Public Accounts Committee on Oct. 19th, 2011

[Michael Wernick]

I think the dynamic of provinces coming into play on these issues was under way. I'm not sure if any of the first ministers that were at Kelowna are still first ministers now, but their governments are more and more engaged as each day goes by. There was a whole bunch of provincial elections this month, and I'm encouraged that we'll probably be able to make further progress with the current crop of premiers and ministers.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thank you.

Over to Mr. Dreeshen. You have the floor, sir.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Welcome to our guests.

I spent quite some time on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development and these are some of the things that we talked about in detail. I also spent 34 years in the classroom, so I have an appreciation for the types of things that have to take place in education.

Mr. Wiersema, you were talking about the multi-year funding agreements. I am curious about where we are at in that process. I know that's an issue that the two of you were more or less discussing.

[John Wiersema]

We finished our audit work in November 2010. At that time Michael and his department were moving towards multi-year funding agreements. Perhaps it's best if I ask Mr. Wernick to talk about that, about where they stand at this point.

[Michael Wernick]

Yes, this is one of the issues where I think a fair bit has happened since the snapshot was taken in this report. This is going to sound a bit bureaucratic.

You will recall, some of you who were around in the last Parliament, that there was a lot of attention paid to grants and contribution programs and the web of rules and red tape that they had created. There was a blue ribbon panel struck on how to improve them. The government responded to that with an action plan on improving grants and contributions, and they put in place what's called the transfer payment policy, which is just a way of stating the rules on contributions and grants.

We were in the mid-part of implementing that policy when the snapshot was taken and the audit was conducted. One of the things that we were looking for was longer, more predictable funding agreements, as well as more cooperation across departments when there are multiple funders of a recipient.

We were encouraged to do a more thorough risk assessment of each recipient, so that you could tell where would it be responsible to give a longer funding agreement and more flexibility and where you would want to have a more short-term relationship. We did that.

Since the report has closed we've done a round of general assessment. We've done an evaluation of the general assessment. We're doing a second round of the general assessment now. That has all been done in close partnership with aboriginal organizations, financial officers, and the like. I think it gives everybody a fairly clear tool for determining where the capacity and the risk is in the funding arrangements.

Since the snapshot was taken we have a lot of multi-year agreements in place, and in some cases we have shorter ones. There's an intervention policy called “default management” for the governments that really run into trouble. Instead of leaving them in a trap where their affairs are run by a third-party manager, this policy gives them a clear set of incentives and steps to get back and regain control of their finances.

These are all changes welcomed by first nations governments. It's making improvements in contribution agreements. We're trying to make them lighter. But I don't want to deviate from the key message, which is that we over-rely on contribution agreements in the first place.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Also, we do have the six tripartite agreements. There must be some discussion there--that they would also like to see the funding models changing as well and to try to go with that.

I'd like to come back to one other point. There were discussions about school boards and that type of thing. When we're talking about 410 people in a community, having worked in that particular area, I'd perhaps caution us to be taking a look at whether or not there should be school boards because of the general mindset of what a school board is. Looking at school councils and advisory groups and trying to tie in one community to another would probably be better than setting up some type of bureaucratic system that would just cause a different level of concerns and problems. Again, that's just from experience, not to say that the school boards I worked with haven't been great. But I do understand where the bureaucracy ties in.

The other aspect is educational delivery systems and options. You were talking about the private sector, and universities are trying to tie in the exciting new things they are doing in delivering different types of education and culturally appropriate services, that type of thing. Can you comment on where some of those new and exciting things are going to be?

[Michael Wernick]

I'm going to be very brief, Mr. Chairman. I see the signals.

On the post-secondary front, I have to commend the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada and the association that represents community colleges. If you go to their websites, you will see very clear inventories of what each of them is doing to improve outcomes for aboriginal students. It can be all kinds of things. It's very encouraging because there's a bit of a race to the top going on, and people are learning quickly from each other. They see something at the University of Victoria and they say, I want to do that at the University of Saskatchewan, and so on. So that's a very exciting kind of collaboration.

On education, I'd certainly defer to your personal experience on this. The intention in identifying school board-like structures is not to have more bureaucracy. It's more that it represents those second-level services, such as guidance counsellors, people who can work with kids with fetal alcohol syndrome, specialists in math curriculum, and people who train teachers. There has to be somewhere for the front-line teacher to go to. In the normal provincial systems, school boards often provide those services, or provincial ministries do. If you're a principal or a classroom teacher on a reserve, you really are in a fairly lonely place, and we'd like to help create some of those intermediate structures.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Madam Blanchette-Lamothe. You have the floor, Madam.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Drinking water and education were mentioned, but I think it's important to emphasize once again that the problem is not the funding services we're trying to offer. It's a structural problem. It has been observed that matters have deteriorated in a number of situations, despite the recommendations in the Auditor General's last report.

Mr. Wernick, I would like you to tell us what hope we can have that, unlike the last time, you will manage to achieve your objectives, to provide the intended services. What structural barriers have you targeted? What resources have you acquired for that purpose? What hope is there that the fundamental changes recommended by the Auditor General will be made?

[Michael Wernick]

I could give you a few examples, including the agreement between the minister and the chief of the first nations. The idea is to determine very specific ways of working. I believe matters are moving forward. There is a panel on education, and work is being done on the transparency issue. A number of work options have been specified in cooperation with the Assembly of First Nations. To be able to achieve certain results under this agreement, we have to work to a schedule.

I believe that, as a Parliament, you will have the opportunity to pass legislation on education, transparency and elections, as well as other potential solutions. However, it won't be easy. Every bill will be controversial, but I believe it will be possible to advance the structural reform the Auditor General has referred to.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

In your view, there's a legislation issue in all that. You believe the government will have to be active and enact statutes that will enable it to do things better.

[Michael Wernick]

I believe that legislation will give us administrators better tools. With all due respect, I want to send the message that, if Parliament demands better results, it has to provide us with better tools.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Can you tell us about those tools that would make it easier for you to achieve your objectives? Could you give us some examples of tools the government should give you?

[Michael Wernick]

The first tool will be the bill we discussed a few moments ago concerning drinking water standards. The ideal solution will be to negotiate something with first nations representatives in a non-partisan manner. And I hope that your parliamentarians won't seek perfection. I think it's time to take action. I believe that establishing a legislative regime will give us the basis for progress in this field.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

You also referred to openness on the part of various partners, who aren't always necessarily open to the idea of cooperating. They include the provincial governments. However, the report states that it is important to define the type and level of service as well as the role of the first nations in the entire structural change process.

Do you think the openness of these new partners will make it possible to attach more importance to redefining the type and level of the services you are going to offer?

[Michael Wernick]

Yes. As we said earlier, four elements must be combined. The establishment of tripartite agreements and legislative structures will clarify roles and responsibilities, and even service standards and funding levels. I think that goes together. I often repeat that it would be impossible to impose that kind of solution on the first nations. They have a very clear vision of their role as a level of government and manager of their communities. So it will be an exercise in cooperation and, at times, in negotiation.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

With regard to cooperation with the first nations, the emphasis is being placed on the importance of the role they will have to play and on the different place that should be attributed to them.

Do you want to make a comment on that subject? Perhaps Mr. Campbell could add a few words as well.

[Michael Wernick]

In terms of—

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

What will make a change in terms of the place left for the first nations in all future structural changes?

[Michael Wernick]

I believe they are the stewards of their communities, at least for half of the aboriginals living on reserve. The other half live in the cities and municipalities of this country. They constitute the level of government that delivers the services. They manage the schools and the other services. It's the commitment of parents and members of the community that makes the difference. In the education field, it's the commitment of parents and families that makes the difference, regardless of where that is. I believe that's not something we can impose from Ottawa or Gatineau. I believe the role of the local governments, the governments of the first nations, is very important when it comes to looking for solutions.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Our time has expired.

Ms. Bateman, you have the floor.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thank you, Mr. President

I want to verify my understanding of the child and family services aspect of your audit, first with Mr. Wiersema and then follow up with Mr. Wernick on actions taken.

Just to verify that my understanding is correct, in 2008 you undertook an audit, and the aspects of the child and family services piece demonstrated that approximately eight times the number of children were in care in a reserve setting than in normal settings elsewhere in Canada.

[John Wiersema]

Mr. Chairman, perhaps I'd ask Mr. Campbell, who's closer to the specifics of the work, to respond to the question.

Ronnie.

[Ronnie Campbell]

Yes, Mr. Chairman, that's correct.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Okay, so that's correct.

Then, clearly, action was taken. And there were some management issues identified at that time, some serious ones--a disconnect between the program and the way resources were allocated.

Fast forward to 2011. You did a follow-up audit and you found that...it would appear that the Government of Canada has provided significantly greater resources for this child and family services component now.