Anita Neville

[Aboriginal Affairs, April 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Kasechewan and water, Caledonia and land claims, Garden Hill and health care, all of these incidents of aboriginals being worse off than their fellow Canadians will be alleviated if the Kelowna accord is implemented in full. Canadians are demanding from coast to coast to coast that the prosperity gap be eliminated.

I challenge the minister. Will he make the Kelowna accord the government's sixth priority?

[Aboriginal Affairs, April 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, members of the House know that the Kelowna accord is indeed an opportunity to make a difference. Canada's first nations would see improvements in health care, education, housing, and in economic opportunities. The funding for the Kelowna accord was booked in the same budgetary allocation that allowed the government to give $755 million to farmers, and that was good.

Given the budget that is being presented on Tuesday, will the minister confirm that $5.1 billion committed to the Kelowna accord will be delivered as promised?

[Housing, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Winnipeg South Centre is home to Canadian Forces Base Kapyong, the former base of the Princess Pats Regiment. There are approximately 350 housing units on the site, 190 of which have been empty for almost two years.

The high maintenance, heating and associated servicing costs for these empty houses is an extraordinary waste of taxpayers' dollars, and all the while we hear about additional funding for the military. There are also other urgent housing priorities for families in the city of Winnipeg.

These homes could be put to good use immediately to relieve the rental housing shortage in Winnipeg and to provide opportunities for children and their parents.

I have written to the Minister of National Defence and asked him to immediately declare these homes surplus. I have asked him to ensure that the transfer process to the Canada Lands Company takes place quickly.

These homes have been vacant since the summer of 2004. Residents of Winnipeg need safe places to live. It is time to act and I urge the government to do so. I await the minister's response.

[Federal Accountability Act, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost the member referenced the matter of Garden Hill First Nation. Unequivocally there has to be a medical assessment of every member of that community to see how far the tuberculosis outbreak has spread.

On the other items, first and foremost there has to be a consultation with the leadership in the aboriginal community. The Assembly of First Nations has been open. It has been part of the discussions with government over the years. To impose this kind of legislation on them is indeed shortsighted.

The most important thing the House could do would be to ratify the Kelowna accord and the dollars committed and booked by the previous government for the Kelowna accord. The Kelowna accord provides hope for aboriginal communities from coast to coast to coast. I have visited with many. They are waiting to train further health officials, for education and for the plans that will lead to economic development and opportunities for them.

Unequivocally, the ratification of the Kelowna accord by the House would be an important transformative change for aboriginal peoples in the country.

[Federal Accountability Act, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the question from the member opposite is quite remarkable. It really underlines the lack of understanding of the relationship between first nations people and the Government of Canada.

I am astounded at his comments. He said things like “treatment of the Auditor General”, “shield” and “money wasted”. What the member opposite does not understand is that only 2% of first nations communities are self-governing. What the member opposite does not understand is that an audit process is currently in place. I mentioned in my comments about 168 reports a year. Does the member know any other jurisdiction that has to file 168 reports, often for $5,000, $10,000 and $20,000 contributions?

It is time that the member understood that one does not impose on first nations governments. One does not tell first nations governments what to do. One consults with them. One comes up with a common understanding of what the issues are and what the responses will be. What the member must understand is that it is incumbent on his government to be responsible in return to first nations people to ensure that their social, health and economic concerns are addressed. What astounds me about his comments is the total lack of understanding of what in fact goes on in first nations communities and what is happening in the realities of today.

[Federal Accountability Act, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I too rise today to speak to the accountability act that has been tabled in the House. All parliamentarians know that it is important for Canadians to keep their trust in elected public officials and the government that serves them.

The bill was tabled in the House a few weeks ago. Since then I have had the opportunity to review it, as have most of my colleagues. There are very many positive positions in the bill, and I welcome them, and there are provisions in the bill that simply serve as evidence of the overarching, in my view, duplicity of the government.

Others have spoken of the selective accountability of the bill and what is not in it. My efforts today will be to focus specifically on the accountability provisions as they relate to Canada's first nations and aboriginal peoples.

I have many concerns about the impact of the accountability act on first nations. First and foremost, the bill does not acknowledge the government to government relationship that exists between the Government of Canada and Canada's first nations. First nation governments will now be subjected both to audits from the Auditor General and access to information requests from the general public. Self-government first nations will be exempted, but given that only 2% of first nations have self-governing agreements, virtually all first nations will be singled out under the proposed legislation.

The bill will no doubt not apply to provincial or foreign governments that receive federal funds. First nations governments deserve nothing less than the same arrangement. If it were to do so, it would know that by applying the new rules to Canada's first nations, the government is entering into murky waters as to the constitutionality of such actions.

Equally important is the fact that the federal accountability act was introduced without any consultation whatsoever with first nation leadership or communities. The era of first nations being dictated to has long ended. The Conservative government, by implementing and introducing an act in this manner, has undone years upon years of nation building and intergovernmental relationships by dictating to first nations, as opposed to consulting with them and reaching a joint decision with which both groups can live. The actions of the government in this matter will surely only result in protests and resistance similar to those that we have seen when legislation in the past has been imposed upon them without consultation.

Had the government done its homework and consulted with first nations, it would have seen that Canada's first nations have taken the issue of accountability very seriously. For the past two years, the leadership of the Assembly of First Nations has been working in a consultative, cooperative and constructive manner with the Auditor General of Canada on strengthening its accountability to its people.

Specifically, the following actions have been taken or are ready to be implemented: the creation of an independent first nations ombudsperson and a first nations auditor general; and the development of an accountability for results action plan, initiated by the AFN in conjunction with the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and the Treasury Board Secretariat. The implementation of the plan would see the development of financial management standards, certification of financial management processes, investments in management capacity and building capacity, improvements to the policy on transfer payments and many self-imposed accountability measures.

We have known from the Auditor General's report of 2002 that each first nation has been required to file 168 reports every year, about three a week. The proposed legislation just adds another layer to this review process.

The bill does not speak to the accountability of governments to first nations people. It does not speak or address the accountability of the federal government of the lack of results of social, economic and health progress of first nations peoples in their communities.

Mr. Speaker, you and I are both from Manitoba. Last evening there was a group of people from Manitoba in my office who are living in third world conditions with an outbreak of tuberculosis in their community. The outbreak of tuberculosis is doubling by the week, if not faster. The response by the government is that it needs to do an assessment of all those in the community to determine their health status. That is not accountability.

When we talk about accountability we have to speak about the accountability of the government to first nations. We have to speak about the Kelowna accord and how it will address housing, education and economic opportunities for first nations people. The Kelowna accord was arrived at by the 13 provincial and territorial leaders and the leadership of all of the aboriginal communities across the country from coast to coast to coast.

Instead of addressing the complexity of the accountability relationship between the Government of Canada and aboriginal peoples, Bill C-2 is a simplistic solution that will have little results for governments or for aboriginal peoples across the country. My great concern about this is that the bill is evidence that the government is still stuck in a colonial mentality, a mentality of a time long past where one imposes without consultation and one knows what is best for others without asking them.

I urge the government to go back, to review, to consult and to discuss so that first nations people can show the responsibility and accountability they have put in place to be accountable both to their own populations and to the Government of Canada. It is incumbent upon the Government of Canada to be accountable to them.

[Request for Emergency Debate, April 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as you know, earlier today I sent you a note, pursuant to Standing Order 52, in order to request leave to make a motion for the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and I believe urgent matter requiring urgent consideration. If permitted, I hope to move that under the provisions of Standing Order 52, the House adjourn in order to discuss the matter of the implementation of the Kelowna accord signed on November 25, 2005 between the federal government, the provincial and territorial governments, and the leadership of the Métis First Nation and Inuit communities.

Very briefly, this matter is of urgent concern to communities from coast to coast to coast in this nation. I am not going to proceed to tell you the economic gaps that exist between aboriginal communities and other Canadians. All of us here in the House know the details of it, but there is some urgency to this matter.

Given that the budget will be tabled next week and that funds for the agreement have indeed been booked and committed by the previous government, it is important that this debate be held immediately. Time is of the essence.

Furthermore, the situations in the communities across the country, as evidenced by Caledonia, by Kashechewan and by other communities call for an immediate response by the government as to its position on this historic agreement.

Accountability is more than just financial audits. Accountability is the responsibility of governments to serve its citizens, to notify its citizens, to give leadership to their citizens and to provide opportunities for Canada's first peoples.

Yesterday in the House we heard the minister pay respect to aboriginal peoples by honouring the agreement in principle made by the previous government on the residential schools matter. It is now time to look forward. The matter is urgent. Aboriginal peoples across this country are looking for an indication from the government that their important and overwhelming needs will be honoured and respected. I ask you to give serious consideration to this issue.

[Petitions, April 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of a large number of Canadians calling on the Prime Minister to honour the early learning and child care agreement that has been signed. As all of us here in the House know, 84% of parents with children are both in the workplace and 70% of women with children under six are in the workplace. The need for this is acute. I urge the government, as do those who signed the petition, to honour this commitment.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, April 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have a follow-up question for my hon. colleague across the way regarding child care. I listened to his response to the previous question, but I am curious to know what kind of timelines he would see for the development of these new spaces.

The province of Manitoba is looking at not having 1,600 new child care spaces in the city of Winnipeg, 700 new child care spaces in rural Manitoba and about 60 to 70 new child care spaces in the northern part of the province. I am concerned about the plans of the member opposite and his colleagues. What kind of timelines would they see for the establishment of spaces to equate to what Manitoba hoped to offer in a very short period of time?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, April 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the member and I have gone toe to toe on a number of issues because we have a very different approach to it. I applaud her commitment to day care but I want to inform the member that the issue is not day care. It is child care. It is early learning. It is providing opportunities for parents to enter the workforce or to go to school.

The program to which my hon. colleague is speaking is modelled on a program that was introduced in the province of Ontario and did not provide one single day care spot. We know in Manitoba what the funding in Manitoba was going to provide. We have calibrated it and we know what it means.

It is interesting that the member raises the issue of water. We heard the minister yesterday talk about the shifts in the water. I applaud him for reintroducing the Liberal water plan. He spoke yesterday of the issue at Canoe Lake but he was speaking of a band-aid solution. The community is trucking water in. It needs a new system. The system was built for 130 homes, not the 220 homes that are there now. If members will recall, the Kelowna accord added an additional $400 million for water and water systems, and we want that agreement honoured.