Finance committee  Thank you. It's the submission of the Assembly of First Nations that the Government of Canada has missed an important opportunity with this budget. We feel that, to a large extent, our efforts to see the concerns of first nations addressed and to implement a first nations plan for creating opportunity remain unanswered.

Justice committee  I think we would have a similar concern. Also, the expansion of the types and numbers of offences as well would have a multiplying effect, in our view, as to the number and type of persons affected under this provision.

Justice committee  Thank you. What I'd like to do is summarize the recommendations. First of all, we agree with the notion that it is important to study the impact of the proposed revisions that are contemplated by Bill C-9 before proceeding with those revisions. We feel it would be really important to conduct such an evidence-based study in advance of such enactment, in order to protect first nations people from further impacts and outcomes of systemic discrimination.

Finance committee  Our understanding is that there is an overall 3% cap on proposed federal funding. As well, our understanding is that INAC currently remains at the 2% cap. As mentioned, we also understand that part of what's going on is that there are budget reductions in terms of contributions to potential funds.

Finance committee  I have a couple of comments. Very clearly, in terms of the child welfare situation, in a sense this is a good example of putting kids at risk in an area where there is a clear federal responsibility. Our reason for presenting this as a case study was to show that there are some very real examples to show that not providing appropriate funding within what would be considered an appropriate standard, or comparable standard, has real costs and real implications for children now and essentially in the future, because of the inappropriate nature of the interventions that result from that lack of funding.

Finance committee  Thank you. As Bob has stated, essentially we feel that child welfare represents a case study and that in a sense this is not the only program area that effectively represents a two-tier system of care and a two-tier system of funding. Since 1997-98 the federal government has retained an overall 2% cap on Indian Affairs funding that relates to off-core services.

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Yes.

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I think there are two elements to your question, and it is a good question. One element is that certainly, through a process of development, which we envision would include an incubation process within the Office of the Auditor General itself, we see the five principles of accountability being the same, regardless of whether it's a first nations government or a non-first-nations government.

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  That's part of it—a “cultural match”, not the cultural part of it.

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  What we would say is that all of the elements of accountability need to be addressed as well, and those would need to be recognized. For example, with the Auditor General of Canada there's a very clear management structure, as expressed through departments; there is very clear funding provided for the financial structures, for all of the accounting provisions; there's the Department of Finance.

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Part of the interest here is that, as accountability is becoming a more important issue nationally, this is a first nations accommodation, if you will, to what seems to be a national interest. At the same time, it's respecting the idea that was described within The Harvard Project, which talks about the cultural match for institutions, that we not simply take institutions, apply them, and expect success.

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  That would be the opportunity to design that institution. To have that examined and then theoretically, or hopefully, approved by the chiefs in Canada, that would be the process.

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  One of the key points is that, as you've pointed out, really since 1996 there hasn't been relevant inflationary or per capita increases to keep pace with our young and burgeoning population. Essentially it's led to this situation where our per capita costs for the things that you've described as being regular kinds of service that every person would expect in this country....

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Just that one.

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Thank you. Where we're at.... This has received general support. It's an idea that's been presented to the chiefs and assembly. We have been directed to develop the idea more fully, including the appropriate reporting relationships, items like what is the scope of independence and responsibility, all of those details; how it would be implemented potentially in an incubation process through the existing Auditor General; and to report to the chiefs and assembly with a full implementation plan.