HUMA Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, March 19, 2002

Á

1105

The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby--Ajax, Lib.))

Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ)

Mr. Abbott

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry (Director of International Affairs, Assembly of First Nations)

Á

1110

Á

1115

Á

1120

The Chair

The Clerk of the Committee

The Chair

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mrs. Skelton

Á

1125

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Á

1130

The Chair

Mr. Alan Tonks (York South--Weston, Lib.)

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Á

1135

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

Á

1140

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Á

1145

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Ms. Monique Guay

The Chair

Mr. Joe McGuire (Egmont, Lib.)

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. Joe McGuire

Á

1150

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. Joe McGuire

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. McGuire

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. McGuire

The Chair

Mr. Larry Spencer (Regina--Lumsden--Lake Centre, Canadian Alliance)

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. Larry Spencer

Á

1155

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Mr. Larry Spencer

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Â

1200

The Chair

Mr. Spencer

The Chair

Mr. Joe McGuire

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

The Chair

Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick (Prince Albert, Canadian Alliance)

Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry

Â

1205

The Chair

Mrs. Skelton

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

The Chair

Â

1210

Ms. Joanne Green (Director of Human Resources, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs)

Â

1215

Â

1220

The Chair

Mr. Gerald Morin (President, Métis National Council)

Â

1225

The Chair

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Joanne Green

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Joanne Green

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Joanne Green

Mrs. Skelton

Ms. Joanne Green

Ms. Carol Skelton

Ms. Joanne Green

Mrs. Skelton

Â

1230

Mr. Gerald Morin

Mrs. Skelton

Mr. Gerald Morin

Mrs. Skelton

Mr. David Chartrand (President, Manitoba Métis Federation)

Mrs. Skelton

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Joanne Green

Â

1235

Mr. Gerald Morin

Mr. Alan Tonks

Mr. Gerald Morin

Mr. Alan Tonks

Mr. Gerald Morin

Â

1240

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

Mr. Gerald Morin

Â

1245

Ms. Monique Guay

Mr. David Chartrand

Ms. Monique Guay

Mr. David Chartrand

Ms. Monique Guay

Â

1250

The Chair

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Gerald Morin

The Chair

Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre)

Mr. Gerald Morin

Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre)

Â

1255

Mr. Gerald Morin

Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre)

Mr. David Chartrand

Mr. Martin

The Chair

Ms. Joanne Green

The Chair

Mr. Joe McGuire

Mr. David Chartrand

·

1300

Mr. Joe McGuire

Mr. David Chartrand

Mr. Joe McGuire

Mr. David Chartrand

The Chair

Mr. David Chartrand

Mr. Joe McGuire

Mr. David Chartrand

Mr. McGuire

Mr. Gerald Morin

·

1305

Mr. Joe McGuire

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Joe McGuire

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Joe McGuire

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Joe McGuire

The Chair

Mr. Larry Spencer

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Gerald Morin

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mr. Gerald Morin

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mr. David Chartrand

·

1310

Mr. Larry Spencer

The Chair

Mr. David Chartrand

Ms. Joanne Green

The Chair

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Joanne Green

Mr. Tonks

Ms. Joanne Green

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

Mr. Gerald Morin

·

1315

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Joanne Green

The Chair

Mr. David Chartrand

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

·

1320

The Chair

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

---

NUMBER 055

l

1st SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, March 19, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á  (1105)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby--Ajax, Lib.)): I would like to call this meeting to order.

    This is the 55th meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. We only have one of the three groups that were going to be here for the first session. Here with us is Ms. Frawley-Henry. She's been sitting at the desk. I don't think it's fair to keep her waiting.

    We will start with your presentation. I think the clerk has told you that you have about five or six minutes for your opening remarks. Normally we then have questions.

    Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ): Where are the others? Are they not coming?

    The Chair: They have not come yet, so we're hoping they will come.

    Ms. Frawley-Henry.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry (Director of International Affairs, Assembly of First Nations): My name is Marie Frawley-Henry. I'm with the Assembly of First Nations. I usually introduce myself using my traditional name as well. [Witness speaks in her native language].

    I've introduced myself in the language of my people of the Anishnabe First Nation, which is Nipissing First Nation, and my clan system. So I've given you a little bit of an introduction.

    I want to thank the members of the committee for taking the time to be here today. I also want to thank you for inviting me here today. It shows that the first nations' voice is being heard and hopefully my other colleagues will have their voices heard as well.

    We have been asked to speak to the concerns first nations have with regard to the employment equity legislative review. I will offer some constructive suggestions and alternatives for dealing with the priorities and goals with regard to employment equity for first nations peoples.

    I'm here today in my capacity as the director of international affairs for the Assembly of First Nations. Due to limited capacity and staff at the AFN, I have recently added to my daily tasks other portfolios, such as employment equity, gender equality, and fundraising. So I'm quite busy. I don't have any other supportive staff as well.

    The AFN is the national body representing the political interests and aspirations of the first nations peoples in Canada. As reflected in the Speech from the Throne opening the 37th Parliament, Canada has a profound responsibility and challenge to positively change its relationship with aboriginal peoples:

    “Nowhere is the creation and sharing of opportunity more important than for Aboriginal people. Too many continue to live in poverty, without the tools they need to build a better future for themselves or their communities.”

    “And it will work to ensure that basic needs are met for jobs, health, education, housing and infrastructure.The commitment will be reflected in all of the Government's priorities.”

    At the very least, these words can be understood as a guarantee to a continued commitment to employment equity. However, as a successful lobby and advocacy organization for some 633 first nations communities across the country, the Assembly of First Nations has recently had its core budget cut by the Government of Canada to nearly 55%. Over 70 individuals were laid off. As a result, I've added a number of tasks to my workload.

    This translates into further increase of the unemployment rate of first nations and millions of dollars of loss to the local first nations economies. First nations already have the highest unemployment rate in Canada.

    More serious is the implication this has on the effectiveness of the Assembly of First Nations to provide essential services such as the AFN employment equity program, which was cut short as a result of the recent budget cuts.

    Since the enactment of the Employment Equity Act, there has been a slight increase in the representation of aboriginal peoples under the act. The 2001 Employment Equity Act report indicates:

    “Aboriginal Peoples in 2000 maintained the same level of representation as in 1999, but the 1.5% level was still the highest achieved since 1987, when representation was only at 0.7%.”

    The main barrier is in the workplace--double, triple jeopardy. This situation is faced by people who belong to more than one designated group and therefore face heightened discrimination. The Employment Equity Act identifies aboriginal persons and persons with disabilities as two of the four designated groups that may encounter discrimination or be at a disadvantage in terms of gaining employment. First nations registered Indian people with disabilities are doubly affected by the barriers that exist in society and that obstruct their ability to obtain employment, as they are members of both of these groups.

    For first nations women with disabilities, the outlook for securing employment within the private or public sector worsens. In reviewing the data on the assessment of progress for the designated groups, the following observations were made with respect to first nations aboriginal people with disabilities.

    There is no data provided specifically with reference to first nations people with disabilities, or aboriginal peoples with disabilities, and their corresponding rate of employment within either the public or private sector. This data is categorized under either “people with disabilities” or “aboriginal people” and does not provide a clear enough picture.

Á  (1110)  

     People with disabilities in both the private and public sector experienced only a marginal increase--in the private sector 2.3% to 2.4%, and in the public sector 4.6% to 4.7%. In both the private and public sector, people with disabilities were denied their fair share of hiring opportunities. People with disabilities in the public sector saw their representation actually decrease in 19 of the 40 federal departments.

    First nations youth: Aboriginal peoples are the fastest-growing demographic group in the country, and have a higher proportion of children and youth than the overall Canadian population. This adds a sense of urgency to address the issues that will have an impact on aboriginal people entering the labour force.

    More than one-third of aboriginal youth reported unemployment in 1996. The unemployment rate of aboriginal female youth was about 2.1 times higher than the non-aboriginal female youth. The unemployment rate of male aboriginal youth was about 2.3 times higher than non-aboriginal male youth.

    First nations women: Throughout a number of pre-contact societies, first nations women contributed significantly to a history that applied a balanced approach. The inclusion of women in the decision-making process was important to first nations peoples. Colonization's imposed institutions and policies of oppression resulted in the loss of egalitarian customs and laws and the adoption of patriarchal rule of law. The various policies and institutions contributed significantly to the breakdown and exclusion of first nations women in the decision-making processes.

    Under-employment: A study by Voyageur in 1997 identified a number of issues and barriers experienced in private sector workplaces, some of which may be present in the federal public service. A key finding was that most aboriginal employees had more education and training than their co-workers, suggesting that they were under-employed. A paradox seems to have existed, in that while they have gained employment due to their educational achievements, their placement in menial positions prevented them from using their skills and training. Voyageur's findings suggest that while education is important to the workplace, advancement of aboriginal people by itself may not be enough. It is also important to sensitize both managers and co-workers to the special barriers faced by aboriginal workers.

    The Assembly of First Nations recommends that the Government of Canada continue to support the Employment Equity Act as it relates to first nations peoples. Employment equity remains one of the few available levers with legislative backing to open up jobs in the wider Canadian economy. The act forces employers to focus on fair hiring practices. Without it, employment equity would not be as high a priority issue as it is currently.

    While many programs have met with limited success, a few have made noteworthy progress. Concerns are not about the act per se, but rather improvements that could be made with the act. Most of the necessary initiatives are already in place. What remains is to work at making them more effective. The high turnover of aboriginal employees due to unfriendly or culturally insensitive work environments could be addressed by mentorship, cultural accommodations, as well as development of various other support systems in the workplace.

    To address fluctuation levels of hirings, promotions, and terminations, the number of permanent positions offered to aboriginal peoples, as opposed to temporary, seasonal, or unstable jobs, must increase.

    It is important to sensitize both managers and co-workers to the special barriers faced by aboriginal workers in order to prevent under-employment. Aboriginal workers must be offered jobs that require them to use the skills and education they have acquired.

    Overall, employment equity in the public and private sectors requires special efforts and amendments to the Employment Equity Act to increase the success rate in hiring, retention, promotion, and training opportunities for first nations peoples.

    To better facilitate broader employment opportunities for aboriginal peoples, the act should be amended to reinstate the industry, trade, and commerce sectors to come in compliance with the Employment Equity Act.

    The Assembly of First Nations recommends that amendments to the act and regulations along with special measures be taken to ensure the accessibility to the workplace of a rapidly increasing first nations youth population.

    Overall, first nations women must be included in the economic gains and opportunities of the country. The act needs to better address how economic leadership can be promoted among women. Additionally, the act can better demonstrate enhanced support for the sustainability and growth for entrepreneurship among women and a strengthened role in the economic development of their community, nations, and global interests.

Á  (1115)  

    We recommend that data be collected specific to the rate of employment for first nations people with disabilities. This data should also indicate the rate of employment for first nations women with disabilities.

    It must be kept in mind that this data would not be a true representation of the employment picture for first nations peoples with disabilities in Canada, as there are variances in the employment opportunities generally on and off reserve. It would be helpful if the data collected indicated on or off reserve and rural or urban locations. This information will assist in developing strategies that are flexible enough to accommodate the differing situations in which first nations people with disabilities reside.

    The data with regard to first nations people with disabilities and their employment rates will provide much-needed information on what is working and what is not working and in identifying what the specific barriers are that may be restricting first nations people with disabilities from obtaining employment.

    In recognition of the urgency to address first nations employment opportunities, the Assembly of First Nations recommends the overall implementation of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples report, which encompasses the employment equity recommendations.

    Beyond employment equity: Employment equity programs constitute but a small part of what is needed to effectively address the economic disadvantages facing aboriginal Canadians. Before employment equity can be successfully applied to first nations peoples, genuine efforts need to be made in decreasing the undeniably high unemployment rates of first nations people residing in first nations communities. More than 80% of first nations communities are located in isolated areas where there are abundant natural resources, yet first nations people lack jobs and sources of income. The statistics given for the unemployment rate among first nations communities is 28.7%, but the real rate of non-participation in the labour force is between 80% and 90%, according to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.

    The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples identified deep-seated problems at the root of aboriginal economic marginalization and predicted that the disparities between aboriginal and other Canadians will continue to increase unless policies are radically altered.

    The commission urged that there be an intensive marshalling of resources and energy to find jobs and qualify aboriginal people to fill them. An integrated, labour-market-driven effort to get aboriginal participants into real, sustainable jobs was advocated along with an emphasis on job creation in the Canadian economy.

    Fundamental to improving the quality of life of aboriginal Canadians and increasing their participation in the Canadian economy is the recognition of their inherent right to self-government. As the RCAP clearly recommended, the reality of the inherent right to self-determination requires a substantial reordering of powers and institutions within the Canadian state.

    On the international level, the United Nations recently noted that Canada is not meeting its stated objectives and commitments with regard to aboriginal peoples. It has been noted that this situation remains “the most pressing human rights situation facing Canadians”. The UN Human Rights Committee is particularly concerned that Canada has not yet implemented the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. The committee pointed to the commission's conclusion “that without a greater share of land and resources institutions of aboriginal self-government will fail”:

    “The Committee views with concern the direct connection between Aboriginal economic marginalization and the ongoing dispossession of Aboriginal people from their lands, as recognized by RCAP, and endorses the recommendations of RCAP that policies which violate aboriginal treaty obligations and the extinguishment, conversion or giving up of Aboriginal rights and title should on no account be pursued by the State Party. The Committee is greatly concerned that the recommendations of RCAP have not been implemented, in spite of the urgency of the situation.”

    These are the concluding observations of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

    The Assembly of First Nations February 2002 plan is premised on the fact that the inherent right to self-government exists and is reflected in the Constitution. From this reality, four streams of change are necessary: nation rebuilding, redistribution of lands and resources, treaty implementation, and new fiscal relationships.

    Canada must undertake to engage first nations in a true process of capacity building. All Canadians recognize the need for first nations to become full participants in the Canadian economy. Economic development and capacity building are the foundations of self-government. As a result, the federal government must engage in processes and activities to secure access to lands and resources in accordance with treaties and aboriginal rights, to support business development, and to uphold fundamental commitments to improving the delivery of and access to educational services for aboriginal peoples.

Á  (1120)  

    As the majority of the Canadian population moves from their working years into retirement, aboriginal people will be moving from their youth to their working years. More than half the aboriginal population is under the age of 25. Aboriginal people will therefore make up a larger segment of the Canadian workforce of the future. The skill shortages faced by aboriginal peoples will have an increasingly negative impact on the Canadian economy unless first nations and Canada work together to address these realities now.

    With that, I thank you very much for your time.

    The Chair: Just by way of explanation to the committee, we were very generous in providing you with time because some of the other witnesses did not show up. We've just been informed that with respect to the witnesses from the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, something came up and they will not be with us. We are trying to get hold of the Interprovincial Association on Native Employment.

    The Clerk of the Committee: That person had transferred his e-mail somehow. We don't have a fax number for him. He must have missed it, and he's sitting in Saskatoon. He would have loved to come, but.... He had been confirmed by writing and by voice, but....

    So we have one witness left and two more to come at 12:30.

    The Chair: Fortunately, we have an excellent witness, and the committee will use their time well. The ones who are coming at 12:30 are coming in from Manitoba, and it's difficult to get hold of them to tell them they can come early. I apologize to the members of the committee, but we certainly have a good representative at the witness table, and I think there will be some good questions. I know that the committee will appreciate your responses.

    Without further discussion, we will move into the first round of questioning. Ms. Skelton, you can begin.

    Ms. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon--Rosetown--Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Ms. Frawley-Henry, thank you very much for coming today. I appreciate it, and I'm very sorry that I couldn't pronounce your name. It's beautiful. What does it mean?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: This has taken many years. This is why I love to work with young people. Once you have been given your name, a name is very significant in telling who you are, what your mission and purpose in life are, and what the task is that you will carry on. It's a medicine name. My medicine name is Sacred Water Woman. It connects us back to the land, the teachings, and the traditions again.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: So it fits very well into your position right now, then.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Yes, being able to flow with--

    Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Yes, I can do that.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: There's one thing I'd like to ask you. We've heard the term “cultural insensitivity” mentioned numerous times before by witnesses, but we've never really had a good definition given to us. Can you give me a definition of what you feel “cultural insensitivity” is or what you see?

Á  (1125)  

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: To sort of paint a broader picture, I could say there obviously have been two world views. Coming from a first nations mother and an Irish father, I saw these two world views growing up, on a stage, all my life. I could see the way my mother in her language, her first language, and the way my father.... I saw these two world views in play constantly. The thinking in the all-inclusiveness was my mother's way of bringing us up and thinking; it was linear and totally different from the way my father would bring us up. But I find I was able to marry those two together to continue forward in my life successfully.

    Bringing that kind of context into your question.... What was the term you used?

    Ms. Carol Skelton: “Cultural insensitivity”. It's been mentioned numerous times, but we've never really had a definition.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: It's important to understand these two world views in order to have the cultural sensitivity. That's another piece of work I'm working on in my spare time. For the last seven years I've been delivering a history series on the spiritual history of indigenous North America to engage young people. That history will have to parallel the European Judeo-Christian world view so that you can see the two sides of this so that you can have cultural sensitivity.

    I think it's all education and awareness so that we are able to look at each other and understand that there are other realities and other world views coming into play as we interact with different peoples in society. Sensitization around that has to be brought into play so there is.... You can see it in the workplace, and you can see it in relationships, as I did. You can see that being played out. I think more and more young people are becoming increasingly aware. With the multicultural mosaic we have in this country, they're enjoying those different relationships and they're looking at it with more of an open and more culturally sensitive way of interacting with different peoples.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: Our federation in Saskatchewan belongs to the Assembly of First Nations, is that right?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: The Federation of Saskatchewan Indians?

    Ms. Carol Skelton: Yes.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Yes.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: They belong to the Assembly of First Nations. We have a huge first nations population.

    It's really hard. We talk about this cultural insensitivity, but how can we, as members of Parliament, try to improve our whole understanding of this cultural insensitivity? Not being a first nations person, how can I--

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Break that barrier.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: --yes, break that barrier?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: There have been successful attempts at that. I know the Department of Indian Affairs actually has a lodge they call the Kumik Lodge. I don't know if anyone is aware of that. What it's set up to do is employees of the Department of Indian Affairs and outside individuals are welcomed into this lodge. It's a circular lodge and it's set up in the cultural way so that the elders and traditional spiritual leaders can come in and can sensitize, and bring about dialogue and discussions, and engage people in the workplace with an opportunity to become more educated and sensitized to the culture.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: So has your organization used this lodge to inform members?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Actually, I've worked with some of the different national aboriginal organizations, and when I did work with them, especially for young people, I certainly utilized that lodge on an ongoing basis. Now I'm a little bit further and I can't access the facilities as often as I would like, but I do connect with them. I have spent many years in that lodge myself, going in there and taking every advantage of listening to the elders and absorbing what knowledge they could pass on. So I think that's a very successful idea in the workplace, to have such a model.

Á  (1130)  

    The Chair: Mr. Tonks.

    Mr. Alan Tonks (York South--Weston, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chairman.

    Thank you for being here.

    You had mentioned right at the beginning of your presentation that the AFN had its core budget cut. You indicated that not only did you have to lay off people, but as a result there was a reduction in the capacity to monitor employment equity, and you cited a number of areas you have concern about. At the same time, you also in your recommendations gave very strong support for the Employment Equity Act.

    What were the reasons given that the core budget was cut so dramatically?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Do you mean the reasons given by the department?

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Yes. It seems to me it is very contradictory to the ends and to the substance of your repor, as we've heard from other people also.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Right. The reasons given were that it seems we are not able to get anywhere. The Assembly of First Nations has a first nations plan and the Department of Indian Affairs has a governance initiative. There seems to be no way of connecting and working and dialoguing on how that could work together.

    I was at the World Conference against Racism and I worked with the national chief. We had a commitment to go forward and speak the truth that the aboriginal people--first nations people--are heading toward extinction through legislation. I work on women and gender equality programs as well, and through some of the legislative issues, in less than ten years there will be some communities non-existent because of the legislation and the policies. We're talking about extinguishment and extermination of indigenous peoples in that regard.

    Because we brought up certain truths about the reality in Canada and some of the third world conditions, I think we have been slapped.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: You were the first organization that I can recall that has in fact talked about the RCAP report as it related to the right to self-government and some implications. I thank you for that, because I was relatively new at this, and I hadn't realized that from your vantage point the community relates self-government so much to capacity building, to program integration, both in education and things such as peer mentoring.

    Was your organization actually involved on the philosophical side of enunciating first nation self-government, or were you involved in actual program delivery, for example, in peer mentoring and the collection of data and so on? Was the AFN advocating or was it delivering services?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: I'm trying to answer the best I can. I can't speak on behalf of all of my colleagues. I'm aware that the Assembly of First Nations obviously is the national advocacy body group, but we do have staff who will research and put statistics and data and so forth together. So it's not only philosophical, but we're doing, I would say, both ends equally.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Because your core budget was cut, you're not doing that right now.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: No. We're doing everything we can, but obviously we're not as effective. I'm handling four files, and fundraising is a file on its own that should be done by one person. As best I can, I've prepared a report, and hopefully this.... I just felt it was very important that this opportunity be given, and we have to choose our priorities now.

Á  (1135)  

    Mr. Alan Tonks: You gave a very brief history of the historical accumulation that has resulted in, I think you used the term, an absence of matriarchal rights, if you will. One of the things we have been told is where we have had successive employment equity programs vis-à-vis the aboriginal community, the consistency and being able to keep those statistics up--in other words, the erosion--is greater among aboriginals. You had mentioned the mentorship program and the support system in the workplace that would affect retention. Are the affiliated groups of the association able to support mentoring programs within their communities? Is that going on now?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Okay. Let me understand your question. Does the Assembly of First Nations...?

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Are they monitoring how much mentoring is going on that would affect women being successful, whether they're disabled or just from the designated group? Are they monitoring what is happening in the federal government, for example, in terms of “successfully”? We were told by Fisheries Canada at our last meeting, for example, that they have been quite successful in terms of getting aboriginal representation from the designated group in terms of statistics. Are you monitoring to make sure that there's no slippage, and are there any programs--

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: The Assembly of First Nations is not monitoring at this time, but I am aware that there was at some point an attempt, before the cut of the employment equity program, to put a monitoring system in place with the public service. I'm not sure where that is at, but there was an attempt to get a memorandum of agreement so there would be a monitoring system in place. We would need the staff and the capacity in order to.... We cannot go any further with.... I would gladly come here to bring the information forward, but the capacity is no longer there.

    The Chair: Madam Guay.

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Welcome to our committee. I'm very disappointed by the absence of other aboriginal groups because their presentations would have been most useful. I don't know if we will have an opportunity to issue new invitations to them. We'll see what we can do. It's unfortunate that we won't hear the views of each of the first nations not represented here today.

    Earlier, you spoke of employment equity for aboriginals and stated that the situation had improved somewhat. You did not give us any figures. No doubt you don't have this information handy. You stated that levels were about the same as they were in 1999. If I understand correctly, you're saying the existing legislation does not allow for progress in the area of employment equity for aboriginals.

Á  (1140)  

[English]

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: I did cut down my presentation, and I believe that I may have cut out the figures, but I certainly can bring those figures forward.

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: It would be interesting to get these figures and to pass them along to our clerk so that we can take them into account when we draft our report. This would be extremely helpful to us.

    You mentioned cuts and my colleague Alan Tonks asked you the reasons why these were implemented. Can you give me some idea of the extent of these cuts and where exactly they were made? That wasn't clear to me. I had to leave briefly, and I apologize for that, and I didn't catch your answer. Was the application of the act affected by the cuts?

[English]

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Actually, the cut is to the whole core budget of the organization. As much as 55% of the core budget has been cut. There have been 70 people laid off as a result of that, and 25 more positions were potentially ready to go, so there were some 90 positions that were....

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: You're saying that it takes many people to ensure that the provisions of the legislation are applied in the different regions.

    This brings to mind another important issue. When it comes to different target groups, businesses must meet certain quotas, or something similar to quotas. There are a number of aboriginal groups in Ontario. However, some provinces have far more aboriginal groups than others. In such cases, it's difficult to enforce a rule limiting the number of aboriginal people a company must employ. Perhaps these companies should be employing a larger number of aboriginals.

    In your opinion, are current employment practices equitable?

[English]

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Let me get your question again. Should we limit the number of first nations in...?

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: No. I'm saying that in certain parts of Manitoba and in other provinces, the aboriginal population is much larger than in Ontario or Quebec. Yet, the legislation is very specific and a company with 100 employees or more must hire one or two aboriginals. I'm not sure of the exact figure. Shouldn't the legislation be amended so that in some regions, more aboriginals must be hired because they make up a greater proportion of the population that in other regions, where their needs may be more limited?

[English]

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Well, something serious has to be done to deal with the needs of the large and increasing first nations and aboriginal population going into the workforce, as I indicated. Some special measures are going to have to be looked at to increase the opportunity of employment for the rapidly growing population of young people, so yes, there should be some special measures to take that into consideration.

Á  (1145)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: Mention was also made of the need to promote public awareness of employment opportunities. Are aboriginals being made aware of these opportunities? Do you believe they are made aware of their rights in the area of employment, of the fact that they are protected by legislation and that they can seek employment in companies that must comply with the legislation?

[English]

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: I spoke of the importance of raising awareness, and I believe that it's also the responsibility of the Government of Canada to work alongside first nations people to increase that awareness. I don't think there is enough being done in that area.

    I was originally hired in 1994-95, during the regional employment equity program, and I was hired to provide education and awareness to corporations, governments, schools, and first nations communities. I did that first within our own communities and then brought that education and awareness to the broader society.

    The belief I have in sensitization and awareness has continued in my life in other works and projects. Education and awareness are always key in breaking down these barriers.

    I thank you for that question, and I believe that the Government of Canada has to work side by side with first nations on these issues.

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: Thank you.

[English]

    The Chair: Mr. McGuire.

    Mr. Joe McGuire (Egmont, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    I have a couple of questions. One is sort of macro in nature, and that's about the department itself, which is a huge department, one of the biggest the Government of Canada has. I wonder if you consider that the money that's being spent in that department is being well spent. Is it getting to the people it's supposed to be helping?

    It seems to me that at least it's a better time to be an aboriginal, in terms of programs and education and the business side. Aboriginals are getting into all sorts of new frontiers. I think things are a little better than they were even 10 years ago.

    But is the budget that has been allocated being well spent? Are there enough aboriginals in the department? Are there enough there, in the right positions, to influence policy, to the extent that maybe they should be influencing policy?

    Take all the time you need to answer those questions.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: I'm assuming you're talking about the Department of Indian Affairs.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Yes, Indian and Northern Affairs.

Á  (1150)  

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Okay.

    Obviously, in order to influence policy and where the decisions are being made, there's always an issue of having aboriginal people in those positions of management and upper management. Obviously that's a case where there is a much greater need to have people throughout the federal and public and private sectors in these key decision-making processes. It helps in bringing education and awareness. It also facilitates a new opportunity to bring an effective and different perspective to the workplace.

    With regard to your question, is the funding appropriate and is it utilized to the maximum for first nations peoples? Obviously, in our circumstances, this isn't so. I don't know how long the department can work when they need to work with the first nations communities. Time will indicate. Obviously the dollars are not being utilized effectively.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: We're talking about employment equity in a department that's devoted to the affairs of the aboriginal. You would think there would be quite a number of people employed in that department who are able to understand the culture a lot better than people from the white community. Are they there? Are there more going in? Are they having an influence, in your judgment?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: I originally had some statistics and data on the Department of Indian Affairs. I had to cut down a lot of my presentation, of course. Obviously the Department of Indian Affairs has a much higher rate of aboriginal employees in its department. It has the highest, actually.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: You don't know how high?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: I have the figures back at the office, again. It's quite a bit of research in order to get a little stack going here. I can certainly provide that as well.

    I have made attempts to request assistance from the Department of Indian Affairs in employment equity, and I have not had any return calls. So it's almost a boycotting of the Assembly of First Nations.

    In order to be effective and work with the Assembly of First Nations and get some effective services provided for the peoples, there has to be some agreement made between the Department of Indian Affairs and the Assembly of First Nations. We can't even provide services on employment equity or monitor or do the appropriate and effective work that we could do for aboriginal peoples, who sometimes face 90% unemployment in first nations communities.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Thank you.

    The Chair: Mr. Spencer.

    Mr. Larry Spencer (Regina--Lumsden--Lake Centre, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Thank you for coming. Obviously you've laid out a lot for us, and you could have laid out a lot more from your stack if we had that, I'm sure.

    I want to take us in a bit of a different direction here, one that comes from things you have said. I want to start by asking you to explain to us.... You mentioned that one of the recommendations, one of the things you stated as important, would be to continue to support the Employment Equity Act for first nations. As far as that act is concerned and what it's doing for you, why would you see that as important? Where is it important to you?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Over the years I have spoken with a number of people. These are first nations people or aboriginal people working on employment equity. They have actually said the Employment Equity Act is not working for them.

    Because I work at the international level as well, I sat in on a meeting at one point where I became aware that this employment equity model in Canada is being looked at by different countries. Then I have to ask how effective is it in Canada, and is it really working well enough to make it a model for other countries?

    Going back to your original portion of the question, in order to have aboriginal people or first nations people employed, there has to be some sort of legislation. Otherwise, it would just be by good nature or a handshake that someone would be brought into a position to work through this legislation. There have been some programs put into place--not to say that they're perfect--but there's a lot of work that needs to be done.

    The legislation needs more teeth, obviously, and I'm sure you hear that from everyone. There is still a long way to go, and other means are needed to make this legislation more effective for first nations people.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: I have another question, and I'm going to ask you for your patience a little bit as I work through two or three things here. I'll say more to you in the next question.

    In answer to the cultural sensitivity problem that you were asked about, you suggested that the way to help deal with that would be for us to gain some spiritual education in one of these lodges, etc. How do you feel you can justify spiritual education in your traditions as being important to go back to, or for us on the outside to come to know? How do you justify that? Knowing how some others are so condemned for bringing the spiritual dimension into things, how can you do this? How do you feel you can do this?

Á  (1155)  

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: I am at this point beginning to learn my language. I mean, I heard my mother speak it as I was growing up, but now I'm beginning to have a real interest in the language. The language describes everything. It's totally different from the whole world view and the English language. It gives everything life; everything is alive. You can't separate spirituality from the aboriginal world view, the first nations world view. Everything has a spirit.

    The connection to the land is the most important way. You can't separate the people from the land. I think that's the important lesson at this time in the human family. It's not a matter of forcing it down someone's throat. You just can't separate the two; it is one.

    For example, you can't just say this is the spiritual history of the people, because of its sacred relationship to all the elements of the Earth, the land, and to the brothers and sisters from the four corners of the Earth. So there's no separation at all. That is part of the cultural sensitivity, that we're all related in that context.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: Okay, I'll hand you that as being a part of the sensitivity, but I wouldn't call it cultural. I would call it a spiritual difference. I won't get into that, but I could discuss that quite at length with you.

    Let me take you just a little bit further here. The world changes. It changes for all of us. It changed for all of us at September 11. Obviously for first nations people who have this intrusion of the rest of the world into their land it has been a great change. Yet it has happened over a long, long period of time. It's not something the aboriginal people of today endured firsthand, yet they're still caught in trying to make that change.

    Now to help you understand a little bit better where I'm coming from, let me just share with you that I have an aboriginal son I've raised since he was three. We adopted him. He's treaty Cree. We have watched him go through the process of trying to find out who he is, where he's from, and all of this. He had that great desire to go back to the past. Then immediately when he got back there, he found out that wasn't where he wanted to be, and he turned around and has not even bothered to meet his blood relatives face to face.

    Now tie that together with what we've already been talking about--that is, the spiritual dimension here. Do you believe that the secret to making the Employment Equity Act work lies in the past, or does that lie yet in the future?

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: Past and future, I think both areas. It's just basic to give equal opportunity to all people to share and participate in all levels of life, from work to entertainment, having that full participation. Unfortunately, we've had to take legislative processes in order to bring awareness that it's important for all people to be given the opportunity to participate.

  (1200)  

    The Chair: Your time has well passed.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: How come the clock speeds up when I speak?

    The Chair: Mr.McGuire, a very brief question.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: I was just getting to my point.

    The Chair: Well, maybe Mr. Fitzpatrick in the few minutes I will allow him can do that.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: It's another non-employment equity question and it has to do with the Marshall decision. I just wonder if you have an opinion on whether the Marshall decision was a benefit to the aboriginals and has had the impact that it should have or could have.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: I really wish I could speak to that. I work on many areas, but I don't have the capacity to answer that question in the respect that it should be answered.

    The Chair: Mr. Fitzpatrick, a short question.

    Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick (Prince Albert, Canadian Alliance): Marie, I just read in the paper this morning that something like two-thirds of the aboriginal people don't live on the reserves, and there is a real trend to move off the reserve. As a person who comes from rural Saskatchewan, I say that's a phenomenon that goes right across the country. The rural area communities are shrinking, and no matter how many skills you have, and so on, it's hard to have a viable future in those areas. I want to make that observation.

    I've been a teacher, and I did spend some time teaching aboriginal people for a short period of time, quite some time ago. I was also a lawyer and I did practise a bit on the side with the legal aid system, which brought me into contact with aboriginal people who were in trouble with the law.

    It was my observation, and you can take it for what you want, that a large number of these folks just didn't come into this society with the skills they need to get by in this larger society. I'm not sure what the problem was so that you have people who can't read and can't carry out basic mathematics skills, social skills, and other things. But to me it's a big problem and it still is a big problem.

    I want to raise the point that when I look at Canada I can see people who have come from vastly different cultural backgrounds, from Asia and Africa, and virtually in one generation, and certainly with their children, they become fully integrated into the larger society and fully functioning in the larger society. A lot of these folks came from even more disadvantaged circumstances than our aboriginal people, and they don't seem to have done it with affirmative action or equity programs.

    I'm wondering why people come from Africa or Asia, or some really third world countries, to Canada and in one generation, or certainly in two, are fully part of the mainstream of our society--they become professional people, well educated, fitting in very well in society--and yet this doesn't seem to be working with aboriginal people. They just seem to be locked into a certain situation and we don't seem to able to knock the barriers down to get aboriginal people to fully participate in this larger society.

    Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry: This is another reason why I'm interested in doing this film work on explaining this history. Obviously it's a very complex situation. On the eastern side of North America you're looking at 500 years of oppression, and on the western side of North America maybe you're looking at a hundred years or so. But that's why it's interesting to look at some of this legislation and some of these policies that have been put into place, like the residential school experience.

    Right from the very beginning, when the two world views made contact, what happened at that beginning was the medicine people, the spiritual people, were eradicated, so you got rid of those individuals. There has been a very interesting way of thinking of how to work with a society of people. The spiritual people were murdered and there were attempts to destroy their way of life through the ceremonies, which is important for the people.

    In the last twenty years there has been a revival of some of these ceremonies and those teachings and songs, which bring the oral history, the connection of the people to who they are. What we're talking about here is identity of people, and that spirit of a race has been oppressed. And you're talking about people for whom this has been going on for generations. The residential school experience was an excellent tool to break down the social skills of families, so that you have dysfunctional parents who do not know how to bring up children and families. And there were five phases of the residential school period that went on throughout that history.

    I can speak on numerous issues of the breakdown. Then you talk about other legislation, like Bill C-31, which discriminated against the women who are not able to pass on their history, their teachings, and all of a sudden they were not native any more. So you have a state that's telling you who you are, and this goes on, and this is implicated....

    Then you have institutions set up like the penal systems, in which aboriginals have the highest rate of people incarcerated. You have these institutions over and over again compounding and worsening the situation. So you have a people who are spiritless and seeking to find a fit in society.

  (1205)  

    The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Frawley-Henry, on behalf of the members of the committee. I thank you for your presentation here today. We are most pleased that you were able to join us.

    I notice that members of the committee asked for some additional information, mainly figures, numbers, and that kind of thing. If you can get that to the clerk, she can then distribute it, and it will be read into the record and used as we deliberate on changes to the Employment Equity Act.

    Again, I thank you for your appearance here today.

    To members of the committee, we've been able to contact the two groups that were coming at 12:30, and they are here, so we will move into that.

    With respect to rescheduling the others, one of the groups cancelled at the very last minute. They just said that something else had come up. We are very tight in our scheduling as we're doing this, and we've suggested that they send their submissions to us to be read into the record.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: Can we do the motion now, Madam Chair?

    The Chair: We can discuss it very briefly, but we don't have enough members for a quorum. What I might have the clerk do, perhaps just as we're changing witnesses at the table, is.... I have written a letter that addresses that. I don't need the committee's approval, but it would be nice to at least have it that the committee appreciates what I'm doing, and it may reflect the spirit of the motion.

    Ms. Monique Guay: The motion will be debated at the end of the committee, yes?

    The Chair: We'll try, but the thing is, we're now looking at wrapping up at about 1:30, as opposed to two o'clock. If we have a quorum we can do that, but I would like to get the letter out.

    The other letter is one to Madam Caplan, with respect to disabilities, the pension stuff, and I think at the last meeting we were rather upset that this wasn't handled in the appropriate fashion. This is probably a good time to clear the record. Mr. Johnston had been talking about her, and he wants it put on the record that the “she” and the “her” he was referring to was not Ms. Stewart but in fact Ms. Caplan, so the record could reflect that.

    While you're looking at that, I'm going to ask Joanne Green, who is here representing the Manitoba Chiefs, to come forward.

    Joanne, normally what happens is that we allow five or six minutes for the oral presentation and then we turn it over to the committee, who will have questions based on your oral presentation. If you have additional information you're not able to get to us in the five minutes you have before us, then you can send it on later and it will be read into the record.

    Ms. Green, the microphone is yours.

  (1210)  

    Ms. Joanne Green (Director of Human Resources, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs): Good day, members of the Standing Committee on Human Resource Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. My name is Joanne Green, and I'm director of human resources for the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs.

    I bring to the committee the recommendations, in the capacity as a representative, of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs. The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs represents 63 first nations and their citizens from the territories of Treaties 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10, and the four Dakota Nations. It is a political forum for the chiefs in Manitoba to advocate strategies and common issues and implement initiatives on matters of policy or legal, political, and social advocacy to advance and protect treaty and aboriginal title and rights.

    The chiefs express their appreciation to the standing committee for the opportunity to present their views on the employment equity legislation. The AMC recognizes the accomplishments made since the enactment of the legislation. However, it also recognizes the need for improvements that will strengthen the Employment Equity Act 1995 and regulations, including or dealing with: elimination of clustering analysis; amending “reasonable accommodation” to “duty to accommodate” for persons with disabilities; first nation and aboriginal women; enforcement and compliance mechanisms; self-identification; provision of human and financial resources.

    By the year 2011, the aboriginal workforce is expected to exceed one million. This will increase the available workforce to a range of 4.2% to 5.4% by the year 2011. With the increased population of aboriginal people in the workforce it is imperative that legislation such as the Employment Equity Act 1995 include comprehensive and enforceable provisions.

    Since 1990, AMC has advocated for equitable representation of first nations and aboriginal persons in the workforce. In 1990, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs filed 51 complaints against federally regulated departments and private sector corporations alleging discriminatory hiring and promotional practices. By this action the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs was instrumental in the changes to the Employment Equity Act, 1995 and the implementation allowing the Canadian Human Rights Commission to enforce the act.

    As a result of the complaints, the AMC established an employment equity unit to negotiate resolutions and to monitor the complaints that resulted in 36 agreements, 15 settled under a master agreement through the Canadian Human Rights Commission and 21 through separate agreements.

    The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs' recommendations are based upon its experience with the 51 agreement holders. The AMC's Evaluation Report of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, June 2001, in its key findings on the AMC employment equity agreements, notes they are “most successful with the federal government departments and lacking with the private sector employers”.

    The factors resulting in the current situation were found to be related to the degree of monitoring of the agreements, the degree of compliance and non-compliance by employers, and also the lack of supporting legislation to enforce the Employment Equity Act 1995.

    The primary overall recommendations focused on the requirement for compliance legislation, criteria and guidelines for self-identification of aboriginal peoples, the need for adequate resources to monitor agreements, and the continuing role of AMC to review the Employment Equity Act for 2002.

    In your briefs you will find a summary, including the statistical results, compliance, and monitoring, from both the federal and private sectors. There's a comparative analysis for your review in my brief.

    The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs' recommendations to the “Legislative Review of the Employment Equity Act--a discussion paper” include the elimination of clustering analysis. The use of a clustering analysis approach that focuses on a concentration analysis is inadequate and does not address the barrier issue; nor does it provide for accuracy in data gathering.

    AMC recommends the analysis be expanded to fully assess data gathering and analysis in determining the impact of promotional systems and processes of designated groups to the occupational groups specific to first nation or aboriginal people to include: gender analysis; wage parity; hiring, promotion, retention, and termination; equivalency of elders' expertise; specific identification of a youth segment.

  (1215)  

    Recommendation B is to amend “reasonable accommodations” to “duty to accommodate” for persons with disabilities. A lack of compliance by employers, together with weak enforcement mechanisms within the act itself, has made it difficult for persons with disabilities to receive maximum benefit from the act.

    The current act requires employers to make “reasonable accommodations” to the designated groups. This section is vague and unclear in its interpretation and does not provide adequate protection to persons with disabilities requiring accommodations related to their disabilities in the workplace.

    The AMC First Nations People With A Disability Needs Assessment Survey Findings--A Profile Of Manitoba First Nations People With A Disability, of March 7, 2001, provides a number of recommendations on the policy and program areas that require urgent attention.

    AMC recommends that the Employment Equity Act be amended to provide maximum protection for persons with disabilities by making changes to the provisions from “reasonable accommodations” to that of the “duty to accommodate to the point of undue hardship.”

    AMC recommends that employers and funding agencies provide for adequate educational resources and equipment in the workplace to meet the disability-related needs of first nations people.

    Section C outlines recommendations in the area of first nation and aboriginal women. The continuing under-representation of first nation and aboriginal women at all levels of the public and private sectors demands changes to the Employment Equity Act and regulations for the implementation of a legally enforceable process. The majority of first nations and aboriginal women are at entry-level positions with lower net incomes, including minimal to no opportunity for employment advancement.

    The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs recommends that changes are made to the Employment Equity Act and regulations to ensure first nations and aboriginal women receive wage parity and promotional opportunities for upward mobility in both traditional and non-traditional occupations.

    In the section on enforcement and compliance mechanisms, we hold that the current framework of the Employment Equity Act provides for a “guiding policy” whereby the enforcement action is taken only as a last resort. The existing process provides a minimal guide for employers to implement an employment equity plan. The act does not provide for an adequately enforceable compliance mechanism, and the review process is too lengthy.

    The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs recommends changes in the form of an amendment to the legislation or to implement an amendment to the guiding policy to ensure a more expeditious legally binding process.

    The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs recommends that the tribunal's mandate be broadened to include enforcement powers and authorities, to include the capacity to enforce compliance of both public and private employer sectors, and to apply remedial action for non-compliance.

    The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs recommends that all agreements on employment equity, current and future, must ensure a higher degree of monitoring to both compliance and non-compliance measures to ensure greater effectiveness, quality database management, and compliance among employers to design, implement, and monitor employment equity plans.

    The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs recommends the strengthening of changes to the existing enforcement process that would serve to increase compliance.

    Under self-identification, currently the workforce survey and data system allows for self-identification to be voluntary. The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs recommends the establishment of a joint partnership to examine the current self-identification process and recommends the establishment of a mechanism that will facilitate clear criteria and guidelines.

    On the provision of human and financial resources, human and financial resources are required by the employers, the monitoring body, and organizations to ensure full compliance and monitoring in accordance with the legislation. The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs requires the provision of resources associated with research and policy development related to employment equity. It recommends that funds be secured for the next fiscal year to undertake a comprehensive monitoring and compliance approach inclusive of first nation and aboriginal people's participation in legislative and policy review processes.

    Additional material and supporting documentation was to be attached for your review, but I understand the committee is not in receipt of it because of a translation issue. I did give the clerk the information.

    In conclusion, on behalf of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, I wish to express an appreciation for the opportunity to provide the AMC submission and recommendations on this most important process. Thank you.

  (1220)  

    The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Green.

    The other group with us in this section is the Métis National Council, represented here today by Gerald Morin and David Chartrand.

    Gentlemen, we've been allowing somewhere between five and six minutes for verbal submissions, followed by questions from the committee. You can decide if you both want to speak, or if one of you will speak and the other will answer questions--however you want to do it.

    Welcome. The floor is yours.

    Mr. Gerald Morin (President, Métis National Council): Thank you. On behalf of the Métis National Council, I want to thank the standing committee for hearing from us today on this very important issue.

    The first issue I want to address is that of self-identification. This issue is very important to the Métis nation.

    As you well know, in Canada there are three aboriginal peoples: there are the Indian peoples, the Inuit peoples, and the Métis people. We represent the historic Métis nation in western Canada. There's a problem in terms of self-identification. I won't go into a long lecture on it, but the federal government has denied the existence of our people and our rights. Institutional discrimination has been practised against our people for many years.

    One of the problem areas, for example, is the lack of an enumeration to enumerate the citizens of the Métis nation. There's no readily identifiable way, no mechanisms established by the federal government in which our people can come forward and say “Here's my card. I'm a citizen of the Métis nation, so I qualify under the Employment Equity Act for the measures that are being taken on behalf of aboriginal people.” That's a real problem, and it is a real concern to us.

    From our own experience and a lot of the personal information we've received, there are people who come forward who claim to be Métis, and there's no real mechanism to validate that. Therefore, there could be many instances when people claim Métis status or heritage because somewhere down the line they can claim some aboriginal heritage and say they are Métis and therefore qualify under the Employment Equity Act. There are those abuses.

    We've heard personal anecdotal evidence, for example, where people will come forward.... It's almost a practice. A subculture has grown up within the public service whereby people will say that for the purposes of employment equity they're an aboriginal person or a Métis person for the purposes of this interview. Therefore, they get the benefits of the Employment Equity Act, when in fact those people wouldn't qualify as Métis people under our own citizenship criteria within the Métis nation.

    That is a very important issue to us. We would suggest that one of the ways in which we could really make the objectives of this act work in terms of ensuring employment equity for our people is to put in place mechanisms. For example, we are the Métis National Council; we represent the historic Métis nation in western Canada. We're one of the three aboriginal peoples in the Constitution. We have five member organizations in Ontario, the prairie provinces, and British Columbia, and each of our member organizations has membership criteria and processes and membership cards. There should be some way in which this act and the federal government could work with the MNC and the member organizations to ensure that there's some validation process so that the people who are taking the benefits of employment equity are indeed citizens of the Métis nation, who we represent.

    That is a concern. Because of those abuses, they might inflate the figures somewhat in terms of the percentage of people who are actually being employed in the federal public service. If you were to take away the abuses and just count the people who legitimately can claim that they are Métis, the figures might be somewhat lower.

    One of the things we identified in the materials we had was that the overwhelming majority of people who are being hired by federal departments and so on, the federal government, are being hired in the Department of Indian Affairs, which of course has the mandate to deal with first nations or Indian people in Canada. We are not covered by Indian Affairs or the Indian Act. We're not saying we want to be, but because of that reality, of the overwhelming majority of aboriginal people who are being hired in Indian Affairs, probably a minority would be Métis. The overwhelming majority would be first nations or perhaps even Inuit people.

    We support the Employment Equity Act and its objectives in ensuring equity for our people working in the federal workforce on behalf of the Métis nation, but there have to be better ways in which we can deal with that issue of self-identification. Perhaps we need some kind of working relationship with our member organizations.

  (1225)  

    The second area I want to address is enforcement and compliance. Of course it's mandatory that departments, federal agencies, crown corporations, and so on meet the quotas identified in the Employment Equity Act. Then the question is how do you enforce that and how do you ensure compliance? If they don't follow it, what real penalties exist? If there is not real enforcement or severe consequences for a department if they don't meet the quotas or strive hard enough to meet the objectives of the Employment Equity Act, why would they give it much effort?

    Perhaps we need to look at ways in which there's better enforcement and compliance with the act. We understand that the Canadian Human Rights Commission has responsibility for monitoring and compliance, and I'm sure they do a great job. But they also have a much broader mandate than just doing that particular work. So you may want to consider, for example, an independent commissioner, who would report to Parliament at least annually and who would conduct regular audits of departments, agencies, crown corporations, and those in the private sector who are covered by the act. That person would perhaps issue annual reports in terms of the progress that is being made. You may even want to go through the exercise of giving departments written and verbal reports annually to ensure that progress is being made toward meeting the objectives of the Employment Equity Act. That is one suggestion we would make.

    In terms of opening remarks, I think those are two areas that are very important to us in looking at the material, that is, self-identification and enforcement and compliance.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Morin.

    We'll now move to the question section. I have on the list Ms. Skelton, Mr. Tonks, Madame Guay, Mr. McGuire, and Mr. Spencer.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: First of all, I'd like to say thank you very much for coming before us today. We really appreciate having you here.

    I'll start with you, Ms. Green. Do you have an employment assistance program in your association?

    Ms. Joanne Green: Yes, we do.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: Do you feel it's meeting your requirements?

    Ms. Joanne Green: Internally, yes, it is.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: We've heard a lot about it being culturally appropriate and all of that. You've set that out. I'd love to see that. Is it possible to send that to me?

    Ms. Joanne Green: Sure.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: I find it to be very interesting.

    Do you hire persons with disabilities?

    Ms. Joanne Green: We have a disability unit within our organization.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: Do you have support systems and everything?

    Ms. Joanne Green: Yes, we do. We have the proper equipment and the proper requirement to get in and out of the building.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: How many people with disabilities do you have?

    Ms. Joanne Green: We have two people with disabilities, plus we have a committee of 12 people and they're all disabled people.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: Congratulations. That's very good. I'm very glad to hear that.

    Ms. Joanne Green: Thank you.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: Mr. Morin, do you have an employment assistance program within your association?

  (1230)  

    Mr. Gerald Morin: No, we don't have an employment assistance program.

    Ms. Carol Skelton: Maybe I should ask how big your organization is.

    Mr. Gerald Morin: First of all, the Métis National Council is made up of five provincial member organizations. They're the members of the Métis National Council. Within the Métis National Council we probably have maybe 12 employees who work for the MNC, so I'm not sure if there's a need for one.

    Our member organizations, however, are made up of.... You know, they have far more programs and far more people working for them. I guess part of the problem when you're talking about the issue of disabilities, which I was going to get to, actually, again.... When you go to the whole thing about federal denial, not a lot has been done other than in the area of training and employment with Human Resources Development Canada. Not a lot has been done in terms of interfacing with us or ensuring program devolution.

    In the last two or three years, I think we've been able to secure some money from the federal government, from HRDC and also the Aboriginal Healing Foundation, where for the first time in our history we've been able to deal with the issue of disability. So for us in the Métis community this issue is something we've only begun to start working on.

    We do have a reference group on disabilities within the Métis National Council, which has representation from the member organizations, and they've been around for the last two or three years. What they have done.... We didn't circulate these because we didn't have them translated, so we'll leave them with the clerk and then everybody can see them. First of all, there'sThe Key to Better Living for Métis People with Disabilities, which was the first one published. It was the work of their reference group. The second one was Métis People with Disabilities and the Capacity to Heal.

    It doesn't necessarily address specifically the issue of employment equity or HRDC; it tackles a whole broad range of issues, because we've only begun to do work in this particular area. We will share these two copies with the clerk and they can be distributed to you eventually.

    The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon--Rosetown--Biggar, Canadian Alliance)): Thank you very much.

    Mr. David Chartrand (President, Manitoba Métis Federation): Perhaps I can add to your deliberations. I'm one of the affiliates. I'm the president of the Manitoba Métis Federation. We have over 200 employees, and definitely look at trying to.... In fact we're quite cautious about the issue of only hiring Métis in our organization. We may be breaking some other rule that we're not completely sure of, but clearly we try to address both the disability and the equality side.

    What we find from our perspective is that given that there is now a transitional period within the relationship with Canada, we now have more control over the actual delivery of programs and have a great opportunity now to employ Métis people. That was one of our goals, and we've accomplished that quite successfully throughout our province. This is just our...it doesn't count all the local offices we have outside, over the 200 employees, so there are many people employed now in different sectors of the fields of employment. We definitely try to meet all the criteria that are established.

    The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Carol Skelton): Thank you.

    Mr. Tonks.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Thank you, Madam Chairman.

    I appreciate you being here today.

    Both of you, Mr. Morin and Ms. Green, have referred to the issue of self-identification and you have both illustrated that a higher level of monitoring is required in terms of meeting the objectives of the Employment Equity Act as they apply to the designated groups, in particular Métis.

    Can you help me to understand a little better what the self-identification issue is and how it implicates in terms of not being able to meet targets? I guess Mr. Morin also mentioned the whole issue of a registration process, so I would like to hear a little bit more about how that could actually happen.

    Ms. Joanne Green: The objective of our recommendation was to provide a more in-depth analysis of our people. That was why we wanted the self-identification matter identified. Right now, we're all clumped in. We don't know where the barriers lie in terms of first nation aboriginal people. That was the reason we wanted self-identification. It's a matter of the clustering analysis again.

  (1235)  

    Mr. Gerald Morin: For us it's a major problem, not only with respect to the Employment Equity Act but in our dealings with the federal government, because again, we've been seeking to work with the federal government to undertake an enumeration. In our case, when we talk about an enumeration, we're talking about establishing a Métis nation registry within the Métis National Council and our member organizations, where we could then enumerate the citizens of the Métis nation to form that registry.

    We have our own membership criteria and processes and our own membership cards, but there needs to be an exhaustive enumeration process that's done jointly by ourselves and the federal government. Our perspectives on that have to be taken into consideration. It presents a lot of problems in terms of...again, it just leaves it wide open to abuses by people who want to take advantage of the Employment Equity Act, people who may not otherwise meet the criteria of belonging to the historic Métis Nation, the people we represent.

    The other problem it presents is, it doesn't present us with any statistics. You talk about a certain number of aboriginal people having been employed pursuant to the Employment Equity Act. What percentage of that aboriginal component is actually Métis? We just don't know simply because there's no way of identifying, from the federal government's perspective, who the Métis.... We know who we are and we have our own membership processes, but that hasn't been undertaken with the federal government. So it presents that problem.

    Again, going back to my earlier point, from our understanding and from what we've heard, people who are seeking jobs in the federal public service are aware of the act and the provisions. They simply self-identify and say, well, for the purposes of this job interview I'm a Métis or an aboriginal person. But that's the extent of their relationship with aboriginal people. Then they get a job, yet there's no other connection to the aboriginal community.

    Enumeration is a critical issue if we are to identify who our people are from the federal government's perspective and, for example, if we are to identify how many people are getting jobs pursuant to the act. Those kinds of statistics could be kept, and we could ensure that when it came to our people, there was employment equity.

    But again, I suppose there could be a working relationship between the federal government and our member organizations to ensure there is some kind of validation process. The RCMP, for example, have made some contacts with our member organizations and said, well, we're thinking of hiring this person. This is a real example I'm giving you; of course, I won't mention the person's name. They said they were thinking of hiring this person, and this person had come forward and asserted they were Métis. Then the RCMP checked with us, and in fact we found out they weren't Métis but somebody who had perhaps married into the Métis community. That doesn't make them Métis, and they shouldn't get the benefits of the legislation.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: I have a follow-up, Madam Chair.

    With respect to what you were suggesting in terms of the Human Rights Commission being very broad, does it follow that this particular monitoring and compliance accountability is for the Métis community? Is that your recommendation: a specific commissioner to do that?

    Mr. Gerald Morin: No. Of course, people may have different points of view, but with respect to the independent commissioner, we were suggesting this to make the Employment Equity Act itself work with respect to aboriginal people. This is perhaps a mechanism or process you may want to consider or recommend to Parliament in order to make the act more effective in meeting its objectives.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Generally. And then you would interface through that in terms of the recommendations you're making vis-à-vis targeting and the Métis community in terms of the real community you would work with.

    Mr. Gerald Morin: Well, no. I think that would be more or less separate. The independent commissioner we're suggesting would report to Parliament on an annual basis, do regular audits of departments and agencies--whoever is concerned--and make an annual report. That goes to the overall effectiveness of the act itself.

    When we talk about the Métis nation registry and enumeration, these are promises that have been made by the federal government, including the existing government, promises to work with the Métis National Council to do an enumeration. That simply has to be done. That promise should be fulfilled.

    Once we have that, then you can take those hard numbers, compile the data, and find out how many Métis people are actually working in the federal public service. That will assist us in making it more effective. If we're very under-represented, then obviously work has to be done.

    In the meantime I'm also suggesting the federal government, the departments and the agencies, should perhaps begin the practice of working with our member organizations in some sort of validation process in cases where people are coming forward and claiming they're Métis. If they have a membership card or a letter of support from our provincial presidents or some.... They can't just say they're a Métis person from Canada. They have to say they're from St. Laurent, Manitoba, or Green Lake, Saskatchewan, so you could then go to those respective member organizations. We know who our people are, and we have ways in which we can validate that in our community.

  (1240)  

[Translation]

    The Chair: Ms. Guay.

    Ms. Monique Guay: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    I'm pleased to welcome you to the committee. You have shared some very interesting ideas with us.

    Thank you for your recommendations, Ms. Green. They will be very helpful to us and we will take them into account.

    Mr. Morin, you talked earlier about the census. Can you not enumerate your own people? I can't understand why we can't find some middle ground. Do you have your own definition of a Métis, one that differs from the government's definition? I just don't understand. Could you clarify matters for me? It's not right that you cannot enumerate your own people.

[English]

    Mr. Gerald Morin: I think one of the basic realities of our inability to carry out an effective enumeration of our people is we simply can't afford it. We don't have the money. We don't have a single cent that's set aside for the Métis National Council and our member organizations whereby we can undertake a proper and effective enumeration of the Métis nation.

    We have the overall problem of being able to access programs and services and dollars from the federal government for capacity building and to deliver programs and services to our people to address the everyday needs, whether it's economic development, education, or dealing with the health care conditions in our communities. I think the federal government allocates, they say, about $7.2 billion a year. About $5 billion of that is from the Department of Indian Affairs, none of which is available to the Métis whatsoever. Out of that $7.2 billion, we're probably--we don't have an exact figure--looking at somewhere in the neighbourhood of maybe $50 million that is made available by the federal government to the Métis nation.

    When you look at the 1996 census, it identified that 26% of the aboriginal community is Métis. That's one-quarter of the aboriginal population in Canada, and yet we get $50 million a year out of $7.2 billion a year.

    We don't have enough money or programs to deal with the everyday basic needs of our people in our communities, let alone to undertake an effective and proper enumeration. So that's part of the problem.

    For us, in the first red book that was released back in I think it was 1993, just before the Liberals came to power, there was an undertaking that an enumeration would be done with the Métis to enumerate. That was one specific promise. We've been working with the federal government, and that was a commitment that was renewed and was gathering strength in the federal government's response to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.

    We've been having disagreements, particularly with the bureaucracy in the federal government, because we have different versions of how that enumeration should be undertaken. From our point of view, it can't be done strictly unilaterally by the federal government, but it has to be a joint exercise. We see it as a Métis nation registry, and the federal government has not yet agreed that it should be a registry.

    A Métis nation registry.... First of all, we know who we are, but we have to come up with a national definition for other people's purposes. At our last MNC assembly in Vancouver last summer, we did come up with a national draft definition, which we hope to ratify as a final definition.

    So that's basically the situation. There are real difficulties. If we had the resources, we would do it. Unfortunately, we need the resources of the federal government to undertake it jointly, and that's what we're continuing to lobby for.

  (1245)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: You mentioned the sum of $50 million that you received. If I understand correctly, a determination was made as to the size of the Métis population and based on that determination, you received a certain amount of money. The government wasn't about to hand over $50 million just like that. Wasn't that what happened?

[English]

    Mr. David Chartrand: If I can, there is a segment of that kind of philosophy under Human Resources Development Canada. There are nine factors out of 320 million that are distributed across the country. For instance, in Manitoba, out of our share, we get 31%, but it's based again on specific census data. For instance, it shows the Métis population in Manitoba as 39,000, which we know is certainly wrong. The voting membership we have in our organization is over 30,000 registered voters, so if you add a child to every second one, you're talking double, triple that.

    Universities have already projected over 120,000 Métis in Manitoba. That particular program does specify on the data, so it has a negative impact on us, because there is no actual enumeration or registry done for us.

    Ms. Monique Guay: I see.

    Mr. David Chartrand: But the rest of it are just crumbs that fall off different programs that we actually get our hands on.

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: I see. That clarifies many issues in my mind.

    Mr. Morin, you talked about a commissioner who would report to the House or to MPs. I've already thought about that. I think it's an ingenious idea. However, in order for the commissioner to do his work properly, he would need to be independent, instead of a government appointee. I hope the committee will bear this clever idea in mind. The commissioner could be a neutral party, someone who could conduct a yearly investigation and report back to us. This would be helpful.

    Getting back to what you said, Ms. Green, there is also the whole issue of contract workers to consider. Companies that secure government contracts and that have 100 or more employees must comply with the Employment Equity Act. Do you feel that they are in fact complying with the legislation? The witnesses we have heard from thus far seem to think that they are not in compliance with the act. In other words, those who secure government contracts are not fully complying with the provisions of the legislation.

[English]

    Mr. David Chartrand: If I can, I'm just itching to jump in on that one.

    I think there are good examples in the private sector where there is commitment that is being made by the private sector. But I think we are challenged with the feeling from the private sector that there is not enough partnership involved from the governments as a whole. I want to give an example too that sometimes the private sector also takes advantage of this philosophy of utilizing aboriginal people. In Manitoba, I'll use the Limestone project, which is a hydro dam, as an example. There was a certain specification that they had to hire so many aboriginal people. But if you guess where these aboriginal people were hired, most of them were cutting the trees and the brush, and being bush labour if you want to call it that. None of them were in the more long-term employment jobs.

    I think there has to be a balance of that process, and clearly from the onset we are challenged, because many of these companies.... I'll even use Air Canada as an example. There have been signings of agreements in relation to Air Canada hiring aboriginal people. So far I've only seen one aboriginal person working as an air steward. In the airlines I've never seen aboriginal people. Where are they? They made a commitment publicly. They stated that they'd be hiring aboriginal people. Are they out there putting the suitcases in the bottom of our planes? I don't know, but I can't see them in public.

    I think it's essential that we look at it from the point of view that there are indicators from the private sector that they want to be partners, but there's a clear indication that many companies that should be aren't abiding with this particular Employment Equity Act.

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: Thank you.

  (1250)  

[English]

    The Chair: Ms. Green, do you have anything that you want to add to Madam Guay's question at all?

    Ms. Joanne Green: I would perhaps add that we've also had a concern that in a lot of the agreements we've entered into, many of the people are in lower-level positions, with little or no mobility.

    Mr. Gerald Morin: I would like to respond to Ms. Guay.

    Besides what David has said, it's hard for us in the Métis nation to segregate or dissect one particular issue and put it over here, because it always comes back to our political and legal status in Canada. The federal government, since Confederation and before, has not recognized the existence of the Métis nation in Canada, in spite of the fact that we and our rights have been recognized in the Constitution since 1982. Therefore, there's a denial of any responsibility, whether it's for undertaking an enumeration, or putting programs and services in place, or a rights-based process to elaborate land claims and self-government.

    It presents a major problem in terms of coming to grips with these sorts of issues. If you deny the existence of a people and there's no registry or enumeration, then how can you measure how the objectives of the Employment Equity Act are being met for our people? So that issue has to be addressed. It's something that can't be ignored when you're dealing with the Métis nation.

    In closing, there's this presentation to the House Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs that we made on May 31, 2001. Pat Martin, you were on the committee, and I think you were at that. It gives good information and background about the Métis nation and the agenda we're pursuing with the federal government. So I'll also table this with the clerk, which also can be translated, for you to look at at some point.

    Thank you very much.

    The Chair: Now I would normally go to Mr. McGuire, but Mr. Martin has come in, and although he's not signed in on the committee, I think we can allow him some latitude.

    I know of your interest in this.

    Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Stranger in the house.

    The Chair: Perhaps, but I think we have agreement even from Mr. McGuire that the stranger can ask some questions.

    Mr. Martin, you have five minutes.

    Mr. Pat Martin: That's very generous of you, Madam Chair. And to the whole committee, I very much appreciate the opportunity.

    I apologize to our guests for coming in late. I was in fact at the aboriginal affairs committee meeting, which is going from eleven to one o'clock, as we speak. So I was running to two. But I did see you as guests in the lineup, and I asked our regular committee member if I could sub for her for this period, partly because of the member from P.E.I.

    The representation from Manitoba certainly interests me as a Manitoba MP, but I've had a long-standing interest in the issues of the Métis nation. Could I ask you two specific questions?

    First, the Human Rights Commission are the people who do the audits to see what businesses or federal agencies are acting in compliance with the act, this being the five-year review. They audited 111 federal government agencies and contractors and even government departments. Only two of the 111 were found to be in compliance. With some remedial work for a whole year, another four came into compliance.

    This is an abominable compliance record. Placement of aboriginal people was at the bottom in the equity groups in terms of meeting compliance. If you haven't answered the question already, and considering I do have another question to ask in 25 words or less, what would you recommend to improve this level of participation of Métis and aboriginal people?

    Mr. Gerald Morin: I think within the federal system first of all there has to be a higher profile on this issue. What we suggested earlier was that you might want to look at the creation of, as Madam Guay was talking about--

    Mr. Pat Martin: Yes, I heard that.

    Mr. Gerald Morin: --an independent commissioner who would report to Parliament perhaps on an annual basis and issue reports. I know in some exercises in the provinces they bring the employers up before a panel and they give their reports. Perhaps you may want to go through that kind of exercise--written and verbally--on an annual basis. Give some broad powers to the independent commissioner to make recommendations, and these issues should actually be debated in the House. It has to happen on an annual basis. Once every five years to get a report that 109 out of 111 are not complying is just not satisfactory. If you're going to do something, then do it effectively. Otherwise, forget about it.

    Mr. Pat Martin: Would you recommend a monetary penalty? Would you go so far as to add teeth to the point of actual punishment for failure to comply?

  (1255)  

    Mr. Gerald Morin: Yes, we made that point earlier as well. I know you were busy with the other standing committee, but there have to be effective and real remedies in place. The rest of us in society, when we do something wrong, get severe penalties. So that same principle should apply to the federal government when it comes to not meeting the Employment Equity Act.

    Mr. Pat Martin: Absolutely. Thank you.

    I have one other quick question, if I have one more minute left. Even though you're referenced in the royal commission, since back as far as 1982 the Métis people fall under not the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs but the interlocutor, with the Minister of Natural Resources sharing responsibility. Now, seeing as Gathering Strength is only gathering dust, as the joke we use at the aboriginal affairs committee goes, have you gone to the new minister and have you asked him the same question about financing for an actual enumeration or your own census within the Métis nation?

    Mr. David Chartrand: Well, firstly, in our organization we are looking at a charter case and we're reviewing a legal case, in fact. Right now, many of you around the table may not realize that the minister responsible is the interlocutor. If you look at the objectives of what the function is for that minister, it is basically to set up meetings for us. We can set up our own meetings. That is the far-reaching criterion that the interlocutor has.

    We've been echoing some strong sentiments. There has to be more of a major role played by a specific minister who has a responsibility to deal with us. Once this issue of evading the jurisdictional part is gone, I think there will be more of an opportunity to work. Without that ongoing development, we will continue to be in this trap. We are eagerly looking at ways to find a balance. I mean no disrespect to the first nations, but they have a direct minister who deals with all their issues, health and education and a variety of stuff, but for us there is no minister. The interlocutor is not a minister who deals with our issues. It's a person who tries to set up meetings, and that's as far-reaching as it gets.

    I want to conclude by giving you our analysis. What we find, according to your numbers.... It's good to hear those numbers. We never heard that only two succeeded. I guess they met the excuses criteria, not the actual development of the solutions criteria.

    I think it's important that we echo this because the Métis are Canadian citizens. We're born and bred in this country. If this is one act that has to respect and protect us, then something should be done to specifically guide us and ensure we are protected, because there is no minister responsible to protect or guide us.

    Mr. Pat Martin: A good point. Thank you very much.

    The Chair: Ms. Green, as a result of your evaluation study, do you have anything to add to the comments?

    Ms. Joanne Green: No. I basically indicated it through my brief and the recommendations we put forward.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Mr. McGuire.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    I have two questions. One refers to the merit principle. We're heard from a lot of witnesses from the Public Service Commission on down that even in view of the Employment Equity Act, the merit principle is one that operates.

    I was wondering how you feel this is working for you. Is there a lack of government involvement in the training and preparation for your groups before they submit to an interview? Is there sufficient support for your aboriginal communities in preparing for work in the public service or in government, like Air Canada and government agencies?

    Mr. David Chartrand: There definitely are attempts by Canada to put in specific requirements on any of the tendering processes that do occur. They'll have an aboriginal component built in. But clearly, at the end we are challenged with finding a better resolution of the private sector or the crown corporation sector to have a mechanism where we can work hand in hand in fulfilling the obligations of that criterion.

    The merit principle, of course, would be great if we had a commissioner. That's one of the things we talked about prior to coming here. A commissioner would have one of the processes of not only showcasing the challenges that are faced by entities not meeting the criteria, but also showcasing the successes of those that do meet the criteria. They should be applauded and the rest of the country should know of those successes. So a merit principle would be strong.

    We believe government involvement needs to take a stronger and more vigorous step in ensuring that there are ongoing developments in the institutions that will have to meet the employment equity criteria. At this point in time, the only successful one we can refer to is the human resources development arrangement we have with Canada right now. It's been very successful. We've succeeded with thousands and thousands of jobs across Canada. The reason it's successful is that now we are in charge of the money and we can determine where we're going to invest this money. We don't have to go through a bureaucracy any more; we go through our own bureaucracy. Now we have the buying power to get into these companies and ensure we're involved in training our people to get in there.

·  (1300)  

    Mr. Joe McGuire: So you're finding that there's not enough commitment to the training and education of aboriginals?

    Mr. David Chartrand: Well, definitely for us, as the Métis, because that's the only program we do have. It's more than that. It's because the transitional process is in place. As I stated, I think government makes attempts, when they do put in these specific criteria in any kind of tendering process.... I'll use the bursary program, in which there was a specific aboriginal criterion, even though CIBC pulled out of the bursary process. A private company bid in, but they had to bring in an aboriginal partner, which we're hoping now will create employment for aboriginal people. But no one is there really in the bureaucracy of those departments or infrastructures to ensure that the partnership relationship is ongoing and continuing to happen. That's where I think there are a lot of stumbling blocks. We can train all we want, but if there's not a mechanism to ensure the bureaucracy is meeting the criteria, it isn't going to happen.

    If you look at some of the recommendations or findings, there was a commitment or complaint about retention, that the reason people were not moving up to management was because the retention ratio was not being successful. Well, let's look at the retention ratio. I think if you look at it in that concept, if there was an infrastructure working hand-in-hand, you would see the retention ratio working.

    I'll give you a perfect example. Maple Leaf opened up in Manitoba and expanded their product. Because we had Human Resources Development Canada money, we came in as a partner, but we hired somebody full-time to work with the families, the transition of moving, ensuring the kids had schools, and the Métis population had the lowest retention ratio in the entire Maple Leaf plant. We're very, very pleased with that, but we have ongoing watchdogs and ongoing mechanisms.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Do you mean the lowest rate or the highest rate?

    Mr. David Chartrand: Pardon me?

    The Chair: Do you mean the highest rate? I just want the record to reflect what you mean.

    Mr. David Chartrand: Oh, I'm sorry, the highest retention rate. I apologize. I was busy thinking of some other ideas ahead of me already.

    But definitely, we were very successful. Maple Leaf guaranteed 100 jobs, and we filled those 100 jobs. That was the partnership getting involved, and it proved to be successful.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Seeing that you're the fastest-growing group in the country as far as population is concerned, do you feel that national or international unions are reflecting that in their negotiations with management in hiring aboriginals?

    Mr. David Chartrand: On the issue of unions and the Métis, definitely we have a clashing mechanism on that process. No disrespect to the unions--I think they play a role in the evolution of the employment process--but from our perspective, we quite fear the union systems moving into our infrastructures because they then start to have all these rules attached to it and all of a sudden they have a say over all your resources. I don't see lobbying or campaigning or protesting all over the place to get a few dollars from the government here and there. So we do have an issue with the union mechanisms. I think there's a role there, but I'm not sure how deep into our infrastructure we'd want them.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Mr. Morin, do you have anything to add to that?

    Mr. Gerald Morin: Yes, that's a very interesting issue.

    My experience with respect to unions, certainly in the Métis community anyway, is that again they're seen as, if you will, a white institution and as a mainstream institution and as another instrument to oppress our people. I haven't seen much evidence in my own experience with having an affinity with unions because they're there fighting for the working people. From what I've seen, they haven't really gone to bat for the aboriginal people or for our issues.

    I'll give you one example. I used to be president of the Métis Nation of Saskatchewan. We have one of the largest and most successful Métis educational institutions in the country, the Gabriel Dumont Institute. It is affiliated with the Métis Nation in Saskatchewan. In that case, the public service union was brought into the certification process and so on, and had access to all the benefits that are available through the act. Because we didn't have educated and trained people at the time in our own Métis institution, we had to hire a lot of non-Métis individuals. But when our people started getting educated and were in a position to take over these jobs, they took advantage of the union process in order to protect positions, particularly the management positions, which were overwhelmingly occupied by non-Métis people. So it was used as an instrument in our own institutions against us. Again, they're seen as a mainstream institution by our people, speaking for the Métis anyway, in my experience.

·  (1305)  

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Ms. Green, do you have an opinion on that?

    Ms. Joanne Green: I'm not sure if you want me to respond to your initial question on government involvement or my opinion on unions.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Well, your opinion on unions.

    Ms. Joanne Green: The first nations are of the same opinion about unions being involved.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: So it's mainly a cultural objection?

    Ms. Joanne Green: I think it's a matter of decision-making and control with respect to their employees.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Yes. Thank you.

    The Chair: Mr. Spencer, you have the honour of having the last question.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: That's good, because I was running out. Everybody's been asking my questions.

    I was going to ask Mr. Morin, but then I got to thinking, maybe Ms. Green would like to answer that from the other perspective. I'm just asking, do you believe the Métis nation is as under-represented in the nation's workforce as the first nations people, or are you about the same? Give me your two viewpoints.

    Ms. Joanne Green: As I said earlier, it's difficult to get an accurate picture because we're clustered into one pot. How can we determine that?

    Mr. Gerald Morin: For us, as I said before, there's no way for the federal government to identify who are Métis in this country. No enumeration has been undertaken, so there are no empirical or objective data we can look at to say that this percentage of the federal workforce is made up of Métis people. There's just no way of determining that whatsoever.

    This is not a criticism of the Department of Indian Affairs for hiring aboriginal people; that's a good thing, and that's what this is all about. But if you look at the numbers I've seen somewhere in the documentation, the overwhelming majority of aboriginal people who get jobs with the federal government are in the Department of Indian Affairs.

    I'm operating on the assumption--I have no hard evidence--that since their mandate is to deal with first nations people, their mandate is not to deal with the Métis nation. My assumption is that the overwhelming majority of those aboriginal employees are not Métis. I would say, based on what I've seen and on our experience, that there are not a lot of Métis people who work in the federal public service.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: So really, you're asking for your own pot instead of being in the same pot, to be divided off as a separate group. That's what I understand you to be saying you want, for the Métis nation to be listed separately.

    Mr. Gerald Morin: Yes. The Métis nation is distinct from first nations and the Inuit; we are distinct peoples. In terms of identifying the numbers and determining how many Métis versus first nations there are and so on, that distinctiveness has to be acknowledged and respected by the federal government. In that way you can get accurate information.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: So you'd have no estimates, then, as to whether your people have more trouble gaining employment or not as compared to first nations people.

    Mr. David Chartrand: What we definitely can say is that we are challenged in a sense. What's important to recognize, Larry, is that one of the things we see is that we lose a lot of our--we will call them--golden boys and our golden women, people who have built up their experience and become the managers and developers. Then government comes along and scoops them up, and we can't keep up with the salary ratio competition at all. That's a matter of deterrence for us. We watch that and we see it.

    The reason I say that is you will find some individuals in government who are Métis, but I challenge you to find the accurate number of Métis out there. I know it will be such a small number that it won't even make a decimal point. It's one area where we do have concerns, that the country as a whole and our government, because of their denial.... Even though our constitution in this country is supposed to protect all citizens equally, equity will continue to evade us as a people because they don't want to accept that there is a responsibility. If they don't want to respect us as Métis, they should respect us as Canadian citizens and give us that opportunity because we are Métis citizens.

    So definitely, it's hard to answer your question because there is no data or information. I raised that issue of competition with salaries and that because we can't keep up with the federal government; there's no way we can.

·  (1310)  

    Mr. Larry Spencer: Thank you very much. I appreciate your being here.

    The Chair: I have one question, if I may.

    You're making your plea for dividing it up as to whether you're Métis, Inuit, or what have you when we're looking at it for the purposes of employment equity. Would you suggest that we do the same thing with visible minorities, that the category under the Employment Equity Act also be divided up, and that we count the number of Indians, Africans, and all those when we're looking at the hiring of members of visible minorities?

    Mr. David Chartrand: If I could answer that, it would be best if you asked them. It's not fair for me to make a judgment call on them. It's wiser for them to make a determination. If it's better for them, then fine. We're basically addressing what's better for us.

    Ms. Joanne Green: That was also going to be my response. That question should be posed to them.

    The Chair: Okay.

    I see over here, again thinking that we're wrapping up at 1:30, Mr. Tonks and Madame Guay. Mr. Tonks.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: I had never heard this description or this expression before. I was wondering if Ms. Green could just expand upon it. It was with respect to aboriginal or first nations women with disabilities, and how terribly difficult it would be to have them represented, through employment equity, in positions within the federal government. You used the expression “the maximum provision”--I take it, under the Employment Equity Act--“is that we have the duty to accommodate up to a point that would not cause undue hardship”. Could you explain where that occurs?

    Ms. Joanne Green: That is specifically identified in your review--

    Mr. Alan Tonks: All right.

    Ms. Joanne Green: --as one of the compliance measures.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: One of the compliance measures?

    Ms. Joanne Green: Yes, under compliance: that employers are to comply to a degree where it doesn't impose undue hardship.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Right, and your point would have been, then, that this needs more enforceable teeth.

    Ms. Joanne Green: Yes.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Okay.

    I'll just finish, Madam Chair.

    You also said that women in that designated category are falling far below in terms not only of numbers but of wage parity. Do you have any of the data that underscores that?

    Ms. Joanne Green: Do you mean the wage parity issue?

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Yes.

    Ms. Joanne Green: No. It was based on what we did through a consultation process with our first nations women at the community level to respond to this.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Right. Okay. I'll just comment that it was my impression and my feeling that--

    Ms. Joanne Green: We also requested that this issue be identified through the analysis, because it isn't a wage parity issue.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Oh, okay.

    Ms. Joanne Green: That was one of our recommendations.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: That's fine. Thank you.

[Translation]

    The Chair: Ms. Guay.

    Ms. Monique Guay: I'm concerned about one thing. Earlier, you told my colleague that you would like to be considered as a separate group from aboriginals. This would create a fifth objective for us to attain, if I understand correctly. This complicates matters because you're saying that you are not enumerated. Therefore, it's difficult to get an exact idea of the number of Métis. Some people have asked us to create a separate grouping for elders and another for young persons. If we did that, do we not run the risk of having too many groupings and of having the system break down? I'd be interested in hearing your views on the subject. What do you think about this suggestion and how might it be implemented?

[English]

    Mr. Gerald Morin: I think we're not talking about establishing separate regimes for Métis and first nations and Inuit. All we're saying is there has to be some way in which the federal government can clearly identify who the Métis are. The sad reality is, right now the federal government doesn't know who the Métis are. The federal government, since Confederation, has not acknowledged our existence. How can you work with us to achieve our aspirations in Canada if you don't admit that we exist? That's blunt reality.

    All we're saying is we support the objectives for employment equity for aboriginal people, but there has to be some way in which the federal government can clearly identify who are the Métis people in this country. There's no way to do it now. The enumeration, and working with us in establishing our Métis nation registry, would be the answer, but that would probably take some time.

    Our suggestion would be that in the meantime, if you want to get more accurate information or meet the objectives of the act, work on an interim basis with our member organizations so there's some way in which we can tell you, “Okay, this person applying for this position is in our view Métis and does meet the criteria of your act and meets our criteria as well as to who is a Métis person”.

    That's an interim measure until there is a proper enumeration. We're not advocating separate regimes. All we're saying is work with us so we can clearly identify the Métis population in Canada.

·  (1315)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: That makes sense to me.

[English]

    Ms. Joanne Green: I'm sorry, I didn't hear your first question. What I got was that you wanted an explanation for all the subgroupings--the elders and the youth. I guess that goes again with the clustering issue. How are we to know, as first nations people, which area to target? Are there employment issues with youth? That was the reason we wanted the subgroups included in the analysis portion, so we could determine where the problems are, what the barriers are, and what categories they are.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    I want to thank those of you who have appeared here this morning and thank you for being so cooperative and getting here a little earlier than you had been scheduled for. We had a problem with the first group--a couple of them couldn't attend. So we are very pleased that you--I know you all have busy schedules--were able to adjust your agendas to meet with us.

    If you have additional information you'd like to share with us and you want us to consider, we'll be working on this for another three to four weeks, so there is still an opportunity for you to get information to us that will be considered as we write the reports. If you send it on to the clerk, she will see that it's translated and distributed to the members of the committee.

    Again, on behalf of all members of the committee, I want to thank you, Ms. Green, Mr. Morin, and Mr. Chartrand, for a very informative presentation and for the excellent responses to the many questions we posed.

    Mr. David Chartrand: We would like to thank you for inviting us and giving us this opportunity.

    The Chair: It's our pleasure.

    Now, to the other members of the committee, in order to deal with a motion we need ten members. I suspect that we're not going to get ten, and if we did it would probably mean dragging them in, and that probably wouldn't serve your purpose, Madam Guay, at this point.

    In anticipation of the concerns you've raised with respect to the issue, I have handed out a letter that I'm prepared to write to Mr. Serson, and also I've asked that an additional letter be prepared that would be sent to Madam Robillard expressing the same concern. It would follow the same lines as the one to Mr. Serson, but I could also indicate to Madam Robillard that we're not happy with what's happened and ask for a response. If the committee agrees, then I will send those along.

    You'll notice I haven't mentioned that the committee asked me to do it, but I would rewrite this to say that I had strong requests from the committee to put this letter to them and to ask for a response.

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: May I just say one thing, Madam Chair?

    As far as the letter is concerned, I fully agree that you should write to the Minister, as this is her responsibility as minister. Moreover, in response to a question I put to her on Friday, she confirmed that she would be closing this centre. Therefore, it's critical that she react before March 31.

    The purpose of my motion is to bring the Minister before the committee and impress upon her the importance of keeping this centre open. It cannot be shut down. You can't fool me, Madam Chair. Once the centre closes, it will remain closed for a very long time. That will be the end of things, as everyone wells knows. We have one final day of meetings scheduled, namely Thursday, and I hope the Minister will come on Thursday to discuss this matter with the committee.

    If all we have is a letter, then we should send it to her, but I fear that a letter won't garner the same kind of reaction from the minister.

·  (1320)  

[English]

    The Chair: Again, I can hand-deliver it, indicate that we find it of a very urgent nature, and request that she respond immediately. That will be done, and it will be circulated and sent to you. As to the other letter, I just wanted to make certain that the letter to Ms. Caplan reflected the concerns we heard the last time and that the committee.... Those two will be sent, and once they've been signed and sent, copies will be provided to all members of the committee.

    Oh, the report Dr. Bennett prepared on behalf of the subcommittee will be tabled in the House on Thursday. Okay? Good.

    Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.