Debates of May 13th, 2015

Indian Affairs and Northern Development--Main Estimates, 2015-2016

[The Chair, NDP, Joe Comartin]

I would like to open this committee of the whole session by making a short statement on this evening's proceedings. Tonight's debate is being held pursuant to Standing Order 81(4)(a), which provides for each of two sets of estimates selected by the Leader of the Opposition to be considered in committee of the whole for up to four hours.

Tonight will be a general debate on all of the votes related to Indian Affairs and Northern Development. The first round will begin with the official opposition, followed by the government and the Liberal Party. After that, we will follow the usual proportional rotation.

The debate is also held under the provisions of the order made earlier today, which allows parties to use each 15-minute slot for speeches or for questions and answers by one or more of their members.

In the case of speeches, members of the party to which the period is allotted may speak one after the other, though the time for speeches should not exceed 10 minutes. The Chair would appreciate it if the first member speaking in each slot would indicate how the time will be used, particularly if it is to be shared.

The order states that when the time is to be used for questions and answers, the Chair will expect that the minister's response will reflect approximately the time taken by the question. Furthermore, no quorum calls, dilatory motions, or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the Chair. As is the case in any proceeding in committee of the whole, members need not be in their own seats to be recognized. Although members may speak more than once, the Chair will generally try to ensure that all members wishing to speak are heard before inviting members to speak again while respecting the proportional party rotations for speakers.

I want to indicate that in committee of the whole, ministers and members should be referred to by their title or riding name and, of course, all remarks should be addressed through the Chair. I ask for everyone's co-operation in upholding all established standards of decorum, parliamentary language and behaviour.

At the conclusion of tonight's debate, the committee will rise, the estimates related to Indian Affairs and Northern Development will be deemed reported and the House will adjourn immediately until tomorrow.

We may now begin tonight's session. The House in committee of the whole, pursuant to Standing Order 81(4)(a), the first appointed day, consideration in committee of the whole of all votes under Indian Affairs and Northern Development in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016.

The hon. member for Churchill.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, indigenous peoples and Canadians are watching. We in the official opposition want answers. I will be spending my 15 minutes directing questions to the minister.

In the main estimates, the department is asking for $869 million for aboriginal rights and interests. However, the PBO's integrated monitoring database shows that the department only spent 13% of its allocated funding for this line in the first three-quarters of the last financial year.

What is the most recent financial data the minister has on this line item? What are the numbers?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Chair, the answer is quite simple.

The PBO refers to funding that has occurred over a period of time, which is not the complete year. The way that the funds are dispersed means that a good chunk of them are dispersed in the fourth quarter.

When that figure is added to what has already been spent, the hon. member will find out, when she looks at the public accounts next year, that the full amount has been invested under that program and sub-programs.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, Canadians want answers. That was not an answer.

In the main estimates, the department is asking for $36 million for capital expenditures. However, the PBO's integrated monitoring database shows that the department only spent 22% of its capital funding in the first three quarters of the last fiscal year.

What is the most recent financial data that the minister has on this line item? Does he expect funding from last year to be carried over into the estimates currently before the House?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, the answer is the same.

In the fourth quarter, these funds will be dispersed. When the whole year has expired, she will find in the next public accounts that, indeed, the capital funds that were earmarked for these programs will have been dispersed.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, a memo obtained by Canadian Press last November showed that over a six-year period, Aboriginal Affairs moved significant amounts of funding meant for critical infrastructure to cover shortfalls elsewhere.

What is the total amount of infrastructure funding that has been reallocated to other programs since 2007?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, from 2008 to 2013, a total of $468 million was reallocated within the department. The reason for this is very simple. Capital funds were reallocated to priorities. When we have pressure on what our government considers to be priority areas for first nations, such as education and social services, a decision is made by the government to prioritize these essential services to first nations.

That explains why we have reallocated those funds.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, the answer is that AANDC has reallocated approximately $505 million in infrastructure dollars to social, education and other programs. Instead of showing leadership and investing in the way that first nations need, the government has chosen to redirect the funds.

According to the department, what is the current infrastructure gap?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, that question is very general. What is the infrastructure gap of what?

If the hon. member wants to talk about infrastructure, I can tell the committee that since 2006, we have provided about $3 billion to assist first nations in planning, construction, operating and maintaining water, and waste water infrastructure in first nations communities. We have made targeted investments in more than 220 major projects and we have funded the maintenance of over 1,200 water and waste water treatment projects.

Since 2006, our government's investment for on-reserve housing has resulted in the construction of close to 12,000 new homes and the renovation of nearly 22,000 other existing homes in first nations communities. We have invested—

[The Chair, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Order, please. We will go back to the member for Churchill.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, the answer was very simple. AANDC, his own department, said that the infrastructure gap was $8.2 billion.

Let us move on to the 2% funding cap.

Can the minister please share what he understands the impact of the debilitating 2% funding cap to be on first nations, particularly in regard to housing, child welfare, education, health, and other human services and basic infrastructure?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, this cap the member refers to is rather an escalator, and that does not do justice to the facts.

If we look at the public accounts for the current expenditures of the department, over and above this 2% escalator that has accompanied each and every budget for this department since 2006, we have invested a total of over $4 billion in new funding for the department for initiatives to support priorities such as aboriginal economic development, first nations education, first nations child and family services, and on-reserve infrastructure.

When this additional funding is added to ongoing annual funding, the department will have spent a total of more than $76 billion since 2006.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, let us go back to the question, which is about the 2% cap.

Does the minister have any concrete plans to address the cumulative impacts of the debilitating 2% cap on funding for first nations, yes or no?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, the fact of the matter is, as I just stated, over and above the 2% escalator, every year the budget of the department is increased by targeted, strategic funding to pursue the objectives of creating jobs and economic opportunities for first nations membership all across Canada, and for that matter all aboriginal people.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, can the minister commit now to a full renewal of the urban aboriginal strategy for the National Association of Friendship Centres?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, I thought the hon. member was going to congratulate us for the reform of the urban strategy, which will see more funds going to groups in urban Canada, who along with other stakeholders at the municipal and provincial level pulled together to execute projects that aim at facilitating and encouraging aboriginals throughout the country to enter the labour market.

The reform we have put forward is resulting in a more effective and efficient delivery of the program that will benefit aboriginals living in urban Canada, I think, more effectively.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, I heard that there is no commitment to a full renewal of the urban aboriginal strategy from the minister.

Let us move to Bill C-51.

As Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, do you have reason to believe that an aboriginal group might represent a threat to the security of Canada?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Absolutely not, Mr. Chair.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, as the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, do you believe that indigenous groups should have been consulted or have you consulted with any indigenous groups or organizations on the content of Bill C-51?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, that goes back to the NDP's well-known position that every piece of legislation studied by Canada's Parliament should be subject to approval by the first nations. We know that is the official position of the New Democratic Party.

However, at the Conservative Party, we believe that Canadian laws should be respected, including the Canadian Constitution, which clearly establishes, with rulings by the Supreme Court, the government's duty to consult when considering to undertake measures that might affect aboriginal rights or treaty rights.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, do I need to remind the minister that the Conservatives have an obligation, according to the Constitution, to consult with first nations when it comes to legislation? It is something they clearly have not done.

Under the provisions of Bill C-51, do you know if your department will be able to proactively share—

[The Chair, NDP, Joe Comartin]

The member for Churchill has done this repeatedly now. The questions have to be directed to the Chair, not to the member directly.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, will the minister or his department be able to proactively share information that is collected on indigenous activists with security and intelligence agencies?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, the last time I checked, I was not responsible for public safety.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Chair, I would ask the minister to look at the case of Cindy Blackstock in the role of his department in terms of surveillance, something I do not think is a laughing matter at all. An RCMP report characterized the Idle No More movement as bacteria. Does the minister agree with that characterization?