them to respond in writing, too. That's an option open to any member here.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Okay, great.

For my first question, I'm going straight from the Auditor General's statement today, in paragraph 14, which was, “We found that INAC had no agreements on child welfare services with three of the five provinces we covered in our audit.” That may have been covered by part of the answer you gave to Mr. Kramp, I accept that, but that would be my question flowing from that.

By the way, just to put something positive in there, I would agree with the chair and underscore that it may seem like very little, but the fact that you've been there, Deputy, two and a half years you said, that's a huge win. There was a time when we sat here and we had at least three, I think we were on our fourth deputy, or you were our fourth. It was just unbelievable. We couldn't get any traction because they kept changing the deputies. So congratulations on surviving. Sometimes surviving is winning.