I would introduce Colleen Swords as well, who is our associate deputy minister over at INAC. It may be her first appearance here, so I know that you'll ask her some very pointed questions later, but she is ready. She is fully ready and has been a great addition to our team over at INAC. As well, Peter Traversy is here to answer a lot of the detailed financial questions I know you'll have. The whole team is assembled nearby. We hope to answer all your questions today, and for those we can't answer of course we'll get you answers, as we've done in the past, if necessary in written form or in other appearances.
[Translation]
Mr. Lemay mentioned that I should practice speaking French today. Since there are no cameras here today, this is a good opportunity for me to do so. So perhaps at the end of my remarks, I can answer in French.
[English]
I do thank everyone. It's good to be back here, especially to discuss the 2009-10 supplementary estimates (C) of the Department of Indian and Affairs, which were tabled in the House of Commons on March 3. I appreciate the important role that you play here in this committee in reviewing the expenditures of the Government of Canada and of this department especially.
As was outlined clearly in the recent Speech from the Throne, our Conservative government will continue to build a stronger, healthier relationship with aboriginal people. The supplementary estimates list many initiatives that are key to this relationship and will drive progress on important issues of concern to aboriginal people and indeed to all Canadians.
As outlined in the documents now before members of the committee, these initiatives total over $224 million and effectively increase the department's budget for the current fiscal year to almost $8 billion. I know that members of this committee are familiar with many other elements of the government's agenda: legislation to protect the rights of vulnerable citizens and accelerate the resolution of specific claims, for instance, tripartite arrangements on first nations education, and on-reserve child and family services, to name just a few.
The Speech from the Throne and budget 2010 highlight a number of areas where our government will focus its efforts to achieve a real and significant difference in the lives of aboriginal people. We will work hand in hand with aboriginal communities and with provinces and territories to reform and strengthen education and to support student success and provide greater hope and opportunity.
Over the last two years, the Government of Canada has expanded its partnership with the provinces, the first nations, and Inuit through several different agreements. You'll be familiar with some of these.
In April 2008 there was an MOU between New Brunswick first nations, the Province of New Brunswick, and the Government of Canada. In April 2009 the Inuit Education Accord was signed between the Inuit of Canada, as represented by ITK, and their partner organizations and governments. In October 2009 a letter of understanding for education was announced between the Government of Canada, the Province of Manitoba, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, MKO, and the Southern Chiefs Organization, another great development.
Just last month, another MOU was signed, this time between the Assembly of Treaty Chiefs of Alberta, the Government of Alberta, and the Government of Canada. On that great occasion, I was there to sign that MOU. As the aboriginal leaders in the room said, they felt it was a very historic moment. I was delighted to sign on behalf of Canada.
We will also introduce new legislative measures to further safe drinking water and effective waste water treatment on reserve. The progress the government has achieved in this area, in collaboration with first nations across the country, is unprecedented.
In 2006, when we took office, there were 193 high-risk first nation water systems. Today, that number has been significantly reduced to 44. In addition, 21 communities were identified as priorities, which meant that the community had both a high-risk system and a drinking water advisory. Today, only 4 communities remain on that list. There is more work to be done on this and that is partly why we need this new legislative framework.
As you know, last week we introduced Bill , the legislation that corrects serious gender inequality issues that currently exist under the Indian Act. I appreciate the support we're hearing about this important legislation. It really is a gender equity issue and I do think we need to get at this quickly. I appreciate many of the comments I've heard from people around the table who are saying that we need to get at this quickly.
Our Conservative government will proudly be reintroducing legislation to ensure the equitable distribution of real property assets in the event of death--this is on reserve--and to further protect the rights of aboriginal people. Again, this is particularly important to women living on reserve.
We'll take action to address the disturbing number of unsolved cases of murdered and missing aboriginal women. I am delighted to see that in the budget.
Also, we will take steps to endorse the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in a manner fully consistent with Canada's Constitution and laws.
We also will continue the work that was started in Canada's economic action plan to ensure that the north's economic and social potential is fully and sustainably developed. Specifically on that, we will be working with our northern partners to promote and build investments in the north through the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency.
We'll continue our work on opening the northern project management office, which will provide a single point of contact for clients undertaking natural resources projects in the three territories. We'll build on the successes of programs such as SINED to ensure economic diversification and encourage northerners' participation in the economy.
I'm delighted again to see allocations for the next stages of building a world-class high-Arctic research station. That will be important for everything from climate issues to the scientific underpinnings for much of what needs to be done in understanding and working in the north for years to come.
We will reform the northern regulatory regime to ensure that the region's resource potential can be developed where commercially viable, while ensuring a better process for protecting our environment.
I think I had a question today on the successor program to the food mail program to help alleviate the costs of shipping healthy foods by air to isolated northern communities. We need to have a successor program. The program we have has done a valiant job, but it needs to be renovated and brought into the 21st century. We need to bring a program renovation forward on that, and we did get allocations in the budget to make that possible.
We want to proceed to give northerners a greater say over their own future and take further steps toward territorial devolution. There are important talks that are ongoing. We will continue to vigorously defend Canada's Arctic sovereignty, map our northern resources, and fulfill our obligations under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, for example, and other national and international efforts. We want to make sure that people not only in Canada but around the world know that Canada's north is Canada's, and we intend to use it and protect it, as Canadians would expect us to, from coast to coast to coast.
Finally, we'll continue to work with other Arctic nations to settle boundary disputes that are well managed. These are kind of long standing, but they're also well managed in the sense that we have a good working relationship with other countries in those boundary areas.
I want to speak to a few of the items on the supplementary estimates themselves. On the Indian residential schools settlement agreement, $120.5 million is for the settlement allotment, and $18.9 million is to ensure that Canada meets its obligations under the agreement.
We all know the significance of the Indian residential schools settlement agreement. It was a huge milestone in the history of Canada's relationship with aboriginal people, and we're providing the resources to implement that agreement. Following on the supplementary estimates, budget 2010 has provided a further $199 million over two years to support implementation of the settlement agreement and help former students, their families, and aboriginal communities embark on the path of healing and reconciliation by ensuring timely payments and health supports that are necessary.
The items I've described today, along with the other investments included in supplementary estimates (C), will help address a wide range of challenges and issues facing northerners and aboriginal peoples. These investments support our government's efforts to work toward collaborative, sustainable solutions that benefit all Canadians.
I know that this committee has recognized that there are a number of obstacles that prevent many aboriginal people and northerners from fully sharing in and contributing to Canada's prosperity. Supplementary estimates (C) will help remove some of those obstacles. Some are monetary, some are legislative, and some are policy.
My guess is that our discussions probably won't stick entirely to the supplementary estimates themselves, but will deal with the panoply of issues that I know this committee has been seized with. So I look forward to the questions specifically on the supplementary estimates, and on other issues as people would like to raise them.
Merci.
Good afternoon, Mr. Minister. It's good to have you with us again. I appreciate your comments, particularly with the fact that you're opening up the scope of any possible questions and subject matter that we can bring before you.
I know you discussed education in your remarks. I want to focus on a particular issue that has certainly been the matter of some attention for a lot of people over the last few months, and that is the First Nations University. You have raised issues of accountability and transparency, and I believe that all members at this committee share your concerns. We know there have been challenges in the past, but I think it would be remiss not to say that there have also been some successes, like the over 3,000 graduates who have come out of the First Nations University, alumni like Perry Bellegarde, who ran for national chief and who was chief of the FSIN. And many others have become doctors and lawyers and have gone into almost every profession and made remarkable contributions to their communities and to Canada.
On the situation of accountability, there have been changes. I think you should agree that there have been some changes. There's been a change in the board of governors. There's been a change in the chief financial officer. There's been a sense and certainly a strong indication from the University of Regina that they are willing now to become involved in this, to provide administrative oversight, and to allow this institution to continue. So there have been changes. I think it would be wrong for anybody to make an assumption that there have been no changes, that even if it is a last-ditch effort, people are making a sincere effort to save this institution.
Is there any scenario, Minister, that you can envision that would allow First Nations University to continue, this unique and historical institution to continue, and to do some good work for first nations students? As you know, if the funding is cut off, it closes down. Some of those who are pursuing higher education now will not go back to pursue higher education. So I ask you this. Is there any scenario that you can envision that would keep First Nations University open after March 31 and allow it to pursue its goals and objectives?
Thank you, Minister and staff, for coming here today.
I'm going to ask four questions and then let you answer. For whatever you can't respond to today, perhaps you could supply the information.
The first question has to do with Jordan's Principle. I think you're probably well aware that in New Brunswick a report came out recommending that INAC and the province reach an agreement prior to September 1, 2010, on how to implement Jordan's Principle. New Brunswick has been musing about going to court to define their responsibilities and their liabilities.
So given what's pending there, what work will the department undertake to ensure that there are no gaps in services if the court defines New Brunswick's responsibilities as less than what they're currently delivering? There could be a gap between the federal and the provincial governments.
The second question I have is on the aboriginal financial institutions. I think you're probably well aware that the department's own report back on March 12, 2009, “Toward a New Federal Framework for Aboriginal Economic Development”, talked about the importance of the role of aboriginal financial institutions and said they should be enhanced. Yet when the loan loss reserve initiative was put out there, the AFIs were not invited to participate. Why were they left out of that process? How much money did the five players who were awarded the loan loss reserve actually loan out in the period that they've been responsible? That's question number two.
Question number three kind of bridges the supplementary estimates (C), the throne speech, and the budget speech. There was $30 million announced for post-secondary education and I wonder if the Province of B.C.'s First Nations Education Act is going to be funded out of that $30 million, because there have been ongoing negotiations about the funding, as you know.
My fourth question is around the Aboriginal Healing Foundation. I just think it's interesting that the money has been sunsetted, and although some organizations will continue to be funded until 2012, some will lose funding as of the end of March. Yet in the supplementaries, you indicate the need to continue funding the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, and there's new money in the new budget.
In a 2009 report that the department commissioned, it talked about the success of the Aboriginal Healing Foundation. They were highly praised in that report. In fact, one of the recommendations was that the “Government of Canada should consider continued support for the Aboriginal Healing Foundation...”. They note in this report that funding under Health Canada won't cut it, because they're not the same kinds of programs. So I wonder if you could indicate whether the government will consider implementing the recommendations from the evaluation that it commissioned.
Those are my questions.
:
Thank you. They're all good questions. I don't know if I'll get to them all, but let me take a stab at them in order.
Jordan's Principle, as you know, we've all supported in the House, so that's not in question. I think we can honestly say that the unfortunate profile that came out of Jordan's situation has been useful, in that it sensitized all levels of government to quit beating around the bush, but let's just get the services.
A tribute to everyone is that, by and large, it has been.... I haven't seen any cases that have fallen through the cracks. Everybody's being careful to follow through on this, both federally and provincially. I fired off a letter to all provinces saying that we're committed to work on it, so let's get this done as quickly as we can.
The government is at varying stages of discussion with provinces right across the country. We met recently with the Province of New Brunswick and in Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island on how we can work together to implement this. My hope is that we can get those details determined. I'm not sure if there's a September drop dead moment. I know there's a high degree of cooperation. Everybody wants to get the essence of this nailed down. I sense a high degree of cooperation right across the country.
So those discussions are taking place. I can't confirm that anything will happen by September for sure, but I'm confident that we're going to get it nailed down, because I find good faith in all corners and in every government. So I think we'll be able to do that and it's my hope that we'll be able to do it with New Brunswick as we will right across the country.
On the aboriginal financial institutions, you're right, they're tremendously important. I've spoken about them many times. When I talk about economic development, I always try to have a component on AFIs, because they are critically important.
The loan loss reserve initiative is basically a pilot project, as you know. This is pretty typical of what we do when we branch out and do something we haven't done before. We picked five institutions, including the First Nations Bank of Canada. They're bigger institutions dealing with bigger loan loss provisions in an attempt to pilot that at these five institutions to see how much success we would have and to see--
:
I guess you can argue both ways. But we know what the AFIs are particularly good at, and what they've been tremendously successful at is small and medium loans and coverage up to a certain amount. They have a lot of expertise in that and they've been very good at it.
Admittedly, though, some other institutions have other experience and other things they're also good at. So what the loan loss pilot project is about is to see whether that's the right way to go or not. It is only five institutions, it's not a pan-Canadian thing, and admittedly it is a pilot project. But the information we'll garner from that will tell us whether we should be looking at that model or another one. That's what a pilot project does, it gives you that information, and we'll get that feedback.
I don't have the dollar numbers on that in my notes, but we'll get back to you on the AFIs. Again, I have a lot of respect for them, and it may well be that we need to go back and beef them up going forward. I don't discount that at all. But we did need to explore, frankly, how we get the banks interested in lending money to aboriginal people. We need to find ways to encourage that. And increasingly, as our new aboriginal economic development framework talks about, there is a component of aboriginal financing that is out of the realm of what we used to consider par for the course.
It used to be that if a guy bought a gravel truck, he needed $100,000, so he went to an AFI and we made the deal. Increasingly there's a smaller number, but a significant number, of big projects; these are mining projects, things that are done in the oil sands, things that are done on wind power, whereby they're talking about a billion dollars now. The AFIs may be the vehicle to go, but frankly I think we need to find a way to get the banks involved and interested and we need to get them to bite. We need to say how can we make sure that you're part of what we see is an exciting new part of the world, and that is big projects for first nations--not the gravel truck, but a billion-dollar wind farm.
So we piloted that in part to get them involved and also just to.... Again, it's a pilot project, and we'll evaluate it. Admittedly, I'm not discounting that we may need to beef up the role of the AFIs as well. I'm not discounting that.
:
A tripartite agreement.... I've been delighted to sign quite a number of these, both on education and on child and family services right across the country. I think they're the way of the future, I really do. I just think to take advantage of some of that provincial expertise in service delivery.... They do a service delivery. They do it in many areas. The Constitution gives them jurisdiction in many of these areas, and they do it well. So not to take advantage of their expertise would be unwise, in my opinion.
In terms of these tripartite frameworks, if you will, that we've signed on child and family services, we've been able to not only fund and establish who looks after what but also who funds what. So on the funding that we've been able to put with those frameworks, this last year we signed agreements in Quebec and in Prince Edward Island, but we already had them established in Alberta, a significant one in Saskatchewan, and in Nova Scotia as well.
In every case we've been able to move from an apprehension model, where you just take kids out of the home when there's trouble, to a prevention-based model. It's what provinces did 15 years ago. We're 15 years behind the times. So by partnering with the province and with first nations, we're able to say, “Let's take advantage of the provincial expertise. They've already done this. They're good at it. They know how to make it work.” And with first nations that say, “Yes, you might know how to make it work, but we have our own sensitivities on our reserves or in our communities”, we make sure we dovetail that together. And we've been able to provide extra funds to make it all work. So that's a good example of how it works.
On education, as well.... I mentioned the one in Alberta that I signed earlier this year. I was there in June. I said in June that I'd like to see if we could get a tripartite agreement on education as soon as possible. That was in June of last year, and we negotiated that right down to the fine print and signed it off in February--done. People said we'd never do that with treaty first nations. These are the treaty groups in Alberta who called this historic. They equated it, in many ways, as being as significant as the treaty. That's how important they saw this. For the first time ever, they felt like they were now included in the decision-making process. The provinces bought in. As the minister there, Minister Hancock, said, we're not fighting about jurisdiction; we're fighting about how to get those kids the best education possible. And that's a great fight to have.
As you know, we have that in New Brunswick, a tripartite agreement in B.C., the one in Alberta, as I mentioned, and others across the country that are increasing....
Do we have a letter of understanding or a memo in Manitoba?
:
Success breeds its own success, right? This is happening across the country. There is lots of interest, and of course some professional jealousy almost.
The only thing I want to say is that the model that works in one province might not work exactly the same way in the next. In B.C. we have a legislative model. That's the way it has gone. It's very advanced, very sophisticated, and it looks like it's great.
But the MOU we have in New Brunswick is different, in some ways, they might argue, even superior. So we just say that you don't have to have a cookie-cutter approach. If you want to do business with us in a tripartite agreement on education, we're all ears. It doesn't have to be like Manitoba or like B.C. If you have an idea on how we could do this working together.... And it's a little different in each place, but every one of them says the same thing. It's just a night and day difference when you get the province involved and the first nation helping to call the shots.
The first nations also say in their agreement...it's right down to, “What do we expect from the parents? What do we want from our leaders in our communities? What's the chief's responsibility? What about education boards? What about the federal government and their obligations and their treaty words, and such?” It's down to that kind of detail.
When the chiefs got excited about it they said they were going to go back to their communities and say, “If we're going to improve the education system, parents, it will never happen unless you buy in”. And that's as important, in an education system, as the federal and the provincial governments and first nation governments themselves. But it's in that kind of detail that the success will be found. That's why the tripartite agreement focuses that attention not just on money--money isn't going to be important--but also on the structure of the education system itself. And I'm convinced tripartite agreements are the way forward.
Thank you, Minister, for being here.
Like Ms. Crowder, I'm going to ask questions on three areas, and if you could commit to get back in writing to the committee on anything you don't have time to answer, that would be great.
First, as I'm sure you are aware—you have to be—there is outrage across the country that the Aboriginal Healing Foundation has been closed, that it is not continuing. It is not being extended. I have four projects in my own riding: Liard Aboriginal Women's Society; CAIRS, the Committee on Abuse in Residential Schools Society; Kwanlin Dun First Nation; and Northern Tutchone Tribal Council. CAIRS has 133 projects and organizations that are well set up across the country. I know the one in my riding sees thousands of people, so if you take thousands times 133.... Anyone who thinks healing is finished is dreaming in technicolor.
Who would know better than the people in the Minister of Health's own riding? They, a few minutes ago, tabled in their legislature a motion.
WHEREAS the loss of these programs would represent a significant setback for community-driven wellness and healing and would threaten the viability of community support programs that have been developed over the past decade; NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Member for Quttiktuq, that the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut calls on the Government of Canada to fully reinstate the funding to the programs and services provided under the Aboriginal Healing Foundation which support Nunavummiut.
The second area I want to talk about is food mail. Through last year's estimates we see it was $66 million. This year's budget says they are adding $22.5 million per year for two years to bring the program total down to 60,000 people. But as we know, we need more money. There are a lot more aboriginal people. The cost of food has gone up. The evaluation that you talked about had some good suggestions of how it has to be extended. People want it extended and improved. In fact, in this year's main estimates it goes all the way down to 47,600 people. So I want a commitment that it is actually going to go up rather than down, as it says in the budget.
My last question is related to CanNor, of which we are all proud. It's great to see Ms. Jauvin here. It sort of has a slight in the budget. The regional development corporations are only mentioned in the budget on page 84, where it talks about new innovation programs. They are all mentioned: ACOA, CEDQ, and WED. The only ones not mentioned are CanNor and FedNor. Unless you can explain otherwise, it suggests that people in the north aren't capable of innovation. We get this new agency and it's not supported like the others are. It's like a step backward just after it started.
Could the minister address those issues? I know he has heard of some of these from constituents across the country.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. We're pleased to have all your departmental officials here as well.
First of all, I wanted to start by just congratulating your department on having reduced the number of high-risk first nation water systems from 193 down to 44, as you mentioned in your speeches, as well as reducing those 21 communities that were in especially difficult times down to four. A lot of effort has been taken, and I certainly appreciate it, and I'm sure the people in those communities do as well.
I was encouraged, as I'm sure all of the members of our committee were, when we were having our hearings in Whitehorse last fall, listening to some of the leaders of the communities. I know I've gone home and I've mentioned to people that there were a lot of CEOs who you wouldn't have minded having in your own company south of 60 because of the talent we saw there. I know just a couple of weeks ago, I, along with some committee members, was at the aboriginal finance officers' presentations, and I was fortunate enough to be sitting with Deanna Hamilton at the time, who was the award winner from the First Nations Finance Authority. When I was listening to her about the types of things they were doing in their community, as well as the other leaders who were there, I was extremely impressed with the talent that is there.
For my questions, could you perhaps expand somewhat on some of these issues, like the water systems, housing, schools? I'm interested in that, plus the infrastructure that is taking place. Also, could you update us on how our economic action plan has been working on reserves?
Of course, in the action plan there's a reserve component and an off-reserve component as well. Whenever you get a big dollop of money for infrastructure investment it takes a lot of the pressure out of the system. There's significant investment every year from the department in new infrastructure and infrastructure management or maintenance. But the economic action plan allowed us to announce a dozen major school projects, and 12 or 14 major water and waste-water projects. There has been a lot of construction, housing construction, and so on. So all of those things are valuable.
It's not a sleeper issue because it's right front and centre in the Speech from the Throne. But in addition to the important investments—and there's $1.4 billion in additional investment under the action plan, so it's significant—one of the things I'm excited about is the line in the Speech from the Throne that talks about the need to examine new ways of managing the financing of first nations infrastructure, aboriginal infrastructure.
One of the things we do year in and year out is cash manage infrastructure based on the vagaries of.... You know, you get a fire over in one area, you run out of money in another area. It's that bad. And it's all done on a cash basis. Moving forward, the Speech from the Throne said that we need to come up with other models that allow us to lever the money we get, which is something I've been pushing for.
In a sense I feel it's a shame. We're the only organization in Canada, probably in the modern world.... The provinces don't do this, and municipalities don't do this. But under our current authorities, if we get $200 million and we say we can build ten schools, that's what we can build. If you gave $200 million to the province they'd say, “Ah, we can build $1 billion worth of schools with that”, because a school doesn't wear out in one year.
So all these investments are making improvements and doing good work. But in the long term, working with outfits like the First Nations Finance Authority, they want to use own-source revenue and property revenue to finance infrastructure on reserve, or use the P3 model we have in the finance department on reserve, or simply get away from a cash basis to a regular infrastructure financing method. Think of the impact we could have if first nations could access that. Everybody else considers this just normal routine business. But we have to go to first nations and say, “No, if you can't pay for it 100% cash you can't have it”.
So that line in the Speech from the Throne--and I'm sure lots of people just turned the page and went on--is one of the most significant things I'd like to work on this year. We need to fix how we finance infrastructure so that first nations can do what everybody else can do in this country. Then a lot of the shortages, the maintenance, and the sense of ownership would swing from the way we do it now--almost like you roll the dice you get a school, you roll the dice you don't get a school--to asking them, “How would you like to manage the long-term infrastructure needs in your community?” I bet you'd like to manage it like any municipality or authority can. You wouldn't do it based on the cashflow that came in today. You would say, “I have a long-term plan and here's how I'm going to do it”.
If we can do that, it will be the single biggest significant change in infrastructure management that has been seen in this department in a lifetime.
:
Mr. Minister, you already have a good idea of one of the three questions that I have for you. Good afternoon to everyone who is with you, including Ms. Jauvin, who was not there when we visited Nunavik.
Mr. Minister, this is separate from the question I asked you in the House about the food mail program. Three years ago, we suggested that the pilot project be implemented in all the communities. The cost of doing that was fairly high but minimal when compared with the cost of maintaining Canada's roads. In fact, it cost approximately $600 million to implement the pilot project in all the communities.
Currently, in announcements regarding the budget, you plan to reduce the number of gateways for the core program only, from 20 to 5 gateways. The only study we were allowed to see is a bit contradictory and should be considered with caution.
Can you tell me whether you are able to put together a program within a timeframe that you can share with us today? As a committee, can we obtain feedback from the various stakeholders so that we can give you suggestions even before a final report is released?
In terms of housing in Nunavik, 1,000 units are needed. This week, we found out that you negotiated with Quebec and have agreed on 340 housing units. Internationally, we have a very poor reputation when it comes to Inuit and first nations housing.
Have you earmarked money for Kitcisakik? In fact, last summer, I invited you to meet with the people of Kitcisakik. I was even willing to stay in the background if you felt that my presence was undesirable. Can you tell me whether, in your current budget, you have allocated money that could apply to Kitcisakik?
Those are my three questions. Since you have no problem expressing yourself, I will let you go. And, I would like you to answer in French, as promised.
:
I can try to answer you in French, but since the issues are very complex, I may end up declaring war on another country before this discussion is over, by accident. So I don't want to do that.
The problems in Kitcisakik are indeed serious. But we have a good relationship with the Quebec government. Discussions and negotiations between the communities, the province of Quebec and our government are ongoing. There is a small project now with....
[English]
I am going to have to go to English or I'll be all day on this. I am sorry.
Regarding Young Musicians of the World, for example, you talked to me about that project. We were able to get a little bit of money in there.
But there is a bigger issue at stake, quite a big issue with Kitcisakik, and we need to work with the Province of Quebec to find the proper location for the community, set the priorities in place, and make it happen. It needs to be a joint project between the community itself, our government, and the Province of Quebec, because some of it is going to be provincial, some of the access issues, and so on.
It has proven to be very difficult. The community doesn't have a lot of capacity, in many ways. So it's very nervous about saying what it wants to do and sticking to a plan, because they're very cautious. I think it's really a capacity issue. But we have good discussions, I think, with the government and we hope to be able to see good progress this year.
On the housing in Nunavik, we were able to sign an agreement yesterday. That is the obligation we had under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement. We were able to renew the five-year agreement on the Nunavik housing agreement, with an escalator. They got 15% more than the last agreement, which is good. There's always need for more, but it was good to see that.
We also transferred last year $600 million, I think it was, to Quebec for social housing generally. So where the Province of Quebec uses that $600 million is up to them. The federal government has significant investments in social housing. I can't speak to that. I don't know exactly where that goes, but it is a significant transfer.
I was just given this, that the department has recently confirmed that it will finance the construction of a new elementary school for Kitcisakik for kindergarten to grade six. So there is progress.
We are working well with the minister there in Quebec. We both have that real concern for those people, and yes, I do consider them important people.
:
That's a great question. I was there when the torch came in. The torch ended up at the aboriginal pavilion. That was its final spot before it went into the stadium, and I was there with the four host first nations when the torch came in. I don't know if it's the right expression or not, but I thought they were going to pop all the buttons on their vests.
They were so proud, and understandably so, of the part they played. It was not only at the Olympics, of course. The torch had gone through more than 100 aboriginal communities across the country. We helped to pay for an aboriginal youth gathering that brought kids in from all across the country. They were part of the opening ceremonies. They did leadership training and so on that went with it.
As you mentioned, the four host first nations did a spectacular job of integrating not only the west coast culture, but.... I think people, whether it was Inuit carvings and culture or food.... Different days of the pavilion had different food, different emphasis, and so on. It was really spectacular. I think we all felt that as Canadians.
I was particularly proud for the aboriginal people, who I think felt for the first time that they were included. Not only were they included in the proposal to host the Olympics and in the planning for the Olympics, but they actually hosted the Olympics. What a change from what both of us probably grew up on. It's quite a change in attitude.
Each of the four host first nations ended up with a significant legacy fund. We helped pay for certain things in each of the four host first nations to help them take advantage of the economic opportunities. It was a little different in each of the communities, but certainly there was an economic emphasis in all of them, both on promotion of tourism and on economic development opportunities. I think some $50 million or $60 million in aboriginal procurement happened during the games.
We funded everything from people to help with tourism aspects to.... Anything we could do to help, basically, we rolled out to try to maximize that. As Tewanee Joseph said when he welcomed people there, when the torch finally came in, he just said it was.... Everything had been done top-notch. They feel it's been a launch for opportunities. Again, it was one of those watershed moments, an opportunity for them to host the world and show the world what they're all about.
For example, the Squamish First Nation has $1 billion worth of development on the books now. The other communities, whether Musqueam, Tsleil-Waututh, or Lil'wat, are all thinking about world-class, big opportunities for aboriginal people. Tewanee Joseph was a wonderful spokesperson, but the message you'll get from all the chiefs there as well is “If we can host the world, then surely we can overcome whatever problems we have here in Canada and show the world we can do this, not just during the Olympic year but non-stop”. It's going to be a great legacy, not just for the four host first nations but I think for aboriginal people across the country.
:
I did not prepare any remarks separate from those of the minister. At CanNor, we have made what I would call considerable progress.
[English]
I think you will recall our priorities from the get-go--you may not recall, but I certainly recall--and the first one was we needed to ensure we were delivering, that there was a smooth transition in the program delivery, and we've continued to do that. I can go into a little bit more detail perhaps later on in the question period with respect to some of the progress we've made on our programs.
I'm proud to say that in this first year, a transition year, we've committed 98% of our funding, and we anticipate we will have spent 80% of it in this fiscal year. So that's something we were very focused on and I'm very pleased to say we've accomplished. We're also busy setting up the agency. Essentially all the foundation pieces are either in place or about to be in place, and our report on plans and priorities has been tabled through the minister and we're very pleased with that.
We also have an integrated business plan, which we are starting to put the final touches to. It's a three-year plan, which will drive our business over the next while.
We also have an HR strategy, which is especially important for CanNor because we want to be very representative of the people we serve, so we have the strategy and we're starting to implement it.
We have a plan to move. The headquarters are established in Iqaluit, but we need to move more people there over time, and that is of course dependent on having accommodation in Iqaluit. Those of you who visited Iqaluit last fall will know that, first of all, accommodation is very tight and we are now sharing with INAC, but we do have a request for a proposal for appropriate accommodation for CanNor headquarters over the next little while and we're hoping to have results. This is all managed by Public Works.
We also had undertaken to launch the northern project management office as soon as possible. This is going to be launched in the coming weeks, as we undertook to do. We're very excited about this, because we think there's potential for this project management office to really make a difference, first of all, to proponents who are trying to navigate the regulatory system in terms of all the permits and the environmental steps they have to go through with respect to their projects. Having situated this office at CanNor allows us to, wearing our economic development hat, see what linkages we could make in terms of economic development and how we can make economic development opportunities available to communities in the context of these projects. So that is happening in the next little while.
The last thing is we have been working really hard to build relationships across the north. As I was saying the last time, Michel, my vice-president, and I were both new to the north, so we needed to build relationships, but we're very thankful that most of the staff across the regional offices are northerners and have been established in the north for a long time, so they had great working relationships with people in the north and that has been very helpful to us. So we're continuing to build these relationships.
We're also building linkages into the federal government, because we realize we may have a certain amount of money to spend, which we're happily spending, but we need to ensure that we take advantage of the fact that the federal government as a whole is spending quite a bit of money in the north. So our role is to ensure that we can develop opportunities based on all this other funding that's being committed in the north and ensure that our agency can help communities, help territorial governments, aboriginal and Inuit groups take advantage not only of our spending, but the spending of the federal government as a whole across the north.
This capacity is something we need to develop, but I think that potentially we can have a very powerful impact.
I will stop there. Sorry.
I want to come back to the question I asked the minister about the Aboriginal Healing Foundation.
In the supplementary estimates, under the major specific initiatives, it says:
The number of students claiming sexual and/or serious physical abuse and the severity of abuse has proved to be much higher than initially estimated, resulting in total projected payments in 2009-10 to exceed the $160 million annual allocation.
We know that in the subsequent budget, additional money was allocated around the payout of Indian residential school settlement money. The 2009 report that the department commissioned acknowledged that research has shown that it takes ten years of continuous healing efforts before a community is securely established in healing from the Indian residential school trauma. The report goes on to say that in some communities, in particular in the Inuit projects, the healing process was delayed due to the later start of the age of projects for Inuit.
It seems the government acknowledges that more people are applying for payment or getting payment through the dispute resolution process, that the department's own evaluation of the programs indicated that they are successful, that there were some delayed starts, and that the healing needs to continue. That report also indicates that the Health Canada support programs are designed to provide specific services that are complementary to, but different from, those of the Aboriginal Healing Foundation.
What steps will the department take to ensure that there are no serious gaps or implications for these communities that have already started on a healing journey and are going to see funds withdrawn? In fact, just to close, in the AHF's report that the minister mentioned, which was tabled in the House, 23% of the projects estimate that they are not going to be able to continue to function without the money and another 56% are unsure of their future.
In light of the apology and the recognition that payments are still needed, what steps are you taking to ensure that there are no serious repercussions for communities?
I'm an easy guy to get along with, so I don't mind amending my motion. I just want to give you the intent behind it. As you probably heard in my question, and as some of you may have heard from constituents, there's a lot of really good work going on.
As the minister said, there's a little bit of residue money left, so some projects will go ahead, but a number of projects are closing. I know, because they phoned us specifically. They're doing good work, as the minister said. He had nothing but praise for them. Some of them are going to be closing on March 31, as you may have seen in the media.
As you know, once you get something up and running but you close it down, people go to other jobs and you lose the continuity. Some of these people are pretty desperate. They're not going to go into a government office or a fancy hotel meeting room. These organizations are kind of special. They're often run by aboriginal people, by people they trust, and people go in and get some basic services.
As I said, I'm not stuck on the wording, but my intent is to somehow get the funds so these people can carry on, so these good projects can carry on. As I said, the statistics show that there are thousands of people involved, just in one of my projects. That's out of 133 in the country. So this involves tens of thousands of people who still need the healing somehow, healing that they can't get elsewhere. There are no other real provisions for it.
Health Canada has always provided some services. That's good. I applaud the government for that. Those services are going to continue, and I applaud the government for that, but they're certainly not at all serving the same need, financially or technically.
That's the intent of my motion. I'm willing to hear suggested changes or improvements, or something that people might be able to agree to. I don't think anyone here, because we're all familiar with it and have heard aboriginal witnesses, thinks the healing is complete. That's the introduction to the motion.