Debates of June 4th, 2015

Opposition Motion—Nutrition North Canada

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from the Northwest Territories for bringing forward this motion on behalf of all of us who represent the north.

We are here to raise awareness of and demand action on the shameful fact that the people who I and many of us represent are going hungry. They cannot afford to keep healthy food on their family's table. Elders and kids have no food in this country, Canada. I fundamentally believe that Canadians are simply not okay with that fact.

I want to begin by giving a quick snapshot of what the people in my own riding of Churchill are dealing with on any given day. John Robert Throassie from Tadoule Lake said, “You go to the Northern Store with $200 and you'll be lucky if you get one week of supplies”.

A constituent from Tadoule Lake shared with me that a four-litre jug of milk is $15. Darryl Beardy from York Landing, which has been excluded from nutrition north, said that a four-litre jug of milk is $12. Julie-Anne Saunders reported to me that, at one time, strawberries in the Northern Store in York Landing were almost $13, and ground beef was $14.

This has been a historic week for Canada. Our Truth and Reconciliation Commission has come to a close and has given us all a clear mandate. Justice Murray Sinclair said it best when he said:

Reconciliation is not an aboriginal problem—it is a Canadian problem. It involves all of us.

He spoke directly to the leaders in Canada and the government and asked us to take up the spirit in actions of reconciliation in all we do.

The commission has given us a road map with 94 recommendations that clearly define what the government's role should be in making our broken country whole again. For our part, New Democrats are fully committed to following these recommendations.

I want to address the Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommendations in the context of nutrition north, because when indigenous peoples are going hungry in the north and the government does not take action to address it, there can be no reconciliation. The TRC report said:

We believe that in order to redress the legacy of residential schools and to move towards more respectful and healthy relationships, the Government of Canada, in meaningful consultation with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis communities, must recognize and address the broader context of the child-welfare crisis. This includes matters of child poverty, housing, water, sanitation, food security, family violence, addictions, and educational inequities.

More succinctly, the formidable indigenous performer, musician Tanya Tagaq tweeted on Tuesday:

#MyReconciliationIncludes the ending of the food crisis in Nunavut. Subsidize the shipping costs.

We have heard it from indigenous leaders; we have heard it from the government's own Auditor General; and I personally hear it constantly on the ground in the communities that I have the honour of representing. Northerners cannot access affordable healthy food where they are. People are going hungry. People are getting sick. The need is urgent, and we cannot wait any longer for action.

I want to acknowledge the work of Leesee Papatsie, a creator of the “Feeding My Family” Facebook page, who is known as a hero in many communities that I represent. She said:

The Inuit never protested. Traditionally, for the Inuit to survive, everybody had to get along and we didn’t create friction. But if we don’t start saying something about high costs, then people will think it’s okay.

She said their children are going hungry.

My riding in northern Manitoba includes 14 communities that are eligible for nutrition north. They are Bloodvein, Berens River, God's Lake Narrows, God's River, Garden Hill, Lac Brochet, Little Grand Rapids, Poplar River, Oxford House, Red Sucker Lake, Shamattawa, St Theresa Point, Waasagomach, and Pauingassi

In response to numerous complaints about the effectiveness of nutrition north from my own constituents, along with six of my colleagues, I wrote a letter to the Auditor General asking for a wide ranging financial and operational audit of the program. The Auditor General agreed, and in 2014, a damning report was released that found huge gaps and a general lack of accountability in the management of the program.

No wonder people in the communities I represent are calling for action. They know the program is not working.

I also acknowledge communities like Churchill and Pukatawagan that, yes, have a railway but are still remote, and people cannot afford healthy food to feed their families.

I have been advocating for the program to be fixed, and for some time, my requests have been met with an infuriating lack of action on the part of the minister and his staff, who admit freely to me that the problems and inequities that exist within the program are there, but they are in no hurry whatsoever to fix them.

I repeat, people are going hungry in our north. Elders cannot afford food. Parents cannot afford to buy healthy food for their children. Parents who cannot afford food for their kids cannot wait for the federal government to choose to prioritize the issue; they need it fixed now.

My colleagues and I are brought here today by the serious health needs of the people we represent. What could be more fundamental than addressing third-world food shortages?

One of the worst issues we are facing in the north is that some communities, which by all accounts are the most northern and face the greatest levels of food insecurity, are excluded entirely from nutrition north, and there is no credible reason. There are indigenous communities in my riding that urgently need to be included in the program, because even a program that is not working as it should is better than no program at all.

The communities are York Landing, Brochet, and Tadoule Lake, which is the farthest north first nation in northern Manitoba. They must be included immediately in the program. We also recognize that there are other communities, as I mentioned, that need to be considered and included.

Time is up for the current government. What we are saying today is that the government has to step up and immediately contribute the funds necessary to include these excluded communities. It is an easy and straightforward step in the right direction. Children are going hungry.

We have crunched preliminary numbers and approximately $7.5 million would be needed to include the excluded communities. We can do this today and simultaneously commit the House to look critically at the nutrition north program from the ground up, and do the work necessary to make food security a reality for northerners. We need to go back to the table and fix this broken program

I want to read into the record the words of one of my constituents, Sheila Marie Beardy from Pukatawagan, who said:

I live in an isolated First Nation of Pukatawagan, Manitoba, where the only means of travel in the summer is by plane or train (twice a week) and in the winter we do have a winter road for 3 months and the high cost of living is ridiculous! We only have 1 store which is called the Northern Store.... Many of our Community Members struggle due to the high cost of living in our Community....

I also think of the northerners who are making a difference every single day trying to establish food security, food sovereignty, in their communities. I think of the work that is being done currently in Garden Hill by Darcy Wood and Shaun Loney, working with local young people and people in Garden Hill to establish community gardens. I think of the work of Diana DeLaronde-Colombe in Wabowden, who for years has been working to establish greenhouses and raise chickens on a small scale in communities in our north. I think of the late Oscar Lathlin and leaders in our provincial government who fought to establish some ability to support food security in our north.

However, the role we need to see here is the one played by the federal government. We in the NDP understand that food security for northern indigenous peoples means more than just nutrition north. We need to address the food crisis in the north and work together for sustainable, indigenous, and northern-led solutions.

In conclusion, I stand in the House to ask the Conservative government to stop taking the north for granted. Stop using northerners for photo ops. I ask the Conservatives to respect the north and stand with northerners to put an end to the food insecurity they and we face.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her intervention. Of course, she speaks about paying attention to northerners. I am a northerner, and I have travelled right across the Canadian north and Canadian Arctic with our Prime Minister announcing investments outside of nutrition north. These investments engage a suite of food security initiatives, like the northern greenhouse initiative, the Growing Forward 2 program, and cold climate innovation, which are enhancing different technologies in the Canadian high Arctic to bring food security solutions to the north.

I have witnessed those things working in communities like Pond Inlet, Hay River, Yellowknife, and Old Crow in the Yukon. In fact, just a couple of weeks ago I was in Old Crow, one of the nutrition program locations, announcing $1.2 million to help stores grow there.

However, the member continues to vote against those. Why would that be?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate hearing from a Conservative member from the north today in the House of Commons. I have heard from a few Conservative members who are certainly not from the north and found that it was all too easy for them to talk about what we in the north need.

I would ask my fellow colleague from the north to work with his minister to immediately include the almost 50 communities, a number of which are in my constituency and a far greater number of which are in Conservative-represented constituencies. These people do not deserve this kind of exclusion by the government. Nutrition north needs to be reviewed and fixed. Let us begin by including the excluded communities right away.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have raised the issue of milk on a couple of occasions because of the importance of that commodity. Hopefully, I will get a chance later to expand on that and other aspects of nutritional food for northern Canada.

The question I have for the member is this. I have heard from a number of her constituents in Churchill with respect to the issue of milk. They were lobbying us to do more to make milk more available and practical in terms of cost. I was wondering if the member would provide some comment on the importance of milk in northern Manitoba. This is an issue from my past days that was brought to my attention on numerous occasions because of the different ramifications of diet and the whole issue of eating healthy.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the high cost of milk is unacceptable in and of itself but is also indicative of how unaffordable a range of healthy foods are in our north. As I mentioned, in Tadoule Lake is the furthest north first nation in northern Manitoba that is excluded from the nutrition north program. That is on the verge of being criminal. The government is expecting people living in abject poverty and who struggle every day to find almost $15 for something as basic as milk, which we can find for a couple of dollars here. It is so critical that the current government take seriously its neglect of the northern people, of northern indigenous communities and immediately start including the excluded communities, reviewing the nutrition north program and working with northerners to bring a solution to this dire problem.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there are many people in my city of Toronto and my riding of Parkdale—High Park who struggle with food security, such as low-income people who either cannot find work for a variety of reasons or who work in precarious jobs. For the benefit of Torontonians for whom the prices in the north would seem astronomical, could the member explain what nutrition north is and how it falls far short of what northerners need?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, there are so many north-south connections on this issue. In fact, we have seen Canadians in southern Canada rally around this issue and take it into their own hands to try and ship the food that is necessary to their northern neighbours, to people they do not even know but with whom they have connected over social media. It is incredible. In a way it is a real sense of community and co-operation among Canadians. I only wish the federal government would show that same kind of spirit, take its obligation toward first nations seriously and co-operate with northern peoples. However, time and again, all we see from the Prime Minister and his ministers are fancy photo ops and great tours in the north when in fact northern people are going hungry.

The northern first nations are excluded from this program. Change needs to happen now. Northerners need to lead the way.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today to speak to this motion. Before I commence, I will just mention that I will be splitting my time with the member for Macleod.

As we have heard in earlier interventions today, a lot of Canadians are concerned. They are supportive of the initiatives that need to take place in the north to enhance food security solutions, and not just under the nutrition north program but through an entire suite of programs that our government is delivering.

I can think of constituents in Canada, like Logan Ashley, who would be very interested in learning about the initiatives that our federal government is undertaking.

I am a northerner, and I have seen our government's investments in the north and in the Canadian arctic. I have travelled with the Prime Minister and the respective ministers, and not, as the opposition would coin it, for fancy photo ops but rather for on-the-ground, community-based, real solutions that have been generated by the community. The communities are very much interested in showing these solutions to the ministers, the Prime Minister and those members of Parliament from our side who take the time to go there and meet with mayors and councillors, chiefs and councils, and community members. We listen to what their needs are, and then observe the beginning, in progress and end of initiatives that they have undertaken with federal government resources and federal government investments.

Let me highlight a couple of those. The Growing Forward 2 program and the northern greenhouse initiatives were announced by the Prime Minister last year when I was with him in Hay River. I was joined by the Minister of the Environment, who is also the north regional minister. We were looking at the great work that communities are undertaking with the Growing Forward 2 program to provide real community-based solutions. It is not just about food security solutions. It is about skills development and employment opportunities, making sure that nutritious and affordable food is available. It is about a broad range of skill sets that are undertaken to deliver quality food and multi-year crops in a challenging northern environment.

This is a Canadian success story. This is about Canadians in the north and in the high arctic finding ways to deliver fresh and available foods right there in their own communities.

We are providing the funding for them to do that. We are supporting the technology and innovation for them to be able to do that. At the same time, we are supporting that skill set and that natural connectability to working opportunities and career opportunities. At the same time, we are helping those communities define and meet their food security needs.

In my home, in the community of Old Crow, just a couple of weeks ago, I was proud to be there to open the Co-op store. It was a first nation development corp. community-invested grocery store. It is going to provide co-operative investment for that community. When people shop there, there is going to be a direct dividend return to that community. That store is also going to provide employment and training opportunities for people living in that community. That store is providing access to more affordable foods and more nutritious foods.

What I saw was a store full of fresh fruits and vegetables, a store that had products in it that were far cheaper than in the past. I saw a program and service delivery that our government is investing in that is working. The community was there to celebrate. They see the real results of programs that are working, not one in a vacuum, like the nutrition north program, but a whole suite of programs, like the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, which was created by our government to improve and enhance the working and economic development opportunities for people of the north. Those included food security solutions, like this one, that the development corp. has put forward in Old Crow.

They have been strong advocates of investing in their own community solutions, and we have done that with and for them. We have been strong and proud participants, and supporters of that program.

We hear somewhat of an incoherent thought from the opposition. On the one hand, they stand in this House today and criticize the nutrition north program, but then urge the government to add 50 more communities to it. I am not sure that is a coherent argument, chastising a program while asking that more Canadian communities be added to it. It is a bizarre track of thinking.

Let me talk about a couple of the communities that the opposition has put down on a napkin. One of the communities added is already a full beneficiary of the nutrition north program.

Governing is a responsibility that we take seriously, and it is not something that one can do by just drafting a list of communities, putting that on the back of a napkin, dropping it in Parliament and then asking Parliament to simply add those communities without thought. It is irresponsible.

When we look at some of the communities they have put in place, some already on this list, some of those communities in the design of this program have road accessibility so it is already far more affordable for them to truck supplies into those communities than some of the communities we are talking about in the Canadian high Arctic. Those are the ones that rely on shipping crates and containers to come in, those that rely on seasonal accessibility to their communities, such as the one in the Yukon that is a fly-in only community.

We have members from the opposition, from Toronto, standing up to speak about these things. We appreciate their support and their concern and their attention to the north, but they clearly do not understand the realities of these communities because they have not been there. However, they are willing to stand in this House and chastise our government for having been there. I have been there. I have been there with the Prime Minister and with several respective ministers.

Every single year, the Prime Minister of this country has been across the north. Ten times he has visited since 2006. That is more than any other prime minister in the history of this country. There is more attention and more investment for the people of the north than by any other prime minister before. This is a prime minister who works in and with the communities and who dispatches his ministers on a regular basis to go to the north. He dispatches his members of Parliament to go to the north and work with the members of those communities. There are two members on this side of the House who live in northern Arctic communities and can speak about the very real challenges, and we are seized with those.

We understood the Auditor General's comments. The minister embraced those quickly and, in fact, almost by the date of the tabling of that report had already actioned many of the recommendations and had already moved to significantly improve the recommendations that were made. We have not stopped there because we understand fundamentally that nutrition north is one part of a suite of programs that our government has deployed since 2006 to improve the working and living conditions of aboriginal people. Those include things like our family tax cut so that we are able to leave more money in the pockets of hard-working Canadians. That is more money in the pockets of moms and dads so that they can spend their money on the needs that they define are important for them. The opposition wants to take that away. The opposition votes against that.

Here is another real example. Just a couple of weeks ago, I was joined in my territory by the Minister of Health. We announced $13 million for chronic health management in our territory. As we all know, across the north certain rates of diseases like diabetes are higher than the national average, in some cases four times higher. That boils down to the need to invest in chronic disease management, nutrition, and dietary supports and programs. It boils down to the suite of programs that we are delivering to ensure we can effectively manage chronic disease, which is a challenge in the north. I personally spent time one summer running from the northern part of the Yukon to the southern part of the Yukon to raise awareness and funds for diabetes, and to ensure that people were aware that our government was prepared to continue to invest in that.

We are doing these things step in and step out: policy investments, legislative adaptations, direct or indirect contributions and services from our government, and into the territorial governments for them to outlay their local priorities under their local governance structures. Everything we have done in this massive suite of programs, the opposition stands up and votes against.

It is disingenuous for the opposition members to stand in this House and say the government should do things, and then every time we table bills, policies or investments, they vote against it. I say this. The opposition should get on board and start supporting what we are doing in real terms for the great people of the north.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, once again it is great to hear voices from the north on the government side on a day when I have heard from a number of southern Conservatives, one of whom, I think, spoke about how important the north is to our heritage.

We have heard about the Prime Minister's tours and we have heard about all the ministers who have gone places. I have seen pictures on ATVs and I have seen pictures in front of schools. These are great pictures, and I am sure it was a really great time.

In fact, the Prime Minister came to our constituency, which was very nice, except for the fact that nothing is actually being done on one of the most fundamental issues that northerners face, which is dealing with the hunger they face.

This is Canada in 2015, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, and the first peoples of this country are going hungry in northern communities. There were people eating out of the garbage dump in Rankin Inlet, so to hear about the Prime Minister's travels is frankly insulting to the reality that northern Canadians face.

Let us see the government put that same enthusiasm for travel into actually making a difference for northern Canadians.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

What is shameful, Mr. Speaker, is the opposition failing to support all of the very real measures that I indicated.

I can tell hon. members clearly what the reaction is in the northern communities when the Prime Minister and those ministers travel and visit. How can I say that? It is because I have been there with them.

From Yukon to the Northwest Territories to Nunavut, I have been there and I have watched the programs and services that we have delivered. I have watched the community work with our ministers. I have watched the community partners engage in these activities with direct federal spending, and I have watched the pride and the sense of accomplishment and the very real support that they feel when our government is there with them and meeting directly with them.

This government, the Prime Minister, and our ministers will never apologize for actually being in those communities to hear directly from Canadians and to attempt to live the same lifestyle that they do, unlike the opposition.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Yukon for his passion and for his speech. He is one of the leading advocates for protecting our hunting, fishing, and trapping heritage in this country.

When I have talked to people in the north, I have heard that they want to be able to hunt, trap, and fish. They want to be able to provide for their families in the ways that they have traditionally done so.

We talk about the full suite of measures that we have taken to address food security in the north. Could the hon. member talk about what he thinks about an opposition party that is anti-hunting, anti-trapping, anti-seal industry? How does that affect the north, and how can we, as the Conservative government, support northerners in their desire to protect their hunting and fishing heritage?

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I am not sure that is actually pertinent to the question before the House. There is a country food element to nutrition north. I see the hon. member for Yukon on his feet and I think he will give the question a go just the same.

The hon. member for Yukon.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, I think you highlighted it perfectly. There absolutely is a country food element in this program. Northern Canadians tell us over and over again that country and traditional foods are very critical and very important to their dietary needs.

I am proud to be joined by the chair of the hunting and angling caucus, who is here with me, because we both know and understand the importance of traditional ways of life for the dietary needs of northern Canadians. We will proudly stand up and support them.

I cannot believe the opposition continues to vote against those measures and speaks out against them. It is absolutely not reflective of the needs of Yukoners, the needs of people from the Northwest Territories, and the needs of people from Nunavut, who can count on this government to continue to support them in their traditional ways of life, and we are proud to do that.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite rich to hear the members opposite claim that we know nothing about our territory and about the reality in the north.

I have lived that reality. I lived on a reserve. I hunted to bring meat back to the village, and I know how important this is to nutrition and the traditional way of life of aboriginal people. They are pretty quick to paint us all with the same brush.

I want to make some clarifications about road access. In the winter, some places are accessible by road, but when the river thaws in the spring and the ice is not strong enough in the fall, there is no access at all.

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts about that.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, that is why I said we are proud to invest in a whole suite of programs and services, from cold climate innovation to the northern greenhouse initiative out of the Growing Forward 2 program. These are all things we can do to help sustainable communities develop their own food security and make community-based solutions. We are proud to do that.

I am always surprised, of course, when the opposition votes against those measures that we put in place.

With respect to the hunting and angling piece in the prelude to his question, I am only reflecting back on the comments that were made by the members themselves when they effectively chastised our government for studying and supporting the hunting and angling heritage in our country. Those are not my words. Those are the words of the opposition.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise as a southern member of the Conservative government to speak on this issue tonight.

I want to speak a little about some of the government's ongoing efforts to work with its partners to ensure people in the north have access to a variety of fresh and nutritious foods at affordable prices and also in a manner that is cost-effective and transparent to the residents, the retailers, and the government.

As many of my colleagues have noted, nutrition north is, by any measure, achieving the goals we have set out.

As we know, the program provides subsidies to food wholesalers and retailers to help offset the high cost of bringing these food items to isolated northern communities. These products are an essential part of a healthy diet. They are products many of us in this place today would have no problem picking up at our supermarket on any day of the week. These are fruits and vegetables, meats and alternatives, milk, and perishable dairy and grain items.

However, as we talked about today, in isolated northern communities these important items were not always available, and if they were, it was only periodically. When they were available to residents in the north, the high cost of flying them in often put them far out of reach for most families, especially in some of those isolated areas in the northern part of our country.

Today, however, thanks to the nutrition north program initiated by our government as part of our broad northern strategy, northerners are seeing a greater amount and variety of nutritious perishable foods in their local markets.

Between the program's launch in April 2011 and March of last year, the average annual weight of eligible items shipped to these communities rose by more than 25%. The fact is that in the north, the availability of nutritious perishable food is up and prices are down.

Over the last three years of the program, between April 2011 and March 2014, the cost of the revised northern food basket for a family of four fell by an average of 7.2%. That may not seem much, but if we add it up, it translates into a saving of nearly $140 per month per family. That is about $1,600 a year. That is a substantial amount of money. In fact, the cost of a food basket in Tuktoyaktuk, located in the riding of the member for Northwest Territories, has decreased by 13.8%. The member who brought the motion forward should actually be supporting nutrition north and working to help northerners receive affordable nutritious food.

According to the most recent data available from the North West Company, the average price of a two-litre bag of milk, which we have talked a lot about today, in Rankin Inlet, Nunavut, was $4.45. That is less than half of what it cost before the program was available.

Let me move on to eggs. The data collected also found that eggs are $2.59 a dozen in Rankin Inlet, down more than 40% from the $4.39 a dozen they cost before the program was instituted.

It is the same story in communities across the north. For example, in March of this year, in Salluit, Quebec, one could buy a bag of apples for $6.19. Without the nutrition north Canada subsidy, those apples would have cost about $18, almost three times as much as they cost with the program.

These numbers the others I have cited represent real progress for northerners, something the opposition is obviously against.

Even with all the success of nutrition north, we continue to seek ways to make the program even better. For example, as has been stated in the House, all the recommendations offered by the Office of the Auditor General in its review of the program last year have been accepted by our government. In fact, we identified virtually all of the same issues and had already taken action to enhance the program before the Auditor General's report was even issued.

A key element in the ongoing refinement of the program is the regular discussion between our government and the nutrition north advisory board. This board represents the perspectives and interests of northern residents and communities to ensure they receive the full benefits of the program. The advisory board has stated its strong belief that consumers will be able to clearly see the amount of the subsidy passed on to them. This will ensure greater retailer transparency and accountability.

We believe the impact of these subsidies should be both more immediate and clearly visible to northern residents. Northerners want and deserve assurance that the benefits of the subsidies provided to wholesalers and retailers are being delivered to them in a full and fair way.

In addition, Canadian taxpayers expect and deserve the same accountability and transparency.

Greater transparency would also benefit wholesalers and retailers involved in this program. This would enable them to show consumers that they are indeed using the full amount of the subsidy they receive for its intended purpose. Its intended purpose is providing northerners with greater access to nutritious perishable foods at a lower price.

In March of this year, the hon. Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development took note of a new practice implemented by la Fédération des coopératives du Nouveau-Québec. This practice is putting the amount of the subsidy of each eligible item purchased right on the cash register receipt. New Democrats should be aware—and I can show them, if they would like—that it is right there and clearly shown, as can be seen at the nutrition north website. They would also realize that several of the communities that they have put on the list are already fully subsidized in the nutrition north program.

I will move on to Nunavik. In each of the 14 stores la Fédération des coopératives du Nouveau-Québec operates in Nunavik, the receipt shows the amount of the nutrition north Canada subsidy for each item. In fact, there is a total at the bottom of the receipt, where it says, “NNC Program has saved you [this many dollars and cents] on your purchase today”. It is right on the bottom of the receipt.

That is true transparency, and it is why, after learning of this practice in March, the minister directed a nutrition north Canada advisory board to examine the approach taken by this innovative retailer and recommend how the board can implement a point-of-sale system of this kind on a much wider basis.

I would also point out that we wanted to keep in mind that any costs related to implementing a point-of-sale system should not impact any of the subsidy dollars. Obviously, these are very important considerations. It is essential that administrative costs for this program be kept to a minimum.

Indeed, our government is already working with the advisory board to consult with stakeholders on additional measures that could be implemented to enhance cost containment and assure the sustainability of the nutrition north Canada program.

Greater transparency, like that provided by the point-of-sale system I described, contributes to greater accountability, which contributes to greater sustainability of this program. Perhaps even more importantly, the point-of-sale information will help to achieve our goal of enabling northerners to better see how nutrition north is working for them. Shoppers in isolated northern communities will be able to see exactly how and when the subsidy is applied to their grocery bill.

It will encourage greater transparency on the part of retailers as well. That is why we will be reviewing the advisory board's recommendations on the point-of-sale system. We will be doing that in the coming weeks to determine the best approach for implementing that point-of-sale system. As I said, this is an approach that will benefit northerners as well as retailers.

Nutrition north is an excellent program. It is well designed; it is well managed; and, most importantly, it is achieving the goals that we have set out to help northerners. However, as we have heard from many of my colleagues today and as our government recognizes, although nutrition north is an excellent program, nothing is perfect. Initiatives such as the point-of-sale program are ways that we can improve this system moving forward.

That is why we are absolutely committed to working with northern communities to make improvements to any program, including nutrition north Canada, and that is exactly what we are doing.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about the advisory board. I wonder if he recognizes that five out of six of the members of the advisory board were contributors to the Conservative Party throughout the north. That seems like a very high percentage to occur simply by chance.

The member talked about the point of sale. There was an issue raised in Iqaluit when I was last there. The food subsidy rate is $2.40. It is clearly identified on sales items within northern stores, but the understanding is that the bulk rate for air freight to Iqaluit is half of that. In fact, if there is a $2.40 subsidy, the store actually only has to pay $1.20 for the freight.

Does my hon. colleague think that there should be a very close examination of the rates of subsidies to ensure that they match up to what is perceived as the method of subsidization, which is the cost of freight?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will try to get to all the questions from my hon. colleague, the member for Northwest Territories.

Regarding his comments on the advisory board, they are quite disappointing when this is a group of people from the north working extremely hard to give us direction and advice on how this program and other programs such as nutrition north Canada are working. For them to come up with ideas like the point of sale program is an outstanding contribution from those volunteers in the north. It is really disappointing that the member would make such an attack on volunteers who are helping us develop programs for the north.

In terms of his numbers, not long ago the member said that there were 55 communities he wanted added to this list. Then it was 42. Now we are back to around 50. Those members should do a little more due diligence and some work when they comment about some of the programs we are trying to implement.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, if I may pick up on the last couple of words the member said, and that is the issue of due diligence.

The Auditor General has expressed a great deal of concern with regard to retailers in the north. The department has no real genuine sense of whether the savings through the nutrition north program that consumers should be experiencing are actually being realized. In other words, are retailers taking advantage of the program at the cost of the consumer?

I wonder if he might want to comment on that. This is not something the Liberal Party is saying. The Auditor General of Canada is saying it.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we did take the Auditor General's report to heart. I talked about that in my speech. We identified many of the same issues the Auditor General identified in his report. We started implementing some of the changes before his report was even published. As I said in my speech, we started addressing some of those recommendations and accepted all the recommendations of his report.

The point of sale system will help address some of those transparency issues. When people have a receipt and they can see the different levels of the subsidy, whether it is a box of cereal or a bag of fruit.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, as the member mentioned, the NDP has changed the number of communities it believes should receive this additional subsidy three times in the last six weeks.

The Auditor General said that Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada should review community eligibility and base it on need. Some of the communities that the NDP has proposed have year-round rail or road access.

Does the member agree with me that we should be following the recommendations of the Auditor General and putting this through a criteria mechanism rather than just picking communities, which is something he did not recommend in his report?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development for his work on this file as well.

The New Democrats have gone back and forth on the numbers of communities they want added, and I have a list of some. It includes Weenusk, Nahanni Butte and Lourdes-de-Blanc-Sablon, which already receive full subsidies from the program. The program is intended for isolated communities that have limited access, whether it is by rail or flying in. Many of the communities the New Democrats wanted add to nutrition north have either year-round rail service or year-round access to highways, so they would not be eligible for the nutrition north program.

The New Democrats really should have done some due diligence when they were compiling the list, whereas we are going by the recommendations of the Auditor General, which is the prudent thing to do.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying that I will share my time with my neighbour, the member for Thunder Bay—Rainy River. I also want to point out that we are here on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people.

Last August I had the opportunity to travel to Nunavik with my colleague, the member for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou. I took this trip as part of my housing tour, and I was able to see how people in Nunavik live.

We visited a number of villages and homes. I saw the main housing problems, such as overcrowding and the need for major repairs. We also visited a grocery store and took photos, because the prices there were shocking.

For example, a bag of apples was $8, compared to $3 or $4 here. A watermelon cost $20.55, compared to about $5 here. A can of frozen orange juice cost $8, compared to $4 here. A 10-pound bag of potatoes cost $8.49, compared to about $5 here. A can of Pepsi cost $3.29, and last week you could get a case of 12 on sale for $3.50 here. Bread cost around $5, and here we pay from $2 to $3. A litre of milk cost $3.85, compared to $2.50 here.

We can see that the price of food in Nunavik is two to four times higher than here. There was a beef roast that nobody was buying, though that was no surprise considering it was covered in frost and cost well over $40. It stayed in the display case, and nobody wanted to buy it.

We met with municipal councils, including six Inuit councils and one Cree band council, to talk about the local situation. I wanted to talk about housing and infrastructure. We had some very good discussions, and I will never forget the story that one Inuit municipal councillor told.

She told us that nine people live in her house. That is nothing compared to what we heard from other people who share their three- or four-bedroom houses with 12 or 13 people. Even so, she was the only person in her household with an income—she was a cashier at the grocery store—because jobs in the north are scarce.

What I wanted to say is that she spent $1,000 a week on groceries. There were nine people in that house living on one salary. How much could she earn as a cashier at a grocery store? Let us say that her annual salary was $25,000. That means that her groceries alone cost at least twice her annual salary, and that includes the nutrition north subsidies. Living in the north is expensive.

All the food is imported by boat or plane. In the summer, food comes in by boat, but in the winter, it can only come in by plane because there are no roads. We went there by plane. Let us not forget that the cost of food goes up with the cost of fuel, among other things. According to the Auditor General, we are not even sure whether the retailers are passing on the full subsidy to the consumers. Those are some of the reasons why food is so expensive in the north.

The other thing is that the food that comes from the south is not culturally adapted. A number of people have quoted Leesee Papatsie today, but it is worth quoting her again. I am not sure whether this quote was used, but here goes:

What they consider healthy food is not traditionally the Inuit diet. It’s imposing the idea of, “Here, this is what we think is healthy for you guys.” What we’ve been saying all along is that we’re not used to cooking fruits and vegetables.

In other words, meals made up of meat, potatoes and vegetables are not what people originally ate in the north. To continue the quote:

There are some days when I go to the store and see a vegetable, and I have to ask one of my kids, “What is this?” It’s only been 40 or 50 years that we’ve been eating this kind of food.

These kinds of foods are not adapted to northern people. Furthermore, a lot of food has to be shipped at the same time, because shipping can only occur at a certain time of year. Otherwise, it has to be flown in.

The food therefore has to be stored, and that affects the quality of the food quite a bit.

Possible solutions do exist. These are not colonialist or paternalistic solutions that come from a department, but rather local solutions. We spoke with some people there who had some really good ideas. In Inukjuak, for instance, people had all kinds of suggestions. The local population not only has good ideas, but those ideas are appropriate because they come from the people themselves. Incidentally, people there are already working on some projects. Earlier we talked about greenhouses that are further north. There are no greenhouses in Nunavik. Someone did plan to build some, and it is an excellent project. However, people need some assistance to develop these greenhouses, including local infrastructure to produce electricity, for example. These villages are not part of Hydro-Québec's network, so they need to find ways to heat the greenhouses and have electricity.

Food produced locally, for example in greenhouses, would be fresher and thus healthier than food that has been stored in warehouses for several months. It would also be more traditional and culturally appropriate. People would be able to make choices rather than have choices imposed on them. When we were there, many people were picking blueberries because they were in season. Why not take advantage of a local resource such as that one? When I was a child in Abitibi, that is what we did. My mother, my brothers, my sister and I picked blueberries and sold them to the grocery store. That creates jobs, uses local resources and provides food that people like. There is also the seal hunt and the caribou hunt.

These activities would create jobs in the north. Some communities already ask residents to hunt and bring back caribou meat to be shared by the community. Some communities are already doing this. Why not do more of this?

There are barriers to the use of local resources. For example, houses in the north are not set up for hunting. Just imagine, Mr. Speaker, if you were to go out hunting caribou and you brought one back to your house. Where in your house would you put it? There would not be any room in my house where I could put a caribou carcass and butcher it. Houses in the north are similar to those in the south because they were built by southerners who have southern ideas. People have to put the caribou or other animal carcasses in the bathtub or shower. That creates all kinds of problems, including mould. There is also climate change. The thawing permafrost, for example, is causing the ground to sink in some villages. We must ensure that human activity will not harm animal populations in the north. Human activity could be an impediment to the grassroots efforts to encourage people to continue their traditional hunting and fishing activities.

I know that the subject of today's motion is food in the north, but I truly believe that we should be looking at much more than just the existing subsidies under the nutrition north Canada program. We need a respectful plan. We should be talking about this within a context of nation-to-nation negotiation. We need to rethink our whole relationship with northern populations. We have to give them the means to find their own solutions. We just got the report from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, which tells us how vital it is to start repairing the broken relationship with aboriginal peoples now.

If we want to achieve true reconciliation, maybe we should start right now by giving northern aboriginal populations the means to decide how they want to solve problems around one of the necessities of life: food.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's interest in this issue. I think it is extremely important to people, in particular the children who go to school in many parts of Ontario, Quebec and elsewhere. I can only imagine the impact the high cost of food is having on children in the north. I would like to hear more of the member's comments about what she thinks should be done in particular with respect to looking at schools as a way of trying to remedy some of the problems in the north when it comes to school-aged children getting proper nutrition.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, it is not up to me to solve the north's problems. We are talking about nutrition in the north. Aboriginal peoples need to tell us what they want and what they need.

There are tremendous needs in schools. We should sit down with them to ask them what they would like to see. Earlier, a Liberal MP was talking about milk. Yes, milk is an essential for those of us in the south. However, the human body is not really very well adapted to cows' milk. Many people are lactose intolerant.

When we talk about nutrition for kids in schools, we have to start by finding out the facts, such as whether milk is talked about in schools. Is it really an appropriate food for those schools? Maybe we should come up with something else. We need to talk. As I said earlier, there has to be a nation-to-nation relationship to really resolve these difficult situations.