AANR Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS, NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES

COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES AUTOCHTONES, DU DÉVELOPPEMENT DU GRAND NORD ET DES RESSOURCES NATURELLES

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, April 3, 2001

• 1106

[English]

The Chair (Ms. Nancy Karetak-Lindell (Nunavut, Lib.)): I'd like to call the meeting to order this morning, Tuesday, April 3, 2001.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), our order of the day is an inquiry into the crisis in aboriginal housing.

We have before us witnesses from three departments; the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and Health Canada. Welcome to the committee.

I thought I would have a representative from each of the departments do a presentation and then we'll get through all the presentations. The members can ask questions of any one of the departments so we don't have questions that have to be answered by somebody else waiting for the presentation.

We'll start with the Department of Indian Affairs. You can introduce yourself and who you're here with. Go ahead.

[Translation]

Ms. Chantal Bernier (Assistant Deputy Minister, Socio-Economic Policy and Programs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development): Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members.

First of all, I would like to thank you for this invitation to meet with you today. I would also like to thank you for studying this issue, which is a serious question that is of grave concern to us.

Today, I would like to briefly describe my role and my responsibilities regarding on-reserve housing, the measures that we have taken to correct the situation, the results that we have observed, and the challenges before us. But first let me introduce you to my colleagues.

I am accompanied today by Bill Montour, my special advisor on housing matters, who is a former Regional Director General of the Department for the Atlantic Region and a former Chief of the Six Nations. He has experience in the construction industry too, and was the Director of the Assembly of First Nations when he appeared before this same committee in 1992, when you held hearings on housing. I also have with me Fred Smith, an advisor on housing issues in my sector, who has worked in the regions and with communities. Both of them will help me answer your questions.

As Assistant Deputy Minister for Socio-Economic Policy and Programs at the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, I am responsible for a number of areas, including economic development, education, learning and employment, social policy, and—most relevant to our discussions today—infrastructure and housing on-reserve.

Therefore, I need to specify right from the start that my responsibility for housing only applies on-reserve, and therefore to south of the 60th parallel, which excludes the territory covered by the James Bay Agreement.

Long before I joined the department, I had the great privilege to work as a lawyer for the Inuit of New Quebec, and I made many visits to communities as a result of my work. Since my appointment as Assistant Deputy Minister, I have made it a point of honour to visit communities as often as possible, and I am personally touched by the living conditions that prevail there. I know they are poor, and I know they need to be fixed.

• 1110

The challenge before us is large, and I would like to describe it by borrowing the words of the Auditor General. In his 10-year report published this past February, entitled Reflections on a Decade of Serving Parliament, he says:

Although the Government of Canada operates in many challenging spheres, it is difficult to name an area more challenging than the resolution of Aboriginal issues. The reasons for the challenge are many and complex.

This challenge has only strengthened our resolve to find solutions. Since the early 1990s and in response to this committee's recommendations in its fourth report, entitled A Time for Action: Aboriginal and Northern Housing in 1992, and the third recommendation in particular, we have modified our policy framework and we have seen an increase in Aboriginal loan, construction and insurance companies. We have also increased First Nations' control over their housing policy. Here is what we have done.

Realizing that a true change in direction was needed to improve on-reserve housing conditions, the government announced a new federal on-reserve housing policy in 1996 which represented a fundamental shift from the previous approach. Under the 1996 policy, First Nations have increased flexibility in how funds are to be used.

In order to promote the development of the Aboriginal government function for housing and allow Aboriginal people to adjust their housing programs to fit their priorities, the new approach is founded on four key pillars: first, increased First Nation control; second, increased First Nation expertise; third, increased responsibility on the part of the occupants of houses; and finally, better access to private capital.

First Nations decide whether or not they wish to adopt this policy. Those that do agree to make their housing plans public and available to their community, to incorporate economic development and job creation into these plans, to develop housing policies and programs that include complaint mechanisms, to maintain the houses under their control, to renovate houses as required, and to build houses that are adapted to the community's needs. In return, they receive multi-year budgets that give them some financial flexibility.

Four hundred and five First Nations have taken advantage of this policy. The remaining ones—in general, the smaller ones that do not have the governance capacity to implement the policy—continue to operate within the old system, that is, a system providing partial subsidies for housing. All in all, the main difference between the old system and the 1996, is that the latter affords First Nations greater control over their housing.

At the same time that we brought in these improvements to the policy framework, we increased resources for on-reserve housing. To our budget of $137 million, we added $20 million obtained by re-allocating funds to match the priority that we place on housing, as well as $20 million from Gathering Strength funds, which includes $2 million for an innovative housing fund, that I will speak about later on, and $5 million for a training program that, by the way, was developed by the Bay of Quinte Mohawks. The budget has therefore increased to $177 million. These funds are allocated to First Nations on the basis of on-reserve population and geographical factors.

Let us turn now to the results that have been observed. We have conducted two studies since this policy was introduced, one in 1998 and the other in the year 2000. These two studies show that the policy is achieving its goal of improving on-reserve housing conditions. While the percentage of adequate housing units remained fairly steady in the first half of the 1990s—at around 44 to 46%—in the second half of the 1990s, it rose to 57%. The number of inadequate units has declined. During the same period, the total number of on-reserve housing units increased by more than 13%, from 78,000 to 88,000.

The Department continues to seek additional resources to support housing. Recently, additional funds were provided to 85 First Nations experiencing particularly severe problems with over- crowding and substandard housing.

• 1115

The 1996 housing policy has contributed to an increase in both the total number of housing units and the percentage of units in adequate condition. Renovations are also up, from 3,000 to 3,300 per year. All units must be built to National Building Code standards, but a number of First Nations are going beyond the requirements to build better-quality housing for their people.

As I said a few minutes ago, we introduced the Innovative Housing Fund as a way of supporting the implementation of new ideas in areas such as building technology, energy sources and financing and management techniques. These initiatives must be cost-shared with the private sector.

We are also encouraged by the emergence of an Aboriginal construction industry as a significant economic force in this country. This construction activity provides new opportunities, not only to build buildings, but also to teach skills and make a difference in the lives and livelihoods of Aboriginal communities. More and more, First Nations are forging links between housing and job creation, between training and skills development.

This fall, we commissioned another study by Dan Brandt, an engineer and architect of Tyendinaga, which also looked at the success factors in reserves where progress was more evident. We found that there are basically four success factors: effective governance; solid internal expertise; occupant buy-in from the start, in terms of both house design and financing; and loan financing for occupants. We hope to draw on this analysis to improve our activities, and we intend to distribute a brochure to various First Nations, outlining the results of this study, as a way of sharing best practices. Finally, we also have a social assistance program. We provide shelter allowances to families that are eligible for social assistance.

That being said, the challenges are still huge, especially in terms of housing quality and overcrowding.

Since early 1999, a committee has been at work developing and implementing a national approach to address mould in on-reserve housing and infrastructure. Committee members include representatives from Health Canada, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, INAC and the Assembly of First Nations.

A joint, four-pronged plan was put into place. To date, the committee has produced an information kit, a guide and a short pamphlet, as well as training to help First Nations prevent mould through better practices. We have distributed 10,000 copies of the pamphlet and we hope that, by increasing awareness of the problem, we will be able to change habits and standards. We will also be promoting detection and early measures to fight mould.

We also know that there may be risk involved in cleaning up mould, and so we are providing training to First Nations to ensure this clean-up is done properly.

All regions, but especially Manitoba, British Columbia and the Atlantic, have been actively involved with First Nations in assessing serious mould situations and working with the communities on how best to respond. However, chronic flooding, overcrowding, inadequate ventilation and a lack of maintenance continue to pose serious challenges. Health Canada, our department and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, in co-operation with the Assembly of First Nations, are working together to improve this situation.

Let's look now at the problem of overcrowding. In spite of the increase in the rhythm of new construction, the on-reserve demographic increase is such that we are still behind in filling the demand. We estimate that approximately 4,400 new families are formed each year, while we build only 2,600 houses on average, leaving us with a predicted shortfall of 1,800 homes per year.

Although no statistics are available on the number of privately owned homes, it is estimated that there are approximately 10,000. These are normally where Certificates of Possession are used by the First Nations to convey rights to individuals, which include the right to make improvements on land, or to transfer the land to another member.

• 1120

To facilitate access to housing loans, the department obtained an increase in its ministerial loan guarantee authority because, as you probably know, the provisions of the Indian Act contain impediments to obtaining conventional mortgages.

I would like to conclude my remarks with another quote from the recent Auditor General's report:

Many Indian reserves have substandard living conditions that would not be tolerated if experienced by residents of Canadian municipalities: inadequate housing, inadequate water supply, crumbling infrastructure, economic underdevelopment [...] But since the problems have been brewing for over two centuries, overnight solutions cannot be expected.

This also means that housing problems cannot be solved according to a set timetable, as they are multi-dimensional and also influenced by demographics. We must work together, and we must increase Aboriginal expertise and Aboriginal governance capacity. We are catching up, but not quickly enough. There remains much to be done and we cannot do it alone.

I would like to conclude by thanking you for your support, which is evidenced by the attention you are giving to this issue. Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you very much.

We'll go on to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Ms. Taylor.

Ms. Deborah Taylor (Director, Assisted Housing Division, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation): Madam Chair and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

My name is Deborah Taylor. I am the director of assisted housing for CMHC. I have with me Jim Robar, the manager of housing technology in our research division.

As you have heard, although the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development has the lead role for housing on reserve, and provides the majority of funding to first nations on reserve, CMHC delivers specialized programs and makes full use of its budget authority for commitments on reserve. I would like to describe the programs we offer.

First nations have access to CMHC's on-reserve non-profit housing program. Under this program, rental housing, which may be new or existing, is financed through long-term borrowing with or without an equity contribution. CMHC provides operating subsidies for the term of the loan that is generally up to 25 years.

As part of the announcement in 1996 on the changes to the on-reserve housing policy, cabinet approved modifications to CMHC's non-profit housing program. Under the new program, first nations have flexibility on design, amount of equity contributed, amount of rent charged to households, and the maintenance regimes. Subsidy is provided to bridge the gap between operating cost benchmarks and a minimum revenue contribution.

Since the program was initially introduced in 1979, over 400 first nations have used the program. The portfolio currently contains approximately 21,000 units at an annual subsidy cost of $118 million. On an annual basis, new commitments across the country average 1,000 units.

First nations also have access to CMHC's Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program, known as RRAP, which provides loans where all or a portion may be forgivable. This is used to bring homes up to health and safety standards. Under RRAP, loans of up to $27,000 per unit for the renovation of existing houses may be provided and up to $18,000 of that may be forgivable.

The overall strategy announced in December 1999 by the government to address homelessness included a doubling of the current budget for RRAP on Indian reserves for a period of four years. The current forecast amount is $14.8 million for commitments. With this increased funding, approximately 1,250 units are rehabilitated each year.

CMHC's home adaptations for seniors independence initiative also provides financial assistance. This helps pay for home adaptations to extend the period of time that low-income seniors can live in their homes independently. Adaptations that both meet the needs of seniors with an age-related disability and are permanent and fixed to the dwelling are eligible. Seniors can receive a grant of up to $2,500 for these modifications.

• 1125

Another initiative is the shelter enhancement program, which offers financial assistance for the repair, rehabilitation, and improvement of existing shelters for women, children, and youth who are victims of family violence. The program also funds the acquisition or construction of new shelters and second-stage housing where needed.

CMHC provides loan insurance to approved lenders, which may be banks, aboriginal capital corporations, or credit unions, to make loans for residential homes or projects located on lands designated as Indian reserves. Since reserve lands cannot be mortgaged, the normal mortgage security is replaced by a loan agreement with the approved lender, which is secured by a band council resolution and a ministerial guarantee from the Department of Indian Affairs.

CMHC facilitates opportunities for first nations to fully participate in all aspects of their housing. CMHC is committed to working in partnership with first nations to support capacity-building, leading to self-governance, and with respect to housing, to enhance capacity to develop and manage sustainable, healthy housing.

As mentioned by Ms. Bernier, CMHC has been involved with the department, with Health Canada, and with the Assembly of First Nations to find practical solutions to address moisture-related problems identified by Health Canada in some first nations communities.

CMHC's role is primarily in the area of research and information transfer. In this regard, CMHC has adapted a training program to help increase the capacity of first nations to investigate the presence of mould, and has prepared substantive input to the kit to assist first nations in putting mould remediation measures in place.

CMHC's objectives relating to aboriginal capacity-building include the following: enhancing existing skills; developing new skills; facilitating the effective transfer of CMHC information, knowledge, and skills; assisting in the development of aboriginal institutions; facilitating partnership; and increasing accountability and empowerment.

Since 1995, CMHC has been contracting out its inspection functions to aboriginal inspection firms and individuals. Where individuals did not have the skills or knowledge or were not able to assume their responsibilities, CMHC has been sponsoring technical training sessions. Individuals have been able to acquire building code compliance and inspection expertise to the point where currently 85% of inspection activity on first nation communities is contracted out to aboriginal inspectors. CMHC is continuing its efforts in order to achieve 100% aboriginal involvement in this area.

I'm also pleased to mention that CMHC continues to deliver their successful housing internship initiative for first nations and Inuit youth. This initiative provides aboriginal youth living on reserve and in Inuit communities with valuable work experience and on-the-job skills development in the various aspects of the housing industry. The housing internship initiative is funded under the Government of Canada's youth employment strategy, which is achieving unparalleled success in helping young people make the school-to-work transition.

CMHC has a budget of $1 million per year, with a funding commitment up to March 31, 2002. In these last four years, CMHC has paid for more than 600 youths to participate in this program.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

On to Health Canada, and Mr. Keith Conn.

Mr. Keith Conn (Acting Director General, First Nations and Inuit Health Programs Branch, Community Health Programs Directorate, Health Canada): Thank you, Madam Chair. It's an honour and privilege to be here today.

With me today is Loc Nguyen, national director of research and development in our environmental contaminants unit, and Rolland Duguay, senior environmental health officer from our Quebec regional office.

My presentation will be very brief. As part of the branch and the community health programs directorate, we clearly understand that housing is an important component of protecting public health. We also clearly understand that substandard housing contributes to substandard health. I just wanted to make those logical statements up front.

• 1130

We also recognize, to reiterate what my colleagues stated earlier, that there is more to substandard housing and health than just mould—for example, indoor air quality, overcrowding, sewage disposal, and lifestyle in terms of culture and practices. Obviously, a multiplicity of factors contribute, individually or synergistically, to poor housing and health. As we have stated before, mould is a symptom of and contributing factor to poor indoor air quality and can have an effect on health.

In terms of the structure of the organization within Health Canada, I'd like to elaborate on our roles and responsibilities as we perceive them. As I mentioned, we are the first nations and Inuit health branch. Within that is community health programs, part of which is the environmental health and research unit. A significant part of that is the role of the regional environmental health officers, or the environmental health program, as it's often referred to.

In terms of specific roles of the environmental health officers within the region on the specific issue at hand here, which is mould and housing, the EHOs work with community health and housing personnel to investigate, inspect, and assess houses upon request or referral. They develop and deliver awareness information through community members, band staff, and technicians. They also provide recommendations for the remediation of the housing unit and the protection of health of the occupants.

Another key activity of our EHOs is participating interdepartmentally in regional mould and housing committees made up of EHOs, CMHC staff, the Assembly of First Nations, DIAND, and the specific first nations community members.

In terms of current initiatives, we are engaged in a national process to look at standardized strategies and protocols with respect to mould and housing specifically. They are being developed in full consultation with stakeholders. The goal, obviously, is to appropriately develop and scientifically address housing issues in first nations across the country. As well, a national consultation with community housing and health practitioners has just been launched. That will contribute towards meeting that goal.

That is, Madam Chair, our brief presentation. Thank you very much.

The Chair: Thank you.

I'm sure members have a lot of questions from the other presentations as well. We'll do our ten-minute round first and then go to three minutes.

I guess Mr. Vellacott from the Canadian Alliance will start.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, Canadian Alliance): Thank you.

I'm not sure who mentioned it, but I'm interested in the statistic, if it's accurate, that about 65% of on-reserve and 49% of off-reserve aboriginal households were in dwellings that fell below housing standards in the country.

My question has to do with the actual dollar amounts—probably they're somewhere in the pages we received—that go into aboriginal housing. Does significantly more money go into off-reserve aboriginal housing as opposed to on-reserve? I mean, it's bad in the urban areas as well, but it's not quite as bad as on the reserves.

To anyone who wants to answer, what would explain that difference?

Ms. Deborah Taylor: I'll try to address it from CMHC's perspective, as I mentioned that the amount going into on-reserve housing on an annual basis is slightly over $100 million a year. That's to support the existing stock out there.

Off reserve, another probably $1.6 billion supports the existing stock of social housing units, federally assisted housing units, across Canada. Of those units, a portion is targeted to aboriginal people, but there is also a great amount of that stock that is not targeted, and it's inhabited by low-income people, not necessarily aboriginal people.

• 1135

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Do you know what percentage would be targeted specifically for aboriginals in off-reserve situations?

Ms. Deborah Taylor: CMHC had one program targeted entirely to aboriginal people off reserve, the Urban Native Housing Program. There are approximately 11,000 units that are under that program. We're delivering a Rural and Native Housing Program, and between 35% and 40% of those units were targeted to aboriginal people. Included in the other units I've mentioned that add up to the 600,000 would be, for example, public housing, where we know that not only in southern Canada, but certainly in northern Canada, a great amount of that stock is inhabited by aboriginal people.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: You can't give a dollar figure though, Deborah?

Ms. Deborah Taylor: Because those programs are not targeted, we don't count statistics of aboriginal people living there.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Would Chantal know a number for the off-reserve dollars?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: No, because we don't do off-reserve. We do exclusively on-reserve.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Right.

Ms. Deborah Taylor: I can tell you that the portion I spoke of that was targeted off-reserve was estimated to be approximately $140 million, but it would exclude non-profit, cooperative, public housing.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Given that there's obviously such a great move into the cities, or the more urban areas, is there a sense that more dollars would be allocated or channelled to that over time? I talked to chiefs and councils, and they acknowledge there are not the jobs on the reserves. So will it come to that, actually shifting some of the housing resource? It's bad in the cities too, in the urban areas—49%, compared to one-third, I guess, non-aboriginal households being substandard in the urban areas. But would it make some sense, if there's not the employment on the reserves? Should we be setting up things to keep people in situations where there aren't the employment opportunities? Obviously, you need to make the provisions there for seniors, and so on. But the opportunities, the education, the employment, and so on, are elsewhere. Would it necessitate a kind of shift, if you will, in respect of the housing dollars to the urban areas?

I guess you could both, Chantal and Deborah, respond to that. Is there anything afoot to shift it to the urban centres?

Ms. Deborah Taylor: As I mentioned, the majority of the stock is located off reserve, and therefore the most of the dollars the federal government spends are currently directed to off-reserve housing. Since 1993 we have not been providing funding to deliver new social housing off reserve. We have, however, continued to deliver new social housing on reserve. We provide expertise and some seed money to try to deliver public-private partnerships in affordable housing off reserve that does not require ongoing government subsidies. Since 1994 we have achieved about 16,000 additional units off reserve.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Okay. What I understand you to say then is that even though there's less substandard in the city, you figure for more of the basic kind of allotment to go onto the reserve situation.

Maybe it's not a question you're prepared to respond to, but I would think we have to do something to buy the housing there on the reserve situations. But if we cannot create the employment and the jobs there, then it's obviously.... Those in the city are not even so reliant on some of these programs, because it would appear to me from what you're saying that they have employment, they have some opportunities that are not there on reserves, and they are able to cover partly on their own. Would that be a correct assessment?

Ms. Deborah Taylor: There may be a greater number of opportunities in the cities for employment and also greater opportunities for housing.

• 1140

I would also add, with respect to what the federal government has done with cities, that since 1996 we have been negotiating with the provinces and territories to transfer the administration for the federally assisted social housing stock. The new agreements that have been signed with nine jurisdictions, including the three territories, allow those jurisdictions to generate savings of federal funding and to redirect them to housing programs for low-income persons. We have seen evidence of this happening, for example, in Saskatchewan, where they have been able to use the savings achieved under those agreements to create some additional housing. So I would expect that in addition to the federal funding, there's also the opportunity for provinces to use their funding to create additional housing offers available to both aboriginal and non-aboriginal persons.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: That's my province of origin, and that's why I asked the question. I think there needs to be more to assist them in making that transition, because I think it's inevitable. In a lot of the reserve situations there can be some things done—we've got a corrections centre coming into one of the reserves in my riding—but there's just not great opportunity that way. So I think we need to provide help in that transition to the urban centres in respect of housing.

The Chair: Mr. Marceau.

[Translation]

Mr. Richard Marceau (Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier, BQ): Thank you. I would like to begin by thanking you, Ms. Bernier, for coming here to testify today before the committee. I have several questions to ask you.

As you know, last week, this committee heard from representatives of the Cree nation. The Aboriginal population is young and growing very rapidly. The Cree nation therefore assessed its social housing requirements and came up with a figure of $427 million in the next five years. Do you think that this is a realistic figure? What are your figures for the needs of the Cree community?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: As I said in my presentation—

[English]

The Chair: Excuse me, I want to remind everyone, for the record, that if we get a chance to say the names, it won't be so confusing for people who are listening, instead of being here, as to who is speaking. I'll say the name. so that it can go into the record, because everybody is just speaking without being introduced.

Ms. Bernier, go ahead.

[Translation]

Ms. Chantal Bernier: Thank you.

Mr. Richard Marceau: Madam Chair, I hope that I did not lose any time.

Ms. Chantal Bernier: As I said in my presentation, I have no responsibility regarding First Nations living in the territory covered by the James Bay Agreement. However, if you like, I will be happy to pass on your question to my colleague, who will mail you an answer.

Mr. Richard Marceau: I will phrase my question differently. In your presentation, you mentioned the housing shortage in Aboriginal communities several times. You gave the figure of 1,800 houses per year. If we wanted to completely eliminate the shortages in Aboriginal communities across Canada, how many units would we need to build per year, or in the next five years?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: We are working on this at the present time, we are currently caring out such an assessment. First of all, I must explain that money is not the only consideration; we must also optimize existing resources in a number of ways. The first way is to increase economic development activities, as Ms. Taylor mentioned. This is really an indirect way to obtain resources, but one that works in the long term, by creating real job opportunities near reserves. This leads to new income for Aboriginal people, which helps improve the housing situation.

We must also look at how First Nations can better manage housing funds, and how we too can better manage housing funds. We have to see how we can make better use of materials and technology, so as to get the most out of our current investments. We must also study demographic trends so that we will be able to respond adequately to the needs. In my presentation, I told you what our projections were, but we will have to determine the best way of satisfying these needs, the type of housing that will be required. The calculations involved are much more complex than a simple sum or a simple extrapolation using population growth statistics. You also have to factor in the effectiveness with which the allocated resources are currently used.

• 1145

Mr. Richard Marceau: I'd like to be sure that I understand correctly. You are saying that there is a shortage of 1,800 houses per year. So do you have a figure. You did do an assessment, but you did not take it to the point where you can say that, if 1,800 houses are needed, that translates into X dollars. Are you saying that it is this calculation that you are currently working on?

You also said, in response to one of my questions, that First Nations and the Department had to run things better. We met with representatives of the Cree nation, for which you are not responsible, who were able to give evidence relating to the living conditions of Aboriginal people across Canada. They told us that there are serious problems with mould. I found that disgusting and I was surprised to learn that nothing had been done. For example, as soon as a black spot is noticed, it has to be attended to immediately or it will spread to the whole ceiling. I don't know the reason for this. Is there not an inspection program? We know what kind of climatic conditions prevail in many Aboriginal communities. One doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that, if a house is sealed and air does not circulate, mould quickly spreads. I don't understand why no inspections apparently took place, unless it was because directives were not followed. I'm putting the question to you. The right thing to do would be to evaluate the cost of repairs and correct the problems, rather than allow mould to spread to an entire wall or ceiling, so that the home has to be demolished, which seems to have happened in the case of several houses.

Ms. Chantal Bernier: I would ask my colleague Keith Conn to also respond to the question. As he said a few minutes ago, Health Canada has some direct responsibility regarding mould.

This being said, we do a lot. We have worked very hard to make information available. As you say, under certain conditions mould spreads. Certain buildings were built in such a way that they are unfortunately at greater risk of developing mould. For the past few years we have been working very hard to distribute information on the best construction methods, and I would ask Fred Smith and Bill Montour to add a few words if they wish because they worked on this issue very closely. This information is not abstract and does take climate conditions into account. You mentioned the cold, but there is also the issue of flooding. Some regions experience chronic flooding, which increases the risk of mould substantially. We have also distributed information to families so that they may take all steps required in their daily lives in order to spot a mould and prevent it from spreading.

[English]

Bill and Fred, do you want to add anything on what we've done on mould?

Mr. Bill Montour (Adviser, Community Development, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll give a brief answer to the question the member has asked.

Mould is a result of, I believe, new construction technologies where we're creating houses so tight that we don't have the air infiltration that I personally experienced when I was growing up. I grew up in a log house with a frame kitchen on the back. The house was cold because there was air blowing through all the time, but at that time we were never sick.

• 1150

I think the construction technologies now make houses so tight that air movement in the house is not as prevalent as it used to be. There are technologies that are emerging. Heating and ventilation technologies are moving along, but I'm finding in my own experience, both in B.C. and the Atlantic, that a lot of people who are occupying houses have no comprehension of this technology or how to use it. So I would suggest that we have to have more of the three of us, and maybe even HRDC would have to become involved, engage in training people on how it works, because it is a system and a lot of people don't realize that.

[Translation]

Mr. Richard Marceau: Thank you very much Ms. Bernier.

Depending upon the location, did you respect the national or regional standards when building these houses? Are there any standards?

[English]

Mr. Bill Montour: The standard we've established now is part 9 of the National Building Code. It's the only standard that exists. It's a very base standard. People work up from there. But to my knowledge, nothing has been established because mould really is a new issue in all of Canada because of the increased tightness of houses, I would suggest.

[Translation]

Mr. Richard Marceau: In your opinion, Madam Bernier, or in the opinion of any of the witnesses, should there be standards other than those found in part 9 of the code you indicated? If so, who should be responsible for putting them in place?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: It is the National Research Council which is responsible for the National Building Code and the question would be more properly put to them. I believe that they are revising the code as we speak.

As to immediate action, as Bill stated, it is a matter of passing on the expertise to the First Nations so that whether standards exist or not, they are in a position to meet their needs. What is interesting to note, as I was saying earlier, is that several First Nations go above and beyond what is required in the code, because with the increased flexibility under the new policy, they can do so. These people can build houses which truly conform to their lifestyle and their daily priorities.

Mr. Richard Marceau: Do I have any time left?

[English]

The Chair: Your time is up.

Mr. St-Julien.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

You said in your statement Madam Bernier:

Therefore, I need to specify right from the start that my responsibility for housing only applies on-reserve, with the exclusion, as a consequence, of northern regions and territories.

Now we do agree on the fact that there is a housing crisis. I have read your briefs. You explained what you do and I know that everyone works very hard, the whole team here today as well as the people who work for you but I am going to be very hard on you today because we are dealing with real issues here. You mentioned a follow-up; it is not a matter of follow-up today, Madam Chair, we have a crisis in our hands. And we talk about our commitments to the UN. Should there be a war anywhere in the world, within 18 seconds our F-18s will be dispatched to the war zone and it will cost us $3 billion a month.

Currently, Aboriginal people in Canada, Inuit in Nunavut and Nunavik are going through a housing crisis. I have a great deal of respect for you and for the minister, but I am in a bad mood, because we want to correct the situation.

You mentioned 1,800 houses per year. Are you able to provide us the list of the 1,800 house shortage in Canada? You write a figure in your report. Are you in a position to table before the committee this 1,800 figures? I find that quite odd. There is a 2,000 house shortage for the Cree in James Bay, Madam Bernier.

Ms. Chantal Bernier: What I said, is that we foresee an increase of 4,400 households per year and the construction of 2,600 new homes. Therefore we forecast that there will be a shortfall of 1,800, on average, in the future. We are concerned about this and we are looking at solutions.

• 1155

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Could you provide us with the list of the 4,400 families of the reserves, and the communities where they are located, and the list of the 2,600 new dwellings?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: That is a statistical forecast.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: That's correct, we want to have that list.

And I will go even further. You are speaking of follow-up, but we are in a crisis situation. Let's just discuss the past 12 months. How often did your people go and visit the reserves?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: We visit regularly. We have regional offices and it is a priority for us to visit the reserves. Contact is quite regular and it is essential. Without regular visits, it is impossible for us to know the seriousness and the problem. Therefore, the presence of the department on reserves is ongoing.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: I would like to ask Ms. Bernier a question.

Let us talk about the Cree and the Inuit in the James Bay area. At Chisasibi, there are Cree and Inuit who live in the community of Ms. Violet Pachanos, and the same applies to the Inuit community of Kuujjuarapik. In the same community at Whapmagoostui, there are still Cree and Inuit who live one street apart.

We are trustees of the Baie James agreement signed on November 11, 1975, and that includes the Inuit and the Cree. I find it strange that in all of the letters—and I could show you some today—we have not found a true answer to the housing crisis. You tell us what you have done, but section 28 of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement promises community and economic development according to the priorities set by the Cree.

If we signed an agreement in 1975 with the James Bay Cree and Inuit, then we have to respect their priorities. It is a tripartite agreement. In 1982, the federal review of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement established the fact that Canada did not implement the agreement and recommended special initiatives in order to accelerate community and economic development for the Cree.

Today, there is a shortfall of 2,000 new homes. I know that you were aware of the situation, but how will we respond to this breach of their human rights and their treaty rights? We have to find a solution to this problem. I understand that ministers are making every effort possible. I understand that the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation has worked diligently with the government of Quebec on behalf of the Inuit, but there has been a breach of the agreement as regards housing for the James Bay Cree. Who is responsible for the agreement as it applies to the Cree in James Bay?

The Chair: Ms. Bernier.

Ms. Chantal Bernier: I took note of your question. As I said at the outset, I cannot answer a question that is outside of my jurisdiction. But I noted your question and I will transmit it to my colleague who is responsible for the Chisasibi community, namely for that particular region of Quebec, and he will be very pleased to mail you his answer.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: I don't want a response by mail, Madam Chair. Who is the person responsible?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: If you want to hear a bureaucrat from the department specifically on that issue, the regional general director, Mr. Jérôme Lapierre, is the person responsible for Chisasibi.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Very well. We will continue to deal with the James Bay agreement because we are trustees. I have a problem with this agreement because the Cree are right: they are short 2,000 homes. Earlier, I was surprised when you said to the committee that it is not a matter of money, but rather a matter of perception. But the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement is very important for the development of the northern part of my riding. This agreement is an extrajudiciary settlement which happened long before the land claims of 1986, way before. It requires special initiatives geared to the unique situation of Northern Quebec. This means that Canada's special undertakings require special initiatives for their implementation.

Currently, Madam Chair, we are in a crisis situation, and when there is a crisis in the world whether it be in Haiti or the Gulf War in 15 or 18 seconds, our F-18s are dispatched at a cost of $3 billion.

• 1200

We have been talking about the Aboriginal situation for years. We had the Cree-Naskapi Commission, reports and studies, but I still don't know how we will solve all the problems of the Cree, the problems of the Aboriginal people and the Inuit within the next few months, this year or in future years. You said that you had money. Tell us how much money you have and we will solve these problems.

[English]

The Chair: Ms. Bernier, and that will be the final question.

[Translation]

Ms. Chantal Bernier: If I gave the impression that I feel I have enough money, but that it is not a question of money, I would like to correct it immediately. What I meant to say is that it is not just a question of money. We have a budget of $177 million, as I said. We had $137 million to which we added $40 million. Twenty million dollars come from an internal budgetary realignment. We were so concerned about the issue that we wanted to increase the funds available. We have reallocated our budget items in order to increase the housing budget, without any outside increase. Furthermore, we have been able to add $20 million to Gathering Strength action plan. As I said, it's not just a matter of money, but I don't want to give you the impression that money is not an issue.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Bernier.

Mr. Chatters, for the next round, three minutes please.

Mr. David Chatters (Athabasca, Canadian Alliance): I had a couple of comments and would ask some of the witnesses to respond.

I think when the particular community that is having this crisis with mould was before us and we listened to them, it became strikingly evident that there seemed to be a real lack of maintenance in the houses we were talking about. These houses were 20 years old or younger and it seemed, to some of us at least, it would be unreasonable that these houses were in such a condition that they had to be burned down and new houses built after only that length of time, when many of us have lived, and are still living, in houses that are 60 and 70 years old and in good repair. So it seems strange to me that there isn't more emphasis put on maintenance.

This issue has been before the committee before. In fact, we interviewed, and some of us visited, examples of housing co-ops that were operating very well for aboriginal housing where inspections were regularly made and seminars were put on to teach residents of those houses how to fix a leaky tap under the sink, or how to fix a forced-air furnace that wasn't working properly. All of these things seem to be dismally lacking.

My other issue is on the RRAP program with CMHC. I've had no end of problems with this RRAP program. It's a wonderful program, well intended and could do terrific good, but I constantly have phone calls from people who have accessed the program where substandard work is done, or the work isn't completed. There are accusations of inspectors getting kickbacks from contractors, all of these things. I've contacted CMHC over and over again and nothing ever seems to change. It seems to just keep going and going and nothing happens.

The rhetoric we've heard this morning all around this issue hasn't changed in the seven years I've been here. It continues to be the same. I don't understand why some of these issues aren't dealt with. Why hasn't CMHC prosecuted contractors who continue to do substandard work or don't complete the work the contract requires?

I leave it for anybody who would comment on those things.

The Chair: Ms. Taylor.

Ms. Deborah Taylor: First, I would clarify that the contract that exists is between the homeowner and the contractor. CMHC is not a party to that contract.

Mr. David Chatters: That's the answer I always get, and it's not solving the problems.

Ms. Deborah Taylor: What we do is we work with the contractors. We do have research and information bulletins we provide to people on how to hire a contractor. This is totally stand-alone, not specific to the RRAP program; it's just to educate the general public about what to watch out for and how to be careful when they are contracting.

• 1205

The Chair: Mr. Godfrey.

Mr. John Godfrey (Don Valley West, Lib.): I'd like to follow up on two points. The first is on on-reserve housing. The challenge I'm having is with some numbers. I'm looking at basic departmental data from 1999. First of all, I hear Madam Bernier saying we have 4,400 families on reserve every year being created, and we're short by 2,600 new houses. So I see a demographic pattern like that. Then I go to the numbers and compare the numbers of new dwelling units built and the number of renovated dwelling units undertaken. In 1998 there were 3,345 new units built and by 1998-99 there were only 2,600. I look at the renovations in 1988-89 and there were 4,358, and it goes down in 1998-99 to 2,864.

We have this growing population. And then I read that we're actually having a higher percentage of adequate housing over time, we're actually going up in adequate housing, and that water and sewage on reserve is improving. So I'm trying to reconcile the population going up, which leaves a shortfall of new housing, and there is reduced construction and reduced renovation, and yet better outcomes. How do you do that?

The Chair: Ms. Bernier.

Ms. Chantal Bernier: Bill whispers, “It's not easy”.

I think it's a matter of interpreting all this data. We are making progress on the quality of dwellings. We are not making the same progress on the issue of overcrowding. And the challenge is this tremendous baby boom right now on reserve, which is why you see, then, an improvement of the quality of the houses, but not a new construction pace that follows the family formation pace.

Mr. John Godfrey: On the demographics, has the baby boom just started since 1988-89, or is it a constant? Is the growth pattern constant over the last decade?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: First nations have always had a higher demographic rate than we do.

Do you know when the baby boom started?

Mr. Bill Montour: The baby boom would have started, I would suggest, in the sixties, as the people of my generation started forming families, and it's been more and more like that since then.

Mr. John Godfrey: So that's a constant?

Mr. Bill Montour: Yes. And then, also, in 1985 Bill C-31 created a number of new Indians who come back to the communities and this put another load on the housing stock that's already on the reserves.

Mr. John Godfrey: I don't wish to put words in your mouth, but if I keep projecting the trends forward, understanding that there's going to be a shortfall for the new household formations, and if I just build in the current amount of money and put an annual incremental whatever it would be, 3% or something like that, what's going to happen to these statistics over time? Will the percentage of adequate units start to dive on current trend, or is it going to continue to improve on current trend?

The Chair: Mr. Smith.

Mr. Fred Smith (Policy Adviser, Infrastructure and Housing, Community Development, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development): I would think that the number of adequate units is going to increase, because first nations are doing more in the way of renovations, and renovations are an easy way of bringing houses up to standard. So we anticipate an increase in the percentage of adequate houses, but, yes, there is going to be a growing gap between the number of houses and the number of households.

Mr. John Godfrey: Maybe this question is for Mr. Robar, who has been quiet, but what I would like to do with the balance of my time is to get back to the moisture problem. It would seem from hearing the presentations that if there was one single issue that seems to dominate health, housing, the whole thing, it seems to be the moisture problem. I also hear from Mr. Montour this a design issue, it's an R-2000 issue.

• 1210

The thing I'm still trying to understand is, first of all, was there a design flaw at the beginning because there wasn't a better air circulation system, certainly not one which anticipated putting two households into one unit? Is that being overcome by some kind of design response? Tightly sealed houses are causing this problem, as I understand it.

Piggy-backing onto Mr. Chatters' question, we know we can at least anticipate this moisture problem through design, retrofitting, putting in a bigger air exchanger, or whatever the heck is required. I hear you're giving out all kinds of information to people.

On the ground, is there some way there can be a regular, non-intrusive, non-authoritarian intervention so you could actually see how people are doing? When you see a practice that is clearly overwhelming the air exchange system, like boiling huge pots of water, can you actually get ahead of the curve so you're dealing with less of a problem down the road?

One is the design question and one is a social education question.

The Chair: I'd also like to remind my colleagues we are now in the three-minute round.

Mr. John Godfrey: Sorry.

The Chair: A very short answer, please.

Mr. John Godfrey: It starts after these questions.

Mr. James Robar (Manager of Housing Technology, Research Division, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation): They are very good questions. I think we have to be careful ascribing moisture problems just to technology and modern building practices.

A well-built home, to a modern standard, after some period of time will experience a need for repair and moisture problems. As was mentioned, maintenance is a key part. I think a house meeting a building code, be it a national building code or a first nations code, can perform to the conditions for which it was designed. Appropriate conditions for the local environment and the local community have to be taken into consideration.

For example, there has to be a question of why we build basements. One of the contributors to moisture in modern-built, well-ventilated housing is the influx of moisture through the basement and from high water levels.

I think another aspect in modern housing to take into consideration is lifestyle, with the amount of moisture generated within the house both from occupation practices and occupancy levels.

In terms of on the ground, I'd like to comment on your question about on the ground and what is being done in a practical way. A reference has been given to the four agencies working together to advance this. One of the strategies is to raise the knowledge within the leadership across the country to address moisture and mould problems and indoor air quality problems. To that end, over the last two years there have been leaders from tribal councils and communities, approximately 500 of them across the country, who have attended one- or two-day sessions to understand these issues.

Furthermore, there have been training sessions where approximately 50 aboriginal technical leaders have been identified to become the leading edge of the knowledge foundation and for first nations to take this knowledge back into their regions and communities. There have been a number of significant demonstrations of alternate building practices.

Mould and moisture are not something that happen like a tornado or an ice storm. As we all know, we live in houses and it develops over time. It is a ubiquitous thing and has to be addressed. It's our expectation, through this capacity for development at the local level of appropriate approaches to the maintenance and repair, that an ownership by the occupant will develop. I think that will contribute to improved quality.

• 1215

The Chair: If I could just intervene here, from what we've heard and my own experience, I've always said a lot of these great programs do not move forward because of overcrowding in the houses. I think that's something we can't get away from. We will not solve any of these problems, whether it be renovation programs, mould, or all the demographics John Godfrey was talking about, until we deal with the overcrowded situation in our communities, whether on reserve, off reserve, or above or below the 60th parallel.

I think that's the main crux of the housing situation. We cannot deal with the overcrowded situation as it is right now. Therefore, all these other problems are symptoms.

Mr. Marceau, I'll give you an opportunity.

[Translation]

Mr. Richard Marceau: John Godfrey asked the question that I wanted to ask.

[English]

The Chair: Okay.

Monsieur St-Julien, you have three minutes.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: When we invite people from the North to come here, Aboriginal, Inuit, it is their grand chiefs who come to meet us. We have met with representatives of the Inuit, Grand Chief Ted Moses, and the Chief of Chisasibi, Ms. Violet Pachanos. They appeared before the committee. For years now, we have been talking about the crisis in Chisasibi; it is mentioned here, on page 119 of the Cree-Naskapi Commission report under the heading of Housing.

How is it that you are here today? I am just wondering. Where are the deputy ministers? Where have all these people gone, the people who are accountable for what it's happening? Now I recognize that you do your work effectively. You are assistant deputy ministers, directors, but where are your bosses? Are they all in Florida or somewhere else?

[English]

The Chair: Ms. Bernier.

[Translation]

Ms. Chantal Bernier: There is only one person above me and that is the deputy minister. Assistant deputy ministers have the highest sectoral rank. Below the deputy minister, in some departments, there is also an assistant deputy minister; that is the case for the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. However, each sector is run by assistant deputy ministers, such as myself.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Perfect. Madam Chair, my question deals with the important matter of Chisasibi. We have been talking about it for years. Studies have been made, which you have followed up. But yet again, I find it strange that some people are not appearing before us.

The minister will appear before us, of course. We will see him. He is to meet with the Chisasibi and Eastmain communities on the weekend. I will be at Kujjuarapik.

However, I wonder because there is a crisis situation. It's a crisis that is currently being felt. For the First Nations, the Inuit of Nunavut and Nunavik, there is a shortage of 12,000 housing units in Canada. This is a crisis situation. I want to tell you that when you go there and meet with these families, the children come to you and ask you “You, the Members of Parliament, what sort of forked tongue are you speaking with?” When I go and visit them I leave with tears in the eyes. It's very sad to see the situation of these families from a health perspective among others. We talk about the quality of health...

I don't understand why your bosses are not here. I know that you do your work well. We agree on that. We are all servants of the State. I am just as much as you. But where are your bosses? Why aren't they here to speak on behalf of the First Nations, the Inuit of Canada, the Inuits of Nunavut or Nunavik? This is a crisis, a real crisis and I insist upon this. Don't come to me in six months with more studies because then I will be really angry? I am warning you.

The Chair: Madam Bernier.

Ms. Chantal Bernier: If you are asking me why the deputy minister is not here, it's simply because when we received your invitation we felt it was appropriate to send the assistant deputy minister who is directly responsible for the issue and who holds the highest position second to the deputy minister. We thought that it would be a more adequate way to answer your questions, that's all.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: A very polite response, Madam Chair. But I do not find it amusing at all.

[English]

Mr. John Finlay (Oxford, Lib.): Madam Chair, time is up; three minutes is up. Thank you.

The Chair: I understand the point you are trying to make.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Could you please put me down for the next round?

[English]

The Chair: I don't have anyone from the opposition asking for three minutes, so I have Monsieur Bagnell.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Could you please put my name down for the next round of questions?

[English]

The Chair: I have Mr. Bagnell, please.

• 1220

Mr. Larry Bagnell (Yukon, Lib.): I thought your response to the question from Mr. Godfrey—and I think Mr. Marceau was going to ask the same thing—was a bit bizarre, in that we talk about the mould as a lifestyle. From the presentation we saw, this problem seemed to me to be rampant in this particular village and maybe others.

Does anyone in this room have a house where there's mould? I don't think it's rampant in southern Canada, and we use lots of water in our lifestyles, and probably more, because some of us have more access to it. It's not in tanks, as it is in aboriginal communities.

But to get more positive and maybe reiterate, now that the crisis has come up, and people often react when things are in the public, have you reviewed all the houses where there is mould, and have you looked at the technological changes that should have been or could be made in this particular village, and maybe have a plan to do it in the other places?

The Chair: Mr. Robar.

Mr. James Robar: We've not reviewed all the houses that have mould in this village, or indeed wherever it occurs.

To comment on the general incidence of mould, the largest study on mould, a national study, was completed in the late 1980s by Health Canada and showed a large variation across the country. But the incidence of significant mould in Canadian housing ranged from 10% in regions like the prairies to around 30% in other areas.

We know from other studies that CMHC has done that, for example, in finished basements in Ottawa, to give you a reference, in a survey of 405 houses, approximately 50% have a moisture problem, and approximately half of those have a significant mould problem. So about 25% of finished basements in Ottawa homes have that.

In surveys of first nations communities, we've done an intensive examination of, for example, the Roseau River community, south of Winnipeg, that indicates that all the factors I referred to—the design, the repair, the maintenance and lifestyle, and the Red River flood certainly contributed as well—are contributors to the incidence of mould in housing.

Mr. Larry Bagnell: Okay.

The Chair: Okay, Mr. St-Julien.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Thank you, Madam Chair.

This breather allowed me to calm down somewhat. We are looking for a solution, but the worst situation is in Chisasibi. The Government of Canada in 1982 undertook a study on implementing the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement. The study proposed a special government initiative in order to promote the development of the Cree community. We know that has never happened. I have been keeping notes on this issue for several years; I have those from 1985-1986. The agreement that we signed, of which we are the trustees, guarantees access to housing for Inuit living in Cree communities. That is found in the James Bay agreement. And I quote:

29.0.42 The Agreement insures that the Fort George Inuit will receive new housing for all families pursuant to the housing programs for Indians or for the North. The number of Inuit housing provided must not be below the ratio of Cree and Inuit to the population of Fort George [...]

Today, it is the Chisasibi community.

[...] and must respect the Cree housing program.

My question is this: when will you sign an agreement with the Cree in order to provide them with housing units as stipulated in the Bay James and Northern Quebec Agreement and which they need in order to achieve self-government? If Inuit families who live in Cree communities have the right to decent housing, don't you think that Cree families are entitled to it too?

[English]

The Chair: Ms. Bernier.

[Translation]

Ms. Chantal Bernier: As I said a few moments ago, it would be completely inappropriate for me to answer a question on a topic that is a colleague's responsibility. I would be pleased to refer your question to my colleague, and send you an answer in writing.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: If you send a letter, could you put the person in the envelope along with the letter?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: With pleasure.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Mr. Godfrey.

• 1225

Mr. John Godfrey: This question is to Ms. Taylor. I know CMHC has developed the notion of core housing need, and this is a fairly standard definition that is shared by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. My understanding is that it has three components: adequate, meaning that it doesn't require major repairs; suitable, in that there is enough space for every family member; and affordable, in that it doesn't take more than 30% of your pre-tax income, leaving enough left over for all the other needs of life. This is what we use in our major cities across the country to define “affordable”.

When you do your surveys of aboriginal housing, whether it's on reserve or in northern regions, wherever it is, do you use that same model, or do you have to adjust it on either the income side or anything else? Is that a model that is applicable or that allows us to make comparisons with different groups of Canadians?

Ms. Deborah Taylor: Yes, that model is applicable to all groups of Canadians. There may, however, be a difference in the response rate. The data is gathered through the census and through a special add-on, the aboriginal people's survey. There will be another one coming up with the 2001 census, so we would hope to gather new data through that mechanism.

But in terms of answering your question, yes, it is the same model that's used, and so the statistics that were referred to earlier regarding aboriginal people and core housing needs on and off reserve would be relative.

Mr. John Godfrey: Thank you.

The Chair: I have only Liberals asking questions now, and I want to make sure that Mr. Vellacott has a chance to deal with his motion before we lose quorum.

I have Mr. St-Julien and Mr. Finlay still wanting to ask questions, so I'll let Mr. St-Julien—

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Would there be the possibility of proceeding with the motion right away if somebody has to leave?

The Chair: Do you want to deal with the motion or ask your question first? I know I have a quorum issue.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Madam Chair, I would like to participate in this round of questions, and have three more minutes. If I do not have any questions, I will still take the three minutes. This is too important a subject to do otherwise, Madam Chair.

At present, we are in a crisis that is almost a global crisis. I have great respect for the people here. They work very hard. I have great respect for them. However, Madam Chair, I do intend to ask other questions. After all, I have three minutes.

[English]

The Chair: Okay, Mr. Marceau.

[Translation]

Mr. Richard Marceau: Madam Chair, we had decided—by consensus, I think—not to engage in partisan comments during committee discussions. This is something on which I fully agree. However, it seems to me that after one 10-minute turn and two three-minute turns Mr. St-Julien has managed to highlight all the points and problems he wanted to bring to our attention.

There are many questions we could ask. However, our witnesses have been subject to a barrage of questions that were not always comfortable, and to which they have provided very satisfactory answers. A number of us now have to leave. Mr. Vellacott has moved a motion. We should perhaps examine that motion, now that everyone has had the opportunity to speak at least once, and some three times, and thank our witnesses for having come here today.

I understand that the situation described by Mr. St-Julien is very urgent. He has made his case well, and persistently. He has put forward passionate, justifiable arguments. I would suggest that, if there are any other questions for people who are unfortunately not here, he should ask the clerk to invite them, as he so obviously wishes to do. And when they appear before us, he can put his questions to them.

[English]

The Chair: We are scheduled for two hours, so I'm sure the witnesses are aware that they were going to be here for that length of time. I just want to make sure we don't lose the quorum so that Mr. Vellacott can deal with his motions. Unfortunately, at our last meeting we ran out of quorum.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Point of order, Madam Chair.

[English]

The Chair: If we can deal with those and get them out of the way, we can go back to dealing with questions.

Mr. St-Julien.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Madam Chair, I do not agree. I have the agenda before me. The agenda indicates that this meeting was to be held from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. I would like to demonstrate team spirit, but I ask you to give me three more minutes during the fourth round, since there is no other item on the agenda. Since this meeting was scheduled from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m., I have every intention of taking advantage of my right to speak for at least three minutes.

• 1230

[English]

The Chair: Yes, I'm very well aware of that, but I want to make sure we don't run out of quorum. So I'm asking the committee if we could deal with Mr. Vellacott's motions now and get on with the questioning, because some members have to leave.

Mr. Godfrey.

Mr. John Godfrey: I think that we can actually do it both ways. Quorum is required to come to some conclusion about Mr. Vellacott's motion. A quorum is not required for Mr. St-Julien to carry on his round of questioning.

The Chair: My point.

Mr. John Godfrey: So I would agree with you. That proposal does not preclude Mr. St-Julien from having a sixth, seventh, and eighth round of questioning.

The Chair: Yes, I'm fully aware of that. I want to be fair to both sides. Unfortunately, at the last meeting we were not able to deal with Mr. Vellacott's motions because we ran out of quorum.

Mr. Vellacott, I'll give you a few minutes to deal with that. Then we'll go back to asking questions of the witnesses—if they'll bear with us for a few minutes. Thank you.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: I will put my motion, then. It's before us in French and English. The intent of it is that I feel we need to get back to these people, to respond in some way. I'll read it off now. It simply says:

I move that, in response to their written request of February 23,

—this is a month and a bit ago, at least, almost six weeks—

AFN Veterans Coordinator Larry Whiteduck, Vice-Chief Perry Bellegarde and Grand Chief Howard Anderson be invited to address the committee to present the findings and recommendations of the National Roundtable on First Nations Veterans on April 19, 2001.

That was moved on March 23, and it's being translated as well. So I move that, seconded by my colleague here, David Chatters.

The Chair: Any questions?

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: My basic explanation, I guess, is that I feel we need to respond to them in some way. The clerk has no mandate to do anything—to say yea or nay, or over to another committee, or anything. As a courtesy, I think we need to get some kind of a timely response back to these people—or anybody else who writes to us. That's what I'm trying to promote here.

The Chair: Mr. Godfrey.

Mr. John Godfrey: My view is that we should ask the clerk to respond to these people, and say that this would not be an appropriate time for them to come because we're engaged in other work. It might be useful for us to consult the Standing Committeeon Veterans Affairs, which might have a prior responsibility for this question.

I wouldn't suggest we turn them down completely, but given the shortness of time we have to consider other issues, I don't think this is the time to do a one-off, simply because someone has asked us to. So I suggest we ask the clerk to respond, saying that we do take their concerns very seriously—however, this is not the time. But we will be consulting with the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs to find out the most appropriate venue for its ultimate consideration.

The Chair: Mr. Finlay, you had something to add to that?

Mr. John Finlay: I was going to suggest that we certainly have to find out whether the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs will in fact be front and centre on this problem, and not AANR. I agree with Mr. Godfrey—we should do that before we pass this motion.

The Chair: Mr. Vellacott.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: In effect, my point is what the two Johns said: is it appropriate that we send a letter to the chair of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, urging them to take up this matter and give it serious consideration?

The Chair: Yes. I think it would be fair for them to have first crack at addressing the issue, because this falls under that committee. So if everyone agrees, we will have the clerk draft a letter to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs asking them to respond to the request first, before we deal with it at this committee.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Is that the intent of what you're saying, John? We're saying “Hey, we're not just playing hot potato on this”; we're saying “Please take it up”. Is that what you're asking them?

Mr. John Godfrey: Yes. “Please take it up—we think this is an appropriate issue for you, and we want to give you the first chance to respond to it”. If they turn us down, then we'll have to rethink.

The Chair: So we'll write the letter to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. Once we get their response, we'll deal with it depending on the response.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: And we will inform these parties that this is what we've done, and that we appreciate their approaching us. Should they expect a response from that committee directly, or should we then get back to them again?

• 1235

The Chair: When we write the letter we would copy it to them, so they would know this has been addressed first to the committee responsible for veterans' benefits.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: I just don't want them to feel we're playing a shuffle on them. They should know who they'll get a response from eventually. Did that committee get an original request from them? Do we know that?

The Chair: We will check into that.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Maybe they got the same letter we did.

The Chair: Not that we're aware of.

Mr. John Godfrey: We should have an informal consultation with them, and then write the letter.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: I appreciate that this is being dealt with. I think these people have some good information, though I don't know the background of it. I would be keen to hear it some day, but if this is felt to be more appropriate, then it's okay—as long as we deal with it in a manner that doesn't look as if we're passing the potato back and forth. They shouldn't feel they've just been given the bureaucratic run-around.

The Chair: All right, thank you very much.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Now do we vote, or is it just by consensus?

(Motion agreed to)

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. St-Julien.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Bernier, could we obtain a complete list of communities that have a backlog, the communities that do not have enough homes for this year?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: I had a word with Mr. Smith. The statistics we have are those on communities with the largest overcrowding. We could certainly send them to you. We also have statistics on communities that have the greatest quality housing problems. We could send you those as well.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Including the James Bay Agreement and the Cree and Inuit communities.

Ms. Chantal Bernier: Since they do not come under us, they are not obliged to provide reports to us. It would therefore be more difficult to give you those statistics. In fact, we do not even have them.

[English]

Does anybody have them?

Mr. Fred Smith: We don't have them.

[Translation]

Ms. Chantal Bernier: Unfortunately, we do not have statistics on those communities.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Will you make some effort to get them from some part of Canada?

Ms. Chantal Bernier: I will ask the region to give us the statistics that they have.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Thank you.

My last question, Madam Chair, is on health and Health Canada. In your introduction, you state that: "substandard housing contributes to substandard health," and "housing is an important component of preventing and protecting public health." We know that at present—not only because of the crisis, but for several years—tuberculosis, asthma and social problems are becoming increasingly associated with people in such housing.

Homeless programs are being implemented in all of Canada's major cities. However, there are no programs for homeless among the Cree, because Cree families welcome friends and members of the community into their own homes during the winter. They are often ready to have 20, 22 or even 23 people in their houses. That is the First Nations' attitude. The Inuit of Canada give members of the community a chance to shelter inside their houses, instead of leaving them out in the cold. Things are better during the summer, because they go to fishing camps, as do non-aboriginal people.

I find it odd that Health Canada... Could you give us statistics on Chisasibi? Have you gone to Chisasibi to meet with Dr. Harris, and try to find solutions to these problems? Reports have been produced on the current situation. Has Health Canada personnel gone to Chisasibi to discuss these issues with Violet Pachanos, the Chief, and with the hospital staff, particularly Dr. Harris, in an attempt to find solutions? When was your last visit there?

[English]

The Chair: You are at your three minutes—

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: —so I'll get Mr. Finlay to ask his question first. Then maybe we'll get Mr. Conn to respond later.

Mr. Finlay.

Mr. John Finlay: Thank you, Madam Chair.

As an old school teacher, I have a very simple problem: I want to know whether mould is spelled mold, or mould. If both are correct, then I stand corrected. Health seems to think it's mold, and aboriginal affairs seems to think there's a “u” in it...so international convention.

• 1240

The Chair: Mr. Robar.

Mr. James Robar: It's established by the World Health Organization. It's spelled mold. Mould is a Canadianization of that. I think there's a trend in government documents to move to an international spelling.

Mr. John Finlay: Very helpful answer, thank you very much.

My other question, is that on the last page of the health presentation, the current initiatives.... Incidentally, I took a little black mould off the caulking on my bathtub yesterday morning in the shower. Having an air-conditioned house, I realized that opening the windows is probably the right thing to do now and again. You said:

We are currently developing standardized strategies and protocols. These are being developed in consultation with the stakeholders. The goal...a national consultation with community housing and health practitioners has just been completed to help meet this goal.

Can you give me a little more detail on that? It sounds promising. Who was involved, and who's going to report?

The Chair: Mr. Conn.

Mr. Keith Conn: Yes, thank you.

First to Mr. St-Julien's question of visiting the communities, again we're in a similar predicament as DIAND in terms of the role and function of Health Canada within the Cree communities under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

Those activities—responsibilities, roles, if you will—of inspection and visits rest primarily with the Cree Board of Health and Social Services and/or the provincial health department for the assessments. However, Health Canada, I can say, is willing to assist or participate in providing some advice, guidance, or assistance in terms of the housing inspections and the whole issue around education protocol development. That's where we can play a practical role.

In terms of Mr. Marceau's earlier question around how did it get so bad so fast and why did it take so long before there was intervention, well, that's a very serious question and a good one.

In response to Mr. Finlay's question, the issue around the protocol and strategy that's currently being developed I think will respond to the issues at large broadly—nationally. We do have issues of mould in other parts of the country.

So the intention of the protocol once implemented was to provide that enhancement of awareness and education at the community level for the occupants in terms of a better understanding of the causes and effects of mould. This in our mind would create a prevention of occurrence.

Also, another intent of the protocol is to provide consistency and a scientific approach in terms of the actual inspection across all communities, and also to define clearly a communication strategy for all stakeholders for a faster response—a more immediate response to the problem.

Of course, as we mentioned earlier, building capacity is a critical issue. Building capacity at a community level in dealing with the cause of the problem in communities broadly is the intent of the protocol. Of course the bottom line—more importantly—is recognizing the various roles, responsibilities, and mandates of the occupant themselves, the housing program at the local level, health, public health, nurses, environmental health officers, and first nation inspectors to ensure that there's clarity on the specific roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders, so that a team approach is applied in terms of prevention, education, and remediation of the issues.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. John Finlay: Thank you for that complete answer.

The Chair: Mr. St-Julien.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Madam Chair, I plan to table a letter dated April 2, 2001, which follows my letters of October 5 and December 11, 2000, regarding Cree housing in James Bay. The Hon. Robert Nault, who signed the letter, stated that “he is well aware of the housing situation of the Cree community in James Bay.”

Mr. Conn said that this comes under provincial jurisdiction. But I have an excellent answer here, which I had translated the day before yesterday, the copy of which I received this morning.

• 1245

It states: “However, this is part of a more general housing context. In the meantime, we must maintain our new relations with the Cree, and our discussions with them are progressing. As you know, I have appointed Mr. Jean Gagné as chief negotiator for the federal government.”

Then, there is a reference to the letter of October 5. Earlier on, I mentioned section 28.8 of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, the Joint Economic and Community Development Committee. This provides the basis for my next question.

The letter then states: “...and the minimal progress accomplished by the tripartite committee. You must be aware that this is largely due to the fact that Quebec unilaterally withdrew from the committee in 1978. All the provisions of Chapter 28 clearly indicate that all three parties are responsible for the economic and community development of the Cree in the James Bay area.”

Here is my question. You talk about the provincial government, but the James Bay agreement clearly states that Parliament is a trustee. The Cree-Naskapi Commission is in place, and comes under government jurisdiction. Even if the other party is not at the table, a solution must be found.

I am asking Members of the Committee for their unanimous consent, so that I may table my letter in both of Canada's official languages in an attempt to find that solution.

[English]

The Chair: One moment.

Mr. Vellacott.

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: In terms of jurisdiction, I think the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement is only to do with provincial government in Quebec. What does it have to do with the federal government?

The Chair: If I may intervene, when we started this inquiry into housing, we stated that we were going to deal with it on a national basis. I recall from the very first meeting that when we talk about dealing with one crisis, we tend to stop looking at the global picture. We stated very specifically that we were going to deal with a national housing crisis.

Mr. St-Julien, I know that you're trying to push your own constituents, but I have to remind you that in taking on this issue, we wanted to give a national picture on the housing crisis. I know it's a very difficult situation with the Cree-Naskapi. The commission has asked to appear before this committee. Maybe we can deal with that individually. As Ms. Bernier pointed out, there are a lot more issues to deal with than just housing and money. That is a topic all on its own.

But I want to keep the focus on the national housing crisis, as to how we can deal with this, what solutions can we suggest at the national level. We've had presentations from AFN, we've had presentations from ITC to give us a national picture. We wanted to give the committee members an opportunity to speak to the officials, depending on what questions might have arisen from those two different witnesses.

You're dealing with a very specific issue to do with a land claims agreement, which I think is a side issue when we deal with the national housing crisis. I can understand where you're coming from, but we do have a request to deal with the Cree-Naskapi commission report. We could deal with some of these issues if we do consent to see the commission before this committee.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Madam Chair, I agree with you, but I do not agree when you say that this is for the voters in my riding. This is not about voters, it is about awareness of all of Canada's Aboriginal and Inuit people. I want to table this letter because the minister said: “However, this is part of a broader housing context. At this time, I simply do not have the resources to deal with that broader context. We are now formulating detailed plans for implementation of commitments made in the Throne Speech.”

I am talking about the broader context as well. I cannot say that I am proud of what's going on; I am in a bad mood. When we say that this all started with Chisasibi and the James Bay agreement, I find myself wondering. I have respect for those people. They are competent and they have leadership, but they cannot clearly state that they are part of Canada. But the Cree are part of Canada. The James Bay agreement is the first of its kind. It dates back to November 11, 1975. How is it that we are unable to deal with the problem in Chisasibi, and with the problems the First Nations people and the Inuit are having. We are trying... but I do not understand.

• 1250

The Government of Canada is prepared to meet its UN commitments, but not the commitments it has made to its Aboriginal, Cree and Inuit friends? What are we doing in this country? We are conducting all kinds of studies, including the Royal Commission on Aboriginal peoples, but we have to find a solution. I have highlighted Chisasibi because it is the best example of what's going on in Canada. What's going on in Chisasibi right now is worst than the Gulf War. We are talking about the health of our friends, our own people. Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. St-Julian. I know you're frustrated, but so are all of us who are trying to deal with this very difficult issue.

I know there are good programs out there, and I think, if we work with the communities...as we heard from the AFN and ITC, there are good-news stories out there. We hope to be able to provide some suggestions on how to deal with this issue, but a lot of the time I think we get bogged down in individual issues that take the focus away from some of the more positive routes we could be taking.

So I understand your frustrations and I know you have every right to address them. It's just that the people here have already stated that they don't have the authority to answer some of the questions that deal with a very specific agreement.

I don't know if any members have other questions that they would like to bring forth at this time.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Yes, Madam Chair, I have one last question for you.

The Chair: Mr. St-Julien.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Will the following ministers—the minister of Health, the minister for Indian and Northern Affairs, and the minister responsible for the CMHC—come and testify before this committee?

[English]

The Chair: We have draft letters right now asking both ministers to come and address the estimates. The part III estimates have been released, and as we talked about in previous meetings, we will be inviting the ministers to come and address the committee. So draft letters are being worked on, and we will be sending them out as soon as we can—hopefully, this week.

[Translation]

Mr. St-Julien.

Mr. Guy St-Julien: We should not forget the minister of Labour. The situation of homeless people among Aboriginals and Inuit in Canada must be taken into account. We should not forget to also ask Claudette Bradshaw, the minister of Labour, to come and testify.

[English]

The Chair: Point taken.

[Translation]

Mr. Guy St-Julien: Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Mr. Bagnell.

Mr. Larry Bagnell: I'd just like to ask all the witnesses who either read the transcripts from when the Cree were here or were listening on the radio if this has changed anything, if there are going to be any changes as a result of it. And for those who haven't, would they be willing, just in the interest of pursuing truth, to read the transcript—I don't even know if it's out yet—of that meeting, because it might be useful information.

[Translation]

The Chair: Ms. Bernier.

Ms. Chantal Bernier: Yes, I have read the transcripts. I had the opportunity to obtain them in advance, and I have read them fully. The comments I saw in those transcripts are completely in line with the direction we have taken, which is to review our policies and an ongoing effort to improve them.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

Ms. Taylor.

Ms. Deborah Taylor: Yes, we read the transcripts that were provided to us in advance of coming to this meeting. We continue to work with the first nations, including the Cree communities, to provide the programs and the funding we have available, as well as to use the other tools that I described in regard to both aboriginal capacity building and providing information to them. But we work within the means we have and we do the best we can with what the government has approved for us to use.

The Chair: Mr. Conn, would you like to respond to that?

Mr. Keith Conn: I did not read the actual transcripts; I got a debrief of them. But I can say that I've had the pleasure of listening to the presentation by the Grand Council of the Crees in Geneva on this very issue and was face to face with a lot of literature and photographs of the actual situation.

• 1255

Has it helped somewhat in terms of the recent presentations? I think it's accelerated movement in my department in terms of the need for a national strategy and protocol to consider the broad issues across the country: public education, social marketing and supports, and training and capacity development, as I mentioned earlier.

The Chair: Mr. Bagnell.

Mr. Larry Bagnell: I really appreciate that; that's very good.

So, Deborah, your response was that it hasn't made any difference, you're just delivering programs as usual?

Ms. Deborah Taylor: Yes.

The Chair: I'm sorry, I missed that.

Mr. Larry Bagnell: I was just asking Deborah if her answer was that it was business as usual, that it didn't make any difference, and she responded yes.

The Chair: Okay.

Ms. Taylor.

Ms. Deborah Taylor: Yes, I did.

I would add that within the Cree communities in Quebec, we have 1,750 units that I described under our section 95, our non-profit rental program. It was mentioned earlier that as far as inspections and work with the community are concerned, we are working with the first nations—working directly with the Cree first nations as well as all the others I mentioned, the 400 first nations across Canada who are involved in our program.

So we are on the ground level in those communities, and we use those opportunities not just to work with the first nations regarding the obligations that we each have for the housing agreements, but also to provide them with additional information.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Larry Bagnell: Is my time up?

The Chair: Yes.

Mr. John Finlay: Madam Chair, I'm sure you're going to do it, but as parliamentary secretary to the minister, I'm going to take a moment to thank all our witnesses today for a long and strenuous session.

We appreciate your coming very much, and I think you've given us a broad view. When we see people from three departments here we realize that this problem is probably as complex as they come.

We're dealing with provincial jurisdictions, interdepartmental jurisdictions, an Indian Act that we're trying to change, and land claims agreements that call for certain things to happen that don't always happen.

We're in danger, I'm afraid, from some of what I've heard today, of thinking that the problem is all on one side and not on the other, and that if we just wave a magic wand, it will go away. That's not the way the world works and it's not the way this committee can do any good. What you've told us is very helpful. We encourage you to carry on and keep fighting the good fight, because it's only through incremental steps that we're going to get there. We're not going to have a magic wand for anyone.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Finlay.

On behalf of the committee, I would also like to thank you for coming to address us today. I know we all have to work together to deal with this issue, and I'm sure this isn't the last time you'll be addressing this topic before the committee.

I would also like to remind committee members that on Thursday, April 5, we will be addressed by Mr. David Oulton, head of the Climate Change Secretariat, so that will be our next briefing.

Thank you again to all the witnesses who were here before us for answering all the questions that were given out by the committee members.

The meeting is adjourned.