Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 15th, 2006

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that we had agreed to ask the witnesses questions about the road that has not been built between Winneway and Belleterre, but without necessarily going into detail. I feel that Ms. Crowder's questions fit into that context. I think that we should defer until later the question of the department's vision for the upcoming months and years, since I am not certain that they can talk about that. It is really a political matter that Minister Prentice will come to explain to us. So without going into detail and specific questions, we at least need to understand how this works. We are just beginning to understand. That is the case for me, at least.

May I ask my questions?

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Thank you, Mr. Lemay.

Ms. Stewart, have you finished speaking to the question? Okay.

We haven't heard from the government side, so, Mr. Lemay, I'd like to....

I stand corrected. I understand now that the minister is the one who will set the priorities. We should keep it broad, though, and not necessarily too specific.

I have the parliamentary secretary, Mr. Bruinooge.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Sorry, Mr. Chair. I didn't mean to interrupt you.

Perhaps what you were meaning to say was that instead of the specific, you wanted the department to talk about its overview.

This committee tabled a report on aboriginal K-12 education in 1995, and this committee intends to pursue the topic of education. Could you give us an overview of INAC actions in regard to education over the last 10 years, and some of the ideas that came from previous committees on education?

[Paul LeBlanc]

If I may, I'll start with a more contemporary timeframe, perhaps the last couple of years, and then see how far back we'd like to move.

Officials in the department met with this committee about a year and a half ago, following a report of the Auditor General, who had reviewed the education envelopes in the department and made a number of observations and recommendations. The department appeared, and the committee asked for a departmental plan of action in relation to these recommendations. That plan of action was developed and tabled at this committee, I'm quite certain, along with presenting it to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

I had the pleasure of appearing at this committee then, and we went over the broad aspects of the education action plan, which focus on seeing a significant reduction in the education outcomes gap, primarily measured by secondary-level educational accomplishments—comparing aboriginal to non-aboriginal outcomes and, more specifically, first nation to non-first nation outcomes. We recognize there is a gap—it's well known—and the Auditor General recognized the gap.

The plan called for a concerted consultation with first nation leadership to develop a new policy framework for education. That work has been under way for several months, and we expect to see that framework emerge in the course of this summer. We had committed to bring that outcome, as well as all of the key outcomes from the work on that plan, to this committee, so the minister had committed to reporting to the committee on a regular basis.

A few months ago we sent to the committee—I don't think members here would have seen it, given the transition time, but I think it's available from the clerk—an updated document regarding the roles and responsibilities in education. The Auditor General observed that there was a lack of clarity in terms of the first nation roles, the first nation educator roles, the roles at the tribal council and their aggregate service level, and the roles of the department. So work was undertaken to clarify those roles and responsibilities, in cooperation with the first nation leadership. That document was developed and has been tabled before the committee.

In terms of improving the management of education outcome, another major piece is to develop better education outcome measurements—that is, better ways to measure successful education management and learner outcomes—and to fit these indicators into a management system that's useful—firstly, for first nation communities managing the education plan for their purposes and, secondly, for reporting to government from a perspective of accountability and sharing results.

So those are some of the major features in this education action plan. The development of the new plan is a major event for us, and it's progressing well. By and large, it's meeting the key targets, with a bit of slippage for a month or two in a few areas. The next major output will be the education policy framework that will be delivered to this table in a few months.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Thank you.

I'm going to go back to the rotation now.

Mr. Lemay.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I want to understand. I have a lot of questions and I know I do not have much time.

On page 5, second paragraph, it says “support to communities for the construction,” etc. On page 8, the second paragraph is about money, but where will that money be spent? Are we talking about people, government, land or the economy?

[Paul LeBlanc]

Are you talking mainly about housing?

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I am talking about the second paragraph of page 5, which deals with water systems, schools, roads, bridges, community facilities and so on.

[Paul LeBlanc]

That is included in the $2 billion spent on the economy.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

And people? How is the $3 billion spent on people?

[Paul LeBlanc]

That is what is mainly talked about in the first and third paragraphs on page 5, that is secondary education and social programs.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

All right. Let us get down to more serious things.

There are a lot of people. This is an extraordinarily complex department for someone from well outside it like me. I want to understand a bit about it.

There is an aboriginal community that exists and that is registered. These are status Indians. They have a band number. Suddenly, there is a conflict within the band and five or six families move to the middle of nowhere, to some other place. How do you do the calculations for those who leave the band and decide to form their own community? How would I count them? Where are they in the organization chart?

[Warren Johnson]

If I understood correctly, Mr. Chair, the question relates to how community issues with respect to potential band splits or the formation of new bands are handled and managed. Those initiatives, being of local concern, are managed through our regional offices. If you're looking for the issue here in the context of band creation or band splits, there is no ongoing funding program, so it doesn't really relate to this table.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I understand all that, but I have a specific question. There is no money to create a band, and I understand that, but they need a school, a dispensary, a police force, a road. How do you work with those communities that are not recognized? I hope that my question is clear.

[Paul LeBlanc]

I will simplify things a bit. The members of these communities, like all Canadians, always have the possibility of moving elsewhere. Community members who move and decide to settle in Toronto, Montreal or Calgary do leave behind most of the benefits that we have described in this short document, which are tied to their status or their living on-reserve. These may include a house, housing, etc. They no longer have these benefits if they move to the city or to some other rural area. But people are free to move. They are citizens of Canada and of the province where they live.

The simplest answer is that they are Canadian citizens like everyone else and they have decided to give up the benefits associated with the reserve and make their way in a bigger world as citizens of their province.

Now, if they settle in sufficient numbers at some point in a rural region of Quebec, they will ask the Quebec government to build them roads, a school, a hospital, etc. At that point, all those socio-economic decisions will have to be made at the political level.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

But where is the department in all this? You have understood the problem quite correctly. However, suppose that this community has 50 or 60 people and no running water or housing. These people come to see us and we go to see you. There is something that is not working. What do we do?

[Paul LeBlanc]

Two things can happen. My answer was more based on the future. Someone can decide to do this or that. I think, sir, that you are going by what happened in the past. You are thinking about communities that move to remote areas. In that historical perspective, two or three things would happen. In some cases, we recognize that there has actually been a band split and the creation of two communities, and the new one ended up obtaining reserve status. That is one possibility.

In other cases, things went differently. The department might recognize the band and provide services. The authorities have to decide how much of an anomaly there is. The department and the province do need forecasts to ensure that people are not living in unacceptable conditions.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Do I still have some time?

That's a bad question. I'm going to remember, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

That's a good answer.

Mr. Russell.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the presentations that have been made here today.

Comprehensive claims are a very interesting subject and one that I've had some dealings with over the last 10 years. In Labrador we have a number of comprehensive claims overlapping. There was a settlement, of course, of the Inuit claim and the creation of Nunatsiavut on December 1, 2005.

The Innu Nation has an outstanding claim, and I'd like to get a sense of how far along that particular claim is from the department's perspective. I understand they may be close to an agreement in principle, exclusive of a self-government piece.

Then, of course, there is the issue of the Labrador Métis Nation claim, a claim that was registered with the government in 1991 and still hasn't found any resolution. In terms of that, what is the government's policy, Métis policy, regarding comprehensive claims? Is there one, or is there one being developed, or is it the same as the criteria for an Indian or Inuit comprehensive claim?

I know I have a couple of questions; some of them are quite short.

There is a statement in the brief about practical steps to improve the life chances of Métis and non-status Indians and urban aboriginal people, and about the minister being an advocate within cabinet of Métis and non-status Indians and urban aboriginal peoples. When I read that statement, I just wonder how effective that is--and I'll probably ask the minister himself.

Is there a Métis-specific program with regard to housing? Is there a Métis-specific program with regard to education? Is there a Métis-specific program when it comes to health, for instance, or post-secondary student support when it comes to education, or the non-insured health benefit when it comes to health?

I would like some specific answers. I probably know some of them, but....

Where is the Métis piece going? Where do you see this going in terms of a policy direction? It's an outstanding issue.

[Paul LeBlanc]

Thank you.

You have several questions, a lot of them on the Métis question, but your earlier ones were not. If you agree, perhaps Ms. Stewart might address your earlier points about some of the claims work, and then Allan....

[Audrey Stewart]

Most of those actually relate to Allan's area. I don't have a forecast on progress for the Innu claim for you, though.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Can you get it?

[Audrey Stewart]

If the chair wishes, we could provide an update.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

That can be done at a later date.