Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 12th, 2009

[Michael Wernick]

We are constantly in touch with the communities and with the provinces. Ms. Cram is in charge of partnerships. As I mentioned in my comments, we have already concluded tripartite agreements with three provinces, and we are negotiating with four or five other provinces. We hope to form partnerships with other provinces during this year, and certainly before 2012. Through our offices, we are constantly in touch with all the communities, almost every week.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

I think that the sums of money invested were increased. Considering the sums that have been committed up till now, have the initiatives been successful? Has any progress been made? Do your partners think so?

[Michael Wernick]

It is probably too early to tell. We launched a partnership with Alberta in the spring of 2007. We are hoping to begin an evaluation exercise with our partners next year. We must let the initiative go forward before we can measure it.

We are very, very optimistic because of the experience of the Alberta government. This province is the real leader in the field of child protection. Albertans went through the same experience in the 1980s, when both the costs and the number of children taken into care went up. They created what we call the Alberta response model, which stresses prevention. They succeeded in bringing the costs down and in getting better results. Therefore, we believe that we can get the same results in our aboriginal communities.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Do I have any time left?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

You have two minutes left.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Do the provinces have enough funds to intervene with problem youth?

[Michael Wernick]

Our role consists in funding services on-reserve.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

All right, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Have you finished? All right.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Christopherson, for seven minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, all, for your presentation.

I don't have a lot to do with matters relating to this in my riding, nor did I have much experience when I was provincial or municipal. Most of my experience has come from being on this committee. I've been on this committee for almost five years now, and some of the most scathing reports coming in have been the ones dealing with this department. This is consistent, and it's getting to the point where, speaking personally, if we don't start to see some kind of a turnaround, then maybe broader action needs to be taken. I don't know what that is. We've tried to do everything--royal commissions and everything under the sun--but these things always come out horrible, just horrible. And the answers aren't very helpful.

I reference, for the advisement of committees, that at least seven reports have been done--most of those I was here for--and they were terrible, just terrible. And this is no better.

I have mentioned performance reports to members before as an area in which we want to make sure we're paying more attention. This is an example, and it's tied to the work that's done. You can see what drives me crazy in these things--and we're still getting it--on page 21:

INAC achieved its expected results for social development programs, as set out in the 2007–2008 Report on Plans and Priorities, such as meeting the basic and special needs of individuals and families, and providing access to quality care supports for children and families in distress....

Then, on page 8, when they show a chart of what's being achieved in terms of strategic outcome for people, it says, “commitments partially met”. So “commitments partially met” translates into “achieved its expected results”. This is the kind of thing we deal with.

We're not dealing with this report, so I won't have questions on it. But since I've raised it, you're welcome to comment on it.

I just needed to start out by expressing how thoroughly disappointing it is to continuously have reports coming in to tell us, as Canadian citizens, how inadequate and borderline incompetent a job is being done. I'm not focusing on individuals, but the work of this department is not meeting the needs of Canadians. No matter how many times we go round and round, it just doesn't seem to change.

I have a couple of direct questions. First, the audit found that INAC had not analyzed and compared child welfare services on reserves with those in neighbouring communities off reserve. I'd like to know if that's been done and what you found, or, if you're planning to do it, when you'll be doing it.

Also, you hadn't yet defined the meaning of “culturally appropriate” services, and I would like to know whether or not you have done that.

Let me just say to the deputy that for all the problems that were found, I have to tell you, I was underwhelmed by your list on page 5 of what you've completed. I'm here to be educated, but I don't see....

Well, take any of these. In the last bullet point, you say, “Increased compliance activities this year.” That's a pretty modest statement. You're still not in compliance, but you've increased it.

And that's the best, five points? Out of that whole document, five points is what you're bragging about? I find it less than something to be bragging about.

So there are some specifics, some generalities.

I leave it with you, sir. I'm listening.

[Michael Wernick]

I think there's a question in there--

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Pardon me? There were specific questions, sir, if you were listening.

[Michael Wernick]

Yes, I was listening intently.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's good.

[Michael Wernick]

The problem with the child welfare is a policy problem in that we do not have the tools to really achieve the results that Parliament would expect.

We are trying to put in place prevention-based child welfare, which is exactly what all provinces tried to do in the 1990s. I did explain to you, sir, that we have accomplished that in Alberta, in Saskatchewan, in Nova Scotia, and we would like to extend that prevention-based approach to other provinces.

The increase in compliance in reporting is specifically in response to the criticisms that were raised in our internal audit and by the Auditor General that we were not checking. So we have gone from no compliance activity to a great deal of compliance activity, and I would hope that you'd be satisfied that this is something we should be doing.

Culturally appropriate services are not really something that I, as a white bureaucrat in Ottawa, can define for a first nations agency operating in a particular community. The Auditor General's chapter does recommend, and we accept, that we should have a point of view on that--and we do--and that we be engaged with our partners on trying to define that.

It may mean something different in a Haida community, in Six Nations, in an Inuit community, and so on. Child protection, at the end of the day, is child protection in the best interests of the child, and one of the controversies about child protection for first nations and Inuit children is trying to be sensitive to the needs of the community: language, culture, separation from parents, and so on. You're familiar with the residential schools experience, the sixties scoop of adoptions, and so on.

That's why the agencies were created in the 1990s and that's why we think it's very important to catch up to practices in most of the provinces, which are the prevention-based models. We are trying to get into the mainstream of what provinces do with comparable services. It's similar to other areas like education, like income assistance, and so on, where--it's no secret and we've said this often--we do not have the kinds of tools that provincial governments have to run these kinds of areas.

I would recommend to you, because I know you're an experienced member of the committee, Madam Fraser's report from the summer of 2006, which is a compendium of what it would take to actually make a difference in aboriginal policy. I agree entirely with her conclusions on that.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Are you advocating those somewhere, then--the changes?

[Michael Wernick]

Every day.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Okay. You didn't answer the question, though, that I asked at the beginning about comparing child welfare services on reserves with those off reserve.

[Michael Wernick]

Our accountability is for the services delivered by those agencies to the extent that we fund them.

I'm not trying to avoid the question, but if you actually run the agency, you have two accountabilities. You have to report to INAC for the money that we provide them, and you have to report to the provincial director of child welfare, because you're using the provincial minister's authorities. Those authorities are given to the agencies, and sometimes they're taken away by the province because it doesn't feel they're using them properly. So if you run an agency, you're accountable to the province and you're accountable to us for the results.

You're aware of the issue of reporting burden, so we're trying to make sure that what we get is real information to help you, as parliamentarians, figure out whether those federal dollars are being used well. We agreed that we haven't done enough. The new agreements require much more detailed business plans and much more thorough reporting of what actually happens to the kids, and we will get there as we do these tripartite arrangements.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Christopherson.

Thank you, Mr. Wernick.

Mr. Saxton, seven minutes.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As always, Ms. Fraser, you have put together a very clear and precise report. Thank you very much.

We do see some serious concerns, and I know the minister takes them seriously; however, we've also seen some progress in many different areas. One that I am particularly proud of is the apology in Parliament last year with regard to the Indian residential schools. I know that in my riding, in particular, I have heard nothing but appreciation for this apology, and it's starting to heal the hurt that was done.

Can the deputy minister comment on how this apology has affected our first nations, in particular the people who were involved in this program?

[Michael Wernick]

I think the apology that was delivered in the House of Commons was a very moving event. I'm sure you would attest to that. I watched it on television and presided over an event at the department. People were in tears and were quite moved by it.

What I think it's done is reinforce a couple of things. One is that there is an opportunity for the rest of Canada, if we're wise enough to step through the door, for a new reconciliation or relationship with aboriginal peoples in the country. I think that's a challenge to all of us.

The other, I think, to try to link it to Mr. Christopherson's question, is that it sort of redoubled everybody's commitment to children and young people, in that the experiences of the kids who went through residential schools should never be repeated in terms of separation from family, isolation, being cut off from their historical roots, and so on.

There are an awful lot of aboriginal kids in this country. We have a baby boom in aboriginal Canada. It's really important that we improve child protection services, child welfare, and basic education services to them. Coming out of the apology, I think that commitment is there from all kinds of parties.

Not to go on too long, Mr. Chair, that's why these partnerships are becoming possible: old quarrels about jurisdiction and whose responsibility it was are melting away because people want to put the children first.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you.

I'm also encouraged by the new prevention-based model of child care that you are working towards. I just want to ask how many children are currently in care, and then I have a question about the funds being allocated to that.

[Michael Wernick]

It's in the neighbourhood of 8,000. I can get the exact number from Ms. Johnston.

[Odette Johnston, Director, Social Programs Reform Directorate, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

There are about 8,530 children in care right now.