Mr. Speaker, I am honoured and humbled to serve as a committee member for the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs. When the government committed to reconciliation and the Prime Minister vowed to enact the 94 recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation report, it was clear the committee would be working on pressing issues.
The committee began with an introduction to indigenous issues. During the meetings, we heard how the residential school system affected indigenous families and their culture. Although residential schools are often thought of as being an issue of the past, the lasting effects are still a major hurdle that continues to plague indigenous people. Many of the witnesses who appeared before the committee had gone to residential schools or have family members who attended.
Residential schools were designed to break their culture. From their mother tongue to their spiritual beliefs, indigenous people had to give up who they were, but the greatest trauma was caused by forcefully being removed from their families.
When the children returned, they went back to families and a culture of which they were no longer a part. Often indigenous people had no way to cope with the trauma. They began to develop mental health issues because there was no belief that things would get better. Many of the survivors turned to drugs and alcohol to deal with their pain. Without being healthy, they could not hold jobs and often fell into poverty.
It was shocking to hear that the suicide rate in indigenous communities across the country ran up to 11 times higher than the non-indigenous rate. They may have survived the residential schools, but by not having the resources in place to deal with their trauma, the cycle often continues.
Indigenous communities still experience the trauma of losing their children daily in our country. First nations, child, and family services take children from their parents everyday due to neglect. Unfortunately, these children find themselves removed from their families, culture, and communities when they are placed in provincial custody in the south.
Right now, according to experts, it is not uncommon for 6% of children on reserves to be in state care. In some communities, the numbers can double. This is totally unacceptable.
In 2005, many Canadians across the country were exposed to how broken the system was with the passing of Jordan River Anderson. Jordan was born with a rare muscular disorder. Due to his disorder, Jordan spent the first two years of his life in a hospital away from his family. When doctors determined that he was ready to go home, he could not. There was an issue with Health Canada and First Nations Child and Family Services. While on the reserve, the health care of indigenous people is provided by Health Canada and is paid for by the federal government.
Jordan was in a medical foster home because the treatment he needed was only available in Winnipeg, 800 kilometres away from his home. Medical foster homes fall under the care of First Nations Child and Family Services, which is funded by the provinces. Jordan needed medical treatments at home, but the federal and provincial governments could not agree on who would be responsible to fund his home care. Instead of going home, Jordan was forced to wait.
Two years later, Jordan died at the age of five, alone in Winnipeg. Jordan never had the opportunity to live with his loving family. He never had a real home. As a father, I find this story painful to tell. I cannot imagine having a child who did not receive care because neither level of government wanted to take responsibility. While some find Jordan's story shocking, first nation Canadians from across the country know this story is still a common one.
No child should ever be put in Jordan's situation. That is why Jordan's principle was developed. We must take a common sense approach to services. Child welfare should come first. An indigenous child should never receive services that are less than their non-indigenous peers because of provincial and federal funding disputes.
Members of Parliament on both sides of the House showed that they agreed with this sentiment in 2007 when they unanimously voted in favour of private member's motion, Motion No. 296, stating that “the government should immediately adopt a child first principle, based on Jordan's Principle, to resolve jurisdictional disputes involving the care of First Nations children”.
The vote may have been been unanimous, but the problem did not end with the adoption of Motion No. 296. When the Truth and Reconciliation Commission released its report, the third call to action was, “We call upon all levels of government to fully implement Jordan's principle”. On the indigenous and northern affairs committee, we heard Jordan's principle mentioned constantly. There are still first nations children who do not have the same access to services and opportunities as every Canadian child. The stories are just as heartbreaking as Jordan's.
The Liberal Party made a variety of large commitments to the indigenous people of our country. The Liberals have promised a new nation-to-nation relationship with our indigenous people. They also call for record funding to indigenous programs, and the implementation of the TRC call to action. They also called for the implementation of the call to action on Jordan's principle.
We already know the Liberal government has a questionable track record on its promises. Its first budget exposed what many Canadians already knew, that the Liberal Party was the party that would tell us what we wanted to hear, but not necessarily what it would do.
Just as expected, budget 2016 failed to deliver on several large commitments to indigenous Canadians. The record funding that had been promised was often less than what the previous Conservative government had committed to.
While the Liberals promised to implement the Jordan principle, budget 2016 only included $71 million for child welfare. This was far short of the $108.1 million that the former Conservative government, in 2012, said was the shortfall.
The Liberals claim that their promises of $634.8 million over five years will make things right. Over half of that is budgeted after the next election, which can only be described as a plan to deflect criticism.
While the Liberal government can break most of its promises without consequences, Jordan's principle is a matter of human right. The principle was brought before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal by the Assembly of First Nations and Blackstock, the executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada. The tribunal ruled the government was not respecting the rights of indigenous Canadians.
In July, the Liberal government submitted a compliance report to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in which it committed to investing up to $382 million. The Liberals also claimed they were compliant.
The stakeholders were skeptical. Blackstock's lawyers said the government's response was vague. He was right. The government presented figures with no plan or timeline.
The tribunal agreed with Blackstock. The government was not in compliance. The tribunal found that the government had a narrow interpretation of what medical needs needed to be covered, only focusing on acute and complex medical situations. The government had adopted a policy that only applied to indigenous people on reserve.
This was not the government attempting to live up to its commitments to first nations. This was the Liberal government attempting to do the bare minimum. We cannot do the bare minimum when the welfare of children is on the line.
We cannot keep going back and forth in court. We need to more forward on this issue.
When my colleague, the member of Parliament for Timmins—James Bay presented his motion, he put forward an opportunity to end the stories we have heard too often in the media and first hand at committee. He has also put forward a motion that all sides of the House can agree on, not because the tribunal is involved but because it is the right thing to do.
The New Democrats support the motion. Many of my Conservative colleagues and I support the motion. Now it is up to the Liberals to make a decision. Hopefully it is for the children.
