Evidence of meeting #15 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was inac.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Bill Erasmus  Regional Chief, Northwest Territories, Assembly of First Nations
Joseph Williams  Elder, Assembly of First Nations
Sheila Fraser  Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
Ronnie Campbell  Assistant Auditor General, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
Frank Barrett  Principal, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
Scott Vaughan  Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

4:05 p.m.

Elder, Assembly of First Nations

Joseph Williams

I really believe in continued healing, as I was saying, and I believe that one of the ways is to find some solution to how people can aspire to meet that challenge at this level. Certainly at the survivor level, one of the things that we cry out for is help. Many of us don't know what to do at this point, because something has been pulled away that was really helping a lot of us. A lot of people now have nowhere to go.

I'm also very cognizant of the therapeutic aspect of healing. I'm not saying that these people who come in are not capable. They are. However, having said that, my earlier remarks were about what I lost when I was in school. I lost my identity, my culture, and my language. Those things are part of the key to therapy, and that's been proven. That's been proven by programs that were community-based, that provided the language. Instead of saying what is the presenting problem here, as therapists, we know what the presenting problem is, but what is it that we need to work with? A lot of times that was missing in the therapy that was provided. It's still missing today. Often they're not providing the service that meets the need of that individual, which is a basic need, if you will. It's to be able to say Achuk, our home. Where do I come from, who is my family--those kinds of things.

That's why it was important for many of us to have programs that alluded to those kinds of therapies that met the needs of the survivor. I'm not saying that western methodology is not good. It has its place as well. I understand that now, but I'm really advocating for the other piece that very often is the missing component.

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Okay.

We're just about out of time there, so thank you very much, Ms. Crowder.

Let's go to Mr. Duncan.

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

John Duncan Conservative Vancouver Island North, BC

I think it's Mr. Rickford.

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Pardon me. I didn't see that.

Let's go to Mr. Rickford then, for seven minutes.

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Rickford Conservative Kenora, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Chief Erasmus and Elder Williams. I also want to acknowledge the national chief for his presence here. I think it's a tremendous show of support for an important process.

I know I've reminded committee members of this before, but for both your benefits, perhaps I should mention I was a signatory to the agreement. I was a relatively new lawyer participating in that process for a firm out of Kenora I worked with, and I subsequently represented a number of clients in the ADR process, which now is known more commonly as the IAP. I was involved in drafting numerous future care plans that respected the individual needs of the survivor and made serious considerations for the impact it had on their families and the broader community.

I also appreciate, Chief Erasmus, that as part of your presentation today you expressed a willingness to work with Health Canada. I understand your principal position on this matter, and will continue to work with and through that, but I was wondering if you could discuss or allude to some of the things that you see. I know you mentioned that the resolution health support programs, or things that Health Canada had been doing prior to this new infusion of resources, almost $70 million, complemented the activities of AHF.

I have two questions, then. In communities in areas where I believe the 12 projects will continue, what do you think is the best possible way for the Aboriginal Healing Foundation and Health Canada to work together? How can they share infrastructure, resources, and capacity in these regards? And for the hundreds of other communities who never even had access to the Aboriginal Healing Foundation's programs, what recommendations might you give to Health Canada, as they continue to deliver in those programs? Could you perhaps comment on some of the priorities and on some of the culturally sensitive things they might entertain as they engage a broader first nations community across Canada and, from the perspective of the MP for Kenora, a number of isolated communities who have had real trouble accessing some of the services under any of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission ADR without great hardship, and the Aboriginal Healing Foundation?

4:10 p.m.

Regional Chief, Northwest Territories, Assembly of First Nations

Chief Bill Erasmus

Thank you.

Well, there's a number of ways to look at this. First of all, one of the first things that came to mind was if you're not going to provide funding to the Aboriginal Healing Foundation.... The model is already there, it's a good model, it works, and Health Canada is not able to provide the same kinds of services that are needed and are required. Do you want to start up a new institution similar to what we already have, or can Health Canada take on the role that the Aboriginal Healing Foundation was engaged in, or parts of it?

I think that's the discussion we need to have, because at this point their instructions, as I said earlier, are quite narrow.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Rickford Conservative Kenora, ON

Sorry, Chief, are you saying that you're not aware of any discussions in the near future that would facilitate that? In fairness, we are going to be making recommendations and discussing implications of the study. I'd like to know whether you're aware of that yet.

4:15 p.m.

Regional Chief, Northwest Territories, Assembly of First Nations

Chief Bill Erasmus

Well, we're quite open to talking about that. There are different ways to do it.

I probably shouldn't say this, but if the expertise can get to our communities and it works, it may not matter so much who does it. But it would help everyone if we knew what Canada is thinking.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Rickford Conservative Kenora, ON

I appreciate that, Chief Erasmus.

I have to give you a bit of background here, very briefly--I'm sure I'm almost out of time. Prior to my legal career I was a nurse in the Kenora riding, northern Manitoba, northern Saskatchewan. I had a chance to do some work in Klemtu and parts of the Arctic, so I have a real appreciation of the ability of any program to reach its effective constituents under certain circumstances, particularly in the wake of the Indian residential school agreement.

As a former employee, I want the record to reflect that in fairness to Health Canada, there is infrastructure in a number of communities, particularly the isolated and remote communities, which I think will be of some benefit to those communities that had not previously had any support, even from or through the Aboriginal Healing Foundation.

We know cultural support services are going to be provided by local first nations organizations. There are provisions and considerations for elders to be involved in that process, including emotional and culturally sensitive support. Access to professional counsellors I guess will depend on the region, their availability to go to the communities, or perhaps by choice, to where survivors would want to go to other communities, another location.

Just in finishing, considerable resources are going into ADI, the aboriginal diabetes initiative, youth suicide prevention programs, maternal and child health, aboriginal health human resources, and aboriginal health transition. I was just wondering, as we close this session, if you could comment on that. You did mention that everyone is affected, and it's not obvious in some ways. Do you consider that contribution a considerable way of dealing with the broader implications of the need for healing? Do you have anything you'd like to stress with respect to the delivery of those programs in the context of...?

4:15 p.m.

Regional Chief, Northwest Territories, Assembly of First Nations

Chief Bill Erasmus

I think it needs to be a comprehensive approach and it needs to be worked out, fleshed out with us. As we mentioned earlier, it may cost more money, but as you know, spending money now and getting the benefits down the road is worth it. It's difficult to determine because of the nature of healing and the nature of what we're dealing with. We're going to have to understand that it's more than just earmarking a number of dollars, and there needs to be a comprehensive approach to it.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Okay. Unfortunately, we're out of time, Mr. Rickford. Sorry. We're a little over, about the same as the others.

Members of the committee, we are running a little bit late right now. I'm going to suggest, if the committee is agreeable to this, that as we only have one witness scheduled for Tuesday, if you would agree, we'll move to Tuesday the portion of this meeting that we were going to consider for instructions to the analysts on this study. We'll use the second hour for our next witness instead of trying to rush on instructions for this study for the last 15 or 20 minutes we have left today.

Do you understand what I mean by that?

4:20 p.m.

Bloc

Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

I vote in favour. C'est bon.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Okay. We have consensus.

We then have the ability.... And I appreciate the patience and understanding of our witnesses who are here as well, but you get some extra time, which is good.

We'll take one short question, let's say three minutes, from Mr. Russell, and Mr. Duncan after him. Three minutes. Juste trois minutes, oui.

Mr. Russell, we'll start now. Go ahead.

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

Todd Russell Liberal Labrador, NL

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Williams, thank you for what you've shared. I believe the silence was indicative of the respect that we have shown for what you shared with us. Compelling words, that's all I can say, and I'm deeply moved by them, as I'm sure others in this room are.

But I think the words also carry responsibility for us to act, so I want to ask my question to your colleague, Mr. Erasmus. The government has made all kinds of apologies for why they have killed the Aboriginal Healing Foundation. But they have killed it. I have to ask you, with everything they've put on the table, everything that they have brought before us, does it adequately replace the work the Aboriginal Healing Foundation had done, all of that building over 12 or 13 years?

The comment made by Mr. DeGagné was that it was a program designed by aboriginal people, for aboriginal people, delivered by aboriginal people. It's not the same. There's a fundamental and profound difference from just some aboriginal people working in the non-aboriginal Health Canada system. There is a fundamental difference between the approaches, and that is so meaningful in terms of having an outcome.

Do you agree with that? Do you agree that we cannot replace the Aboriginal Healing Foundation with some adapted Health Canada approach?

4:20 p.m.

Regional Chief, Northwest Territories, Assembly of First Nations

Chief Bill Erasmus

Thank you.

We agree with what you're saying. That's why I think it's so important that we begin a dialogue very quickly. The more I understand Canada's decision and the more I understand the direction they have given the departments to work on this, I don't think that decision is going to change.

They need to be instructed to change their approach to the extent that we're able to sit down and make room here so that we can design something that is indeed by our people and for our people. It's not too late to do that.

I think Canada needs to be told that this decision-making that they've exercised this time around shouldn't and can't happen in the future.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Thank you, Mr. Russell and Mr. Erasmus.

Let's go to Mr. Duncan for our final question.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

John Duncan Conservative Vancouver Island North, BC

Thank you very much.

I'm sort of hidden away here, but they're my friends, so it's okay.

We were all very touched, Elder Williams. It's not the first time I've been close to such testimony, but it always has a similar impact on me. I'm happy that you're with us and that you're doing as well as you're doing. Obviously I'm assuming you have your supportive wife beside you and it's very nice to see that.

My question I guess is for Chief Erasmus and it deals with the Health Canada mandate, trying to take a practical approach here. I'm just wondering if you had a chance to review any of the testimony that Health Canada provided to this committee on this question. Because I thought I detected a high degree of interest in trying to be culturally sensitive, to use many of their aboriginal employees--I understand they have over 400 employees--and to use elders and the experience and history of the AHF to try to do exactly as you've suggested. But it's not going to happen without collaboration and cooperation.

So I guess that's really my question. Do you feel that's realistic and do you think that engagement process is workable? It would be nice if we could walk away with some feeling of positive movement out of this.

4:25 p.m.

Regional Chief, Northwest Territories, Assembly of First Nations

Chief Bill Erasmus

Yes, thank you.

I don't want you to get me wrong. I think much of what Health Canada does is good, but it's not designed to deal with the whole issue of healing. That's the difficult situation we're in. And that's why we're emphasizing the need to expand what they do, if they are indeed going to be the body that deals with the survivors.

We're quite prepared to work with them in developing that. And yes, we had a chance to review the comments they made and the material they have out there.

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Thank you very much, everyone. I want to especially thank our witnesses today, Regional Chief Erasmus and Elder Williams.

To Elder Williams and your family, I'm sure I can say, on behalf of all members, that we wish you good health and more of that resounding strength of spirit and courage that you clearly have in your continuing journey ahead.

Thank you very much.

Members, we'll take a brief recess for about three to four minutes while we change the tables for our next witnesses.

We will suspend.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Let's carry on with our second part.

I'll reiterate my appreciation for our guests today. We have changed the schedule somewhat. That sometimes happens at committee.

Members, we are now moving to our ongoing consideration of our study on northern economic development. We're delighted to welcome today Auditor General Sheila Fraser. This is on chapter 4 of the spring report of the Auditor General's department.

She is joined today by Ronnie Campbell, the Assistant Auditor General; and Frank Barrett, principal. We also welcome Scott Vaughan, who is the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, which is a division of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada.

With no further ado, let's lead off with Ms. Fraser for ten minutes. We have an hour, so we'll do our best to get through first presentations. Then we'll go directly to questions from members.

4:35 p.m.

Sheila Fraser Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Thank you, Chair, for this opportunity to discuss our office's work related to chapter 4 of our spring 2010 report, entitled “Sustaining Development in the Northwest Territories”.

As you mentioned, I'm accompanied today by Scott Vaughan, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development; Ronnie Campbell, Assistant Auditor General; and Frank Barrett, the principal. They are all responsible for this work.

The federal government has a mandate to promote political and economic development in the Northwest Territories and to protect the environment. Our audit looked at whether responsible federal departments have laid the foundations for sustainable and balanced development in the Northwest Territories. Specifically, the audit focused on whether Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Environment Canada, and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada had adequately implemented key measures to prepare for sustainable and balanced development.

These measures included settling comprehensive land claim agreements and self-government agreements, establishing and implementing a regulatory system that protects the environment, and supporting appropriate economic development and skills training programs for aboriginal peoples in the Northwest Territories.

Comprehensive land claim agreements and self-government agreements set out governance rights and the ownership of land and resource rights. These agreements are therefore important for economic development. They help to provide a level of certainty and predictability for business, industry, communities, and governments. Almost all of the Northwest Territories either lies within settled land claim areas or is the subject of ongoing negotiations.

At the time of our audit, four land claim agreements had been finalized. One of them—the Tlicho agreement—was also a self-government agreement. Four other land claim agreements and ten self-government agreements were under negotiation. We found that Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, or INAC, has made constructive efforts to negotiate these agreements and had followed the established processes for their negotiation. As well, INAC had used alternative approaches when negotiations appeared to be stalled. While much remains to be done, in our view the efforts to settle land claim and self-government agreements represent a significant achievement and an important step towards sustainable and balanced development in the Northwest Territories.

However, we also found difficulties with the annual funding process by which INAC supports Aboriginal communities to enter into self-government negotiations. The nature of this process makes it difficult for communities to receive funding at the beginning of the fiscal year within which it must be spent. On average, the agreements we looked at were signed more than six months after the beginning of the fiscal year, and several were signed in the last month before the agreement expired. Officials told us that this situation has resulted in overdraft charges and penalties, damaged business relationships, delays in meeting payroll, and the loss of experienced staff. These issues can affect First Nations' ability to participate in negotiations.

We also looked at the environmental regulatory system. Protecting the environment is important particularly because Aboriginal communities in the Northwest Territories depend on wildlife, water and land for subsistence and for economic development opportunities. We examined whether INAC and Environment Canada had established and implemented an adequate regulatory system in the Northwest Territories. We found that, in regions with settled land claim agreements, there are systems and structures that support land use plans and provide a means of adequate consultation with communities.

In regions without comprehensive land claim agreements in place, however, there is uncertainty about Aboriginal title to the land, how it may be used and who should be consulted to make development decisions. Community leaders from these areas have also indicated that the existing process does not provide their communities with adequate representation for considering development proposals that affect their lands under negotiation.

Moreover, in regions without settled land claims, we noted a lack of specific mechanisms for developing land use plans.

Without a formal land use plan, development decisions must be taken on a case-by-case basis. Decisions related to project approvals may therefore take longer because it has not been determined where different types of development should take place and what conditions should be applied.

INAC also has specific responsibilities for monitoring the cumulative impact of development. This information is important because it provides co-management boards with environmental information to support informed decision-making on development proposals. We examined whether INAC had established the needs and priorities for monitoring cumulative impact and had implemented a plan to do so. We also examined whether Environment Canada had supported INAC in these responsibilities.

We found that eleven years after receiving a mandate to do so, INAC has not yet put in place a program to monitor cumulative impact. Similarly, funding for Environment Canada's program that would support cumulative impact monitoring ended in 2007. As a result, neither department had implemented this program.

Mr. Chair, our audit also examined skills training and economic development programs for aboriginal communities. We examined two Human Resources and Skills Development Canada programs aimed at supporting skills training. We also looked at four INAC programs aimed at supporting economic development for aboriginal peoples in the Northwest Territories. We found that HRSDC had established clear objectives and targets for both programs we examined and that it had reported on progress toward their short-term objectives. However, the department had not assessed the progress these programs had made toward their longer-term objective regarding sustainable employment for aboriginal peoples.

We found that INAC's economic development programs did not have clear objectives. Instead, the programs shared a number of broad objectives that were both general and vague. We also found that INAC did not monitor its programs' performance or review information reported by funding recipients. During our audit, the federal government established the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency and transferred to it the delivery of INAC's economic development programs for the Northwest Territories.

Overall, we concluded that Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and Environment Canada had not adequately implemented key measures designed to prepare for sustainable and balanced development in the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening statement. We would be pleased to answer any questions committee members may have.

Thank you.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Terrific. Thank you, Ms. Fraser. We'll go directly to questions from members, beginning with Mr. Bagnell, for seven minutes.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You're doing an excellent job chairing.

Meegwetch.

Basically, I think the gist of the first part of your report is that it works better for sustainable mechanisms when the land claims self-government agreements are in place.

I want to go back to a couple of your previous reports to get an update. In your previous reports on the north, including the Northwest Territories, where this report was centred, you commented not that the land claims weren't good, as you said here, but that they weren't being implemented well, that the government wasn't living up to the spirit. I'm more worried about the technicalities of the agreement. In any event, the implementation wasn't good.

Could you give us an update? Now that the government has had those recommendations for a few years, how is that working out?

4:40 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

Chair, we are doing a follow-up to be reported next spring on a number of issues in INAC, of which implementation of land claims is certainly going to be an important section. So we don't have any really up-to-date information; we'll have it for the spring. But certainly there have been a number of issues that we've noted over the years, and I think the major problem, if I could resume, was that while there may have been, in many cases, strict attention to legal interpretation, there was not very good focus on the overall intentions.

For example, I remember the one that always comes to mind was an agreement where the objective was to increase aboriginal employment in the north and one of the conditions was to hold a meeting. So people would say, well, we've had the meeting. And we would say yes, but are you increasing aboriginal employment in the north?

So there have been actually many to and fro discussions with the department on that issue. We will obviously have to look to see if they have changed their approach or are still taking a very narrow legalistic approach to these agreements.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT

Thank you.

You say here that in the regions with settled land claim agreements, there are systems and structures that support land use plans and that provide adequate consultation. I assume that it's better related to sustainable development.

Just last week, the minister had a different interpretation, I think. He said that this wasn't working and that he would, if need be, open up these land claims. Do you have any comment on that? And perhaps Mr. Vaughan, the Commissioner of the Environment, could comment on whether the existing land claims are not protecting the environment, so these structures, which you're saying are working, may have to be changed.