SCYR Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Sub-Committee on Children and Youth at Risk of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Wednesday, May 22, 2002

¹

1545

The chair (Mr. John Godfrey (Don Valley West, Lib.))

Mr. Ghislain Picard (Regional Vice-Chief, Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador)

The Chair

Mr. Ghislain Picard

¹

1550

¹

1555

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ)

Mr. Ghislain Picard

º

1600

Ms. Monique Guay

Mr. Ghislain Picard

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui (Coordinator, Early Childhood, First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission)

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Mr. Ghislain Picard

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Ms. Monique Guay

º

1605

The Chair

Ms. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.)

Mr. Ghislain Picard

Ms. Anita Neville

Mr. Ghislain Picard

Ms. Anita Neville

Mr. Ghislain Picard

º

1610

Ms. Anita Neville

Mr. Ghislain Picard

Ms. Anita Neville

The Chair

º

1615

Mr. Ghislain Picard

º

1620

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

The Chair

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

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Mr. Alan Tonks

º

1625

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Mr. Alan Tonks

Mr. Ghislain Picard

Mr. Alan Tonks

Mr. Ghislain Picard

º

1630

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Mr. Jules Picard (Coordinator of Social Services, First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission)

º

1635

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Marjolaine Sioui

º

1640

Ms. Monique Guay

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

The Chair

Mr. Ghislain Picard

º

1645

The Chair

Mr. Ghislain Picard

The Chair

---

CANADA

Sub-Committee on Children and Youth at Risk of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

---

NUMBER 026

l

1st SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Wednesday, May 22, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹  (1545)  

[Translation]

    The chair (Mr. John Godfrey (Don Valley West, Lib.)): I want to thank our witnesses for having come. I know it is always complicated to come here, especially from such far away places. We are delighted to see you again after all of the negotiations, but it was essential that you be with us this afternoon. We do apologize about the vote. The votes do complicate our lives considerably.

    This afternoon we will be hearing representatives from the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador. We shall be hearing from three people, whose names are on the list. Mr. Picard, are you going to start? Have you decided amongst yourselves on the order of the speakers?

    Mr. Ghislain Picard (Regional Vice-Chief, Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador): With your permission, I will be making the main presentation, but when we get to our dialogue, I may ask Ms. Sioui or Mr. Jules Picard to answer certain questions.

    The Chair: Excellent, thank you for your brief. This is very pretty; I like this design.

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, members of the committee, and guests.

[English]

    I would like to thank you for inviting me here today so I may share with you the most important strides first nations in Quebec have made in taking charge of the delivery of services and programs for the members of their nations, particularly those programs aimed at improving the lives of our children. As first nations, we have consistently argued that we have the inherent right to manage our own affairs. We have always said the most effective programs and services are those that are conceived, developed, and delivered by the community.

    In the past decade, the first nations communities in Quebec have invested considerable effort towards creating and developing local delivery mechanisms in several areas. We have always maintained that no single sector, no single program, no single government ministry could single-handedly solve the many social and economic problems facing our nations. It is our belief that along with these rights, we have the responsibility to ensure that all programs not only meet the fundamental needs of our people, but respect the unique traditions, values, and cultures of each nation and each community. In Quebec we have also created regional structures to come to the assistance of communities, if requested, to facilitate the development and integration of criteria and guidelines, and to act as liaison between communities and stakeholders.

    I would like to mention that a brief has been prepared that contains more details.

    There are ten first nations in the province of Quebec. We each have our own language, our own traditions and histories, our own cultures and values. In Quebec the vast majority of aboriginal people are members of the First Nations of Quebec, and the vast majority of them live within their communities. This has meant, in effect, that a strong community-based approach is the most effective way of providing services.

    We are as different and distinct from each other as one European nation is from another. Like the European nations, we have created regional structures to serve our common needs. In Quebec many of these structures have been grouped under the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador. To date several commissions have been created to facilitate the development of services in the fields of health, social services and early childhood development, employment and training, economic development, and education. Although each commission has received its own specific mandate, they share in common the following objectives and goals: to facilitate the creation and development of delivery systems in the communities; to provide technical and management support in the areas of development training and research; to promote the exchange of ideas, innovations, and practices; to provide a forum for individuals, communities, and nations to voice their concerns and to share their vision; to serve as a liaison between members, communities, and other interested stakeholders; finally, to assist in the development of effective accountability measures, not only for stakeholders, but for members, and to provide technical support when requested by communities.

    Fundamental to this system is the formal recognition that each nation, each community has the right to determine its own needs and priorities and the right to maintain its autonomy in matters relating to programs, and this includes the right not to be a member of any of the commissions. I would like to stress, however, that our commissions have proved to be successful in grouping together many of the first nations communities. They have fostered a network of mutual support, the creation of new expertise that respects the particularities faced by each community and each nation. Their expertise and innovations have been recognized and applauded by several government departments and officials.

    In the area of programs specifically targeted to children and their families many notable advances and innovations have taken place. Among them are integration of child care and head start programs with the provincial Centres de la petite enfance; development of culturally appropriate prevention programs in the areas of health and education; creation of special education services as part of a pilot project; increased research, training and capacity building for community workers and members.

¹  (1550)  

[Translation]

    These are to name but a few. There are many more services and innovations that have been developed. Unfortunately, all too often many initiatives are funded as short-term pilot projects and although they have proven to be successful and are recognized as such by government officials, they are often discontinued since they cannot be funded under existing national frameworks. The rigidity of criteria and lack of funding continue to be one of the principle findings in consultations, surveys and evaluations. Our evaluations and consultations have also found the following points to be common in many sectors and services. These include:

    The process that has evolved is the outgrowth of First Nations exercising their inherent rights to manage and deliver services and programs intended to best serve their members.

    One cannot develop “wall-to-wall” coverage through a national framework: key principles remain flexibility, local control over delivery; regional consolidation of shared administrative responsibilities; development of evaluative and training tools regionally based on local realities.

    The real process of integrating services and delivery is taking place at the local and community level. This integration involves many partners other than federal departments.

    New innovative strategies are also being developed at the community level and often are unique to a community or nation.

    The principles of flexibility, community-driven program delivery supported by clear, coherent guiding principles and objectives have proven to be effective in Quebec. This has allowed for cross-sector integration and the creation of partnerships between departments of both federal and provincial governments. This has been recognized by many federal government officials in Quebec.

    The gains and expertise that have been acquired by First Nations in Quebec must be maintained and incorporated in any new framework, to put it simply: “Don't throw the baby out with the bath water”.

    There is a need to harmonize criteria and reporting procedures between federal departments while maintaining national guiding principles and objectives.

    The process of devolution has meant costs savings for federal and provincial governments, yet funding levels for services have remained stagnant for First Nations while our population, demand and inflation have continued to rise. This is in sharp contrast to existing services and programs for non-aboriginal non-government organizations such as child care centres. The principle of passing on those cost savings to the First Nations needs to be explored further.

    Many of the innovations and solutions to the challenges facing First Nations will come from a community-based approach that respects and supports each community's capacities, its own particular needs and vision.

    New funding should be available in order to offer services as soon as a child or its family are identified as needing an assessment in order to determine which specialized services or support they need or when the integrity of development of a child or its family is identified as being at risk.

    We do not claim that we have found a panacea for the daunting challenges that we face as nations. However, we do maintain that important steps have been taken in developing structures and systems that will prove effective in the long term in permitting individuals to take charge of their lives and improve not only their living conditions but also the wellness of their children and families.

    For many First Nations in Quebec, the last 40 years have been a period of great change. Often these changes have been prompted by strategies and initiatives that have sought to address a particular problem only to create new problems and challenges.

    In closing, I would just like to mention that changes to existing agreements, programs and services must be measured not only for their short-term benefit but with their long-term impact in mind. Above all, they must be done in partnership and negotiation with the First Nations and for the common interest of our future generations. Thank you very much.

¹  (1555)  

    The Chair: Thank you very much. I don't know if Mr. Jules Picard or Ms. Marjolaine Sioui have anything to add or if they will simply be replying to questions; it is up to you.

    So, let us begin straightaway with Ms. Guay.

    Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

    I would like to thank you for having come to meet with us here at the committee. Please forgive us for the slight delay. This does happen from time to time.

    In your presentation, you referred to pilot projects. You stated that there were interesting pilot projects but that they should not be funded only for short-term periods, although they have proven to be successful. Could you give us some examples of such projects?

    One of the objectives of the committee may be to assess certain potential pilot projects. This will help us with regard to the thrust of our report concerning children in the zero to six age group.

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: I will give Ms. Sioui or Mr. Picard an opportunity to answer the question concerning that particular clientele. One example I could quote is the project concerning special education for children, which concerns one part of the group you alluded to. The First Nations Education Council has been working since 1992 on a project to provide the special needs students in our communities with services adapted to their needs. We had to work from 1992 to 1997 to get the federal Department of Indian Affairs to accept that there were needs, after having compared what exists in the non-aboriginal and aboriginal milieux.

    After a three-year pilot project involving those services, we undertook a national process to broaden the specialized education services to all of the aboriginal communities. We had done all possible research to prove that it was necessary to fund these services. Finally, we were able to present figures showing how much all of this would cost. So, we presented figures and finally in the last budget we were granted an amount of $60 million over a two-year period, i.e. $30 million a year over the next two years, whereas according to the estimates we had prepared, we would have needed $150 million a year to meet existing needs.

    What will the outcome of this be? We will have set up a service and it will have been funded for a period of three or four years as a pilot project, and the result will be that we will have underfunded services.

º  (1600)  

    Ms. Monique Guay: And thus, less effective services.

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: Demographics in our communities point to another reality.

    Ms. Monique Guay: Ms. Sioui.

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui (Coordinator, Early Childhood, First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission): Here is another example: we announced new budgets of $185 million for special needs related to fetal alcohol syndrome and for the Aboriginal Head Start Program (AHS). I sit on a regional committee. We have not yet determined how the funds that were announced will be used. The three departments, HRDC, Indian Affairs and Health Canada are still attempting to determine how the money will be used.

    Insofar as the Aboriginal Head Start Program is concerned, we developed evaluation tools for potential pilot projects we would like to see set up. We determined, by region, the pilot projects that could serve to assess these evaluation tools and we are going to put them in place.

    However, if we look at the budgets that have been allocated, we can see that there is a crying need for new infrastructures. The communities have extremely long waiting lists, and here again we are being granted limited funds and we still don't know what they will be used for. How will we be able to sustain these pilot projects afterwards, when we would like to implement them? That is another example we can point to.

    Ms. Monique Guay: Does the government of Quebec also provide you with funds for such activities?

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: Concerning the government of Quebec and early childhood centres, the communities have the necessary autonomy to implement that initiative. However, in our region, we do not want to force the communities to turn toward this source of funding. This is a choice that is being given to them within the context of their autonomy and they may choose to go that way if they wish.

    When we turn to the province, this triggers other things involving laws that are in place and brings about certain differences in the communities, concerning the way in which they manage their programs. It is a process we are reviewing at this time. The communities do have access to it because the initiative has been made available to everyone and to all the communities.

    With regard to child care, at the national level, we currently receive budgets that represent between $3,000 and $5,000 per child. Under the program that has been created in the province of Quebec, we invest about $10,000 per child. There is a big gap, and that has to be looked at.

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: With your permission, I would like to complete the reply to the question you asked. We deal with the federal government for many communities, but it has to be said that for numerous communities, when we knock on the provincial door, this facilitates the federal government's withdrawal from those services rather markedly.

    Ms. Monique Guay: Mr. Picard, you referred to the early childhood centres. Your communities have the opportunity of taking advantage of these, of implementing these programs. Would you say that they have been a success, that they are working well?

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: At the next assembly of chiefs, at the regional level, we are going to submit a service offer. We are currently assessing the impact of the services the province offers at the community level. Currently, when the communities choose to accept provincial funding for early childhood centres, they are then subject to the same laws as any other town. This has an important impact we have not studied and had not anticipated before setting this up. That is why we are studying the situation with the Ministère de la famille et de l'enfance (Department of the Family and Childhood).

    Ms. Monique Guay: You do have a certain autonomy, nevertheless. I know that the government of Quebec is quite broad-minded in this regard and does not impose strict constraints. When we get involved on the reserves, we try not to push anyone around. I think that the ultimate purpose is that you be independent in all areas and in all possible programs. I understand your position. When you have to choose between a service where you are being given $10,000 per child and another where you are only provided with $3,000 to $5,000, and when you are represented by the federal government, things become a bit problematic. I can see your predicament very clearly.

    I am now going to give the floor to my colleague so that she can ask you a few questions, but I would like to have the floor again later.

º  (1605)  

[English]

    The Chair: Ms. Neville.

    Ms. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.): I'm sorry, I don't speak French.

    Thank you for coming today, and thank you for your presentation. It seems that what you're doing is working, that you are making a difference for your community.

    I was struck by the fact that you said the real process of integrating services is taking place at the local and community level, and the integration involves many partners other than federal departments. I'd like to hear a little more about the process. I'd be interested in knowing more about the process that's taking place at the community level. Also, what role, if any, does the federal government have in the planning and delivery of programs and services?

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: One example I could provide is the integration of child care services and the head start program. It is probably one of a kind in the country in aboriginal communities, and this is coming from what communities expressed: why work in different corridors, when we can come together and be more effective? We feel the federal government has to be there to support these types of initiatives, but also to be mindful that whenever you develop programs, you need to take into consideration what goes on in the community and to design programs to respond to those realities that might express themselves differently in aboriginal communities. That's why we say the wall-to-wall approach won't work, because there are specific regions that have specific ways of doing business.

    This is said with all due respect to national processes. That's something we believe in, and every time the opportunity is there, we have a duty, as a region, to be present and to contribute to the national processes that are in place. But at the same time, I think we need to have the flexibility, in order to adapt programs and the way they are implemented in the regions so that they respond to regional realities.

    Ms. Anita Neville: What would you identify as your most successful area of programming, and what would you identify as your greatest need for development in programming?

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: It's a difficult, but very interesting question. One of the most common answers we provide when, for instance, we are asked what our priority is is that it's difficult to choose one priority among many.

    Ms. Anita Neville: But we all have to.

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: Yes, I understand that, but because of the amount of work we do at the regional level, which is really aimed at providing capacity for the community, I would have to say that whatever we do in any given area needs to be supported. That's why we put a lot of effort into and emphasis on the integrated approach, because what we do in health is going to have an impact on education, what we do in education is going to have an impact on human resources development.

    Given the proper flexibility, given the proper capacity, we can achieve much more, but we must also take into account that the challenge is far greater than that of our non-aboriginal brothers and sisters. The demographics are, in a way, on our side, but at the same time they're not on our side, because the resources are limited. So we feel that if the flexibility is there in the agreements we sign with your government, possibly there are more means we can get to facilitate our collective approach, given the particular mandates we have at the regional level.

º  (1610)  

    Ms. Anita Neville: I'm impressed with the fact that you are dealing in a holistic way with community problems--the word we used here is the horizontal approach. What advice would you give to other communities, both on reserve and urban, about how to deal across departments, across areas, because you're absolutely right, that is the way to do it?

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: As I said in the paper, and it's something that we believe very strongly, there's a very wide diversity across the country of aboriginal peoples and nations. We have that very same diversity in Quebec, where we speak of ten different nations, but I think, if you try to identify that one common objective, rather than looking for 12, 15, or 20 different objectives, you make your job easier in trying to achieve that one objective. That's what we have tried to accomplish.

    At the same time, I think it's very important that you don't create regional institutions that are more important or more resourced than what you have at the community level, because there's a fixed lifespan in what we do at the regional level, unless communities say to us they think we have something there, some kind of recipe for maybe a regional authority, which is not the case now. What we have now is really a duty to build on the capacity of the communities with training, education, and strengthening the foundations of the communities, which are the people. That's the kind of work we do, those are the kinds of principles we rely on in doing our work at the regional level.

    So there's really no advice to provide. We can express what we do in our region, and if that's applicable to another region, let's go for it.

    Ms. Anita Neville: Thank you.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    I want to welcome Mr. Tonks. I know what question he is going to ask. But so he can get through the presentation in order to ask his question about Quebec--I know exactly what it is, and I don't want to scoop him on this--I'm going to let him keep reading and I'm going to ask a question. I'm playing for time here.

    My question is really a follow-up. I notice in your very helpful briefing that you referred, Mr. Picard, to things that have already begun with federal departments, but you asked for a greater harmonization amongst federal programs, including the regional offices of federal departments. Like Ms. Neville, I was very encouraged to hear that there is something of this work going on already. You gave the very good example of aboriginal head start, which comes out of Health Canada, and child care, which comes out of Human Resources Development Canada. Are these ad hoc relationships with individual communities? How does that work? Where does the Government of Quebec come in on these things? Obviously, we need more of them, which would involve Health, HRDC, Indian Affairs, at least, and we would want them to move in the direction of greater local authority and decision-making. But can you give us a bit of the sense of the ones we have? Are they just ad hoc arrangements, community by community, with a couple of departments coming together, how does that work?

º  (1615)  

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: Probably the key word is harmonization. The other thing that comes to mind is the fact that communities demonstrate a lot of willingness to come together. One of the examples we provide in our region is the fact that they are communities that are well structured, that have the population base to really say, we don't need to be involved regionally, we can do things on our own. Yet there is that spirit through which people say, I think we certainly have something to provide, but also something to gain from the other smaller communities.

    As to how we view ourselves in our regional operations, with the Quebec government, there's no imposition, but we have to also understand that there are some areas where we need to be cooperating and collaborating with the Government of Quebec. Regardless of what we think, we are in Quebec. In certain cases we have to entertain that relationship with the Province, but it has to be done in a way that respects who we are and the realities we face as aboriginal communities.

    These arrangements are not, in my view, ad hoc. I think there's more to it than just an agreement or a program. I think communities, when coming together, are really trying to achieve something that will benefit them in the long term. As I said earlier, our life expectancy as a regional organization is quite precise, in the sense that we can only continue to exist if the communities we serve choose to decide that we will continue to exist. That's the reality of the way we do things, and there's nothing that can be said against that.

    At the same time, I think communities also tend to view their own development and evolution in terms of how they can strengthen their own first nation institutions. It's only by coming together, especially in light of the fact that there's a relationship, fiscal and administrative, with the federal government that needs to be improved, so that we have balance in the programs that are provided to us and the way we manage those programs.

    I will let Marjolaine continue.

º  (1620)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: At the community level, we are talking about networking. Two years ago, when we merged the two sectors to create one early childhood sector for children's programs, we put a great deal of emphasis on networking within the community. As you know, there are other initiatives such as Brighter Futures, the Canada Prenatal Nutrition Program and the FAS/SAF. All of these initiatives exist within our communities. To provide better service, when we want to bring all of these initiatives together, we can create tools or implement methods to help families and the children in the communities.

    The problem with all of that is that when we receive an additional sum from the province, we are increasing the amount of work in the communities in spite of the fact that our financial and human resources remain limited. This generates a great deal of work for the community, especially small communities. As Ghislain was saying a moment ago, there are communities which have larger populations and are capable of offering a greater variety of services and of delivering services differently than a small community of about 400 souls.

    Also, there are an excessive number of reports to be prepared. Speaking of harmonization, there are a great many administrative reports to be completed. This is very cumbersome because there is a duplication of work. Whether we are talking about a 5,000-dollar initiative or a 300,000-dollar initiative, we have to do the same work within the community. We are looking for ways of lightening the workload associated with the departments' criteria or methods. We are trying to find some way of putting all of this together and of lightening the load for everyone, especially for the communities which have greater needs in this regard. These are all things that must be reviewed and re-evaluated, because currently, for the small communities, things are not necessarily working well. It is difficult for them to provide the same services as the others do.

[English]

    The Chair: Merci.

    Mr. Tonks, are you there yet?

    Mr. Alan Tonks (York South—Weston, Lib.): Thank you for your deputation. I'm sorry, I had another committee to be at.

    In your brief you point out that several commissions have been created. Then you outline the programs the commissions are locking into. You also indicate that there is a shortage of funding in a lot of the programs. On page 5, with respect to day care, you outline the number of spaces that have been provided. There are 27 communities operating day cares and a total of 38 first nations head start programs. Is the funding not available under the head start program to continue that level of care? I don't understand the dysfunction. There are obviously 27 communities that have day cares, and yet there are 38 that have plugged into the head start program. Why wouldn't they all be?

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: Just to clarify, in the first paragraph, if you look at the first sentence, 27 communities operating day cares are under the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission, which is one of the commissions. However, there are other communities that have separate agreements with HRDC. These are only the 27 communities represented with the commission. As for the others, they do have day care centres, like the Cree, but they are represented by the CRA, which is the Cree Regional Authority. This is the explanation. The 38 communities include the Cree communities.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Okay.

    Is the brighter futures initiative, which I believe is a federal program, separately funded?

º  (1625)  

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: Yes, with Health Canada.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Belonging or not belonging to those communities that are either under federal or provincial guidelines, everyone has access to the brighter futures program, do they not?

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: Yes, in the communities they do.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: So no one is excluded by virtue of being part of the commission.

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: No.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: It's universal.

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: Yes.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Okay.

    You have commissions for health, social service, childhood services, employment and training, economic development, and education. I think we would all agree that in any community-based program those are the essential service objectives. In all the various communities do your commissions ever meet under one roof? Are they a holistic, multi-service organization? Can they be organized together, or is that too complicated?

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: It's never too complicated, it just takes time, and as I said earlier, the lack of resources for these regional commissions is, in our view, very evident, and things need to be changed. As was said earlier, we use the horizontal approach in almost everything we do, and the roof is really the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador, which is, in a way, the political guide for all these administrative regional commissions. They all have very specific mandates. They all have their respective assemblies, and the members of their assemblies come from the communities. Our duty is really to promote the gathering of all this expertise from the communities.

    Eventually, we're hoping we will be more successful in bridging the gaps between what education does, what health does, what we do in training and the labour market. We're not there yet. Hopefully, we will be in the near future, but I think this very brief is an example of what we can do collectively, because what you have in there are the concerns we experience in education, in health, in the area of social services, in the area of labour market and training. This is one example, and I think, given the proper forum, given the proper means, we certainly can achieve much more.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: I certainly would agree with that, upon just a very quick reading of the brief. Do you have any data that would demonstrate the impact? For example, with the statistics you've used for national averages in unemployment, can you relate them to on-reserve and off-reserve unemployment?

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: We haven't come to the point where we can gather data collectively as regional commissions, but each commission does its own work and its own data collecting, for instance, in the area of special needs, in education, in order to demonstrate to the federal government that the funds to respond to those needs are required. We note that at least 52% of our student population finds itself in that area of special needs. In the area of training we have agreed with the federal government that there are targets we need to attain in order to show that the agreements we sign are working. For the last four years, at least, we have managed to attain those targets.

    But it also has to be said that we're not near paradise yet in redressing the situation of aboriginal people. If we were to bring the unemployment rate to 25% in any given community, that would be one great achievement for us. It probably would be disastrous to have an unemployment figure of 25% in Newfoundland, for instance, but in light of the very specific situation of aboriginal communities across the country, those are the types of targets we give to ourselves. If we're able to provide work to younger aboriginals in any given year to bring down that figure, it is a great achievement. But there again, because of the limitations, we are not able to collect the data on a regular basis, thus, I guess, favouring that cooperation between the commissions you're talking about.

º  (1630)  

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: With the different commissions, we have different programs, so if you look in the area of health, you will have.... You're probably aware of the regional health survey that occurred in 1997, and we're just about to start with the second phase, which is the longitudinal survey, where we will collect data again. These data have proven to be effective for going back to the federal government and proving that those needs were there and that there was need for some other programs. The proof has been given on that. With early childhood, they have completed the regional assessment for day care across the province, so that will be available. There will be a final report sent to HRDC national and regional. We're also just at the end of the third year of the head start program, and we've just completed an assessment for that in our region. I know Jules wants to speak about that. As for social services, they also collected some data regarding poverty in first nations communities.

[Translation]

    Mr. Jules Picard (Coordinator of Social Services, First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission): I would like to say something about the National Child Benefit. You know that where the National Child Benefit is concerned, there are savings and there are also reinvestment projects. Following the evaluation and analysis of these projects, the Health and Social Services Commission in cooperation with the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Quebec region, managed, among other things through job readiness-enhancing measures, to integrate men and women who had never worked before into the labour force. I believe that the Department of Indian Affairs, Quebec region, has a lot of data on the number of women and men who were able to join the labour market thanks to the sums saved under the National Child Benefit.

    The National Child Benefit is one of the poverty-fighting measures implemented by the government. It has allowed a fair number of women to get back into the labour force over the past three years.

º  (1635)  

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Ms. Guay.

    Ms. Monique Guay: I'm happy that you broached this subject because another committee, namely the human resources development committee, is in the process of reviewing the Employment Equity Act. It's become apparent that aboriginal women are not well served by this legislation. Therefore, you can rest assured that our recommendations - I have the report here with me and I'm working on it - will focus on helping these women resolve their financial problems. Of course, one of the goals of early childhood centres is to help women escape the cycle of poverty and improve their lives and standard of living. These women are often caught in a vicious circle. Training programs are needed.

    Let's return to the subject at hand, Mr. Chairman.

    The witnesses who have testified before the committee have focused at length on fetal alcohol syndrome. I'd like to hear more about this phenomenon, particularly in terms of how it affects Quebec. Is it as serious a problem in Quebec as it is in other provinces?

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: The First Nations Education Council has done some work in this area. It has done a number of studies and received funding to develop strategies, education and training programs, and so forth. The data collected pertains more to schools. I'm not completely familiar with this data, but I could get that information to you if you like. What I can tell you about this group, namely children from birth to six years of age, and the first nations preschool program, is that according to our latest census figures, 57 children in 38 communities are in need of care as a result of fetal alcohol syndrome.

    Right now, we're talking about funds that are to be taken out of the $185 million budget and reallocated to fetal alcohol syndrome programs. At the last national forum that I attended, the view widely expressed was that the funding available to communities is often too insignificant to be allocated in a way that allows communities to put in place measures to identify and deal with the problem.

    Public awareness campaigns are a positive step.

    Ms. Monique Guay: Campaigns targeting pregnant women, among others?

    Ms. Marjolaine Sioui: When we speak to communities, we hear about the lack of funding. They wonder what they can possibly do at the local community level when faced with funding shortages. It's impossible for them to take certain initiatives and to improve the situation.

    With respect to fetal alcohol syndrome, we're in the process of completing a survey of the needs of our region's children from birth to six years of age. It's the first-ever survey of its kind in Canada. We knew that some funding would be forthcoming and we wanted to be ready to act on the survey carried out in the various Inuit and first nations communities. The Inuit did not take part in the survey. They informed us that they had already devised their own strategy and approaches. However, there will be a brief add-on describing the situation faced by the Inuit population. This will be a collaborative effort of sorts with the Inuit.

    To present the situation of first nation children from birth to six years of age, a final report will be drawn up. It will contain the data collected, as well as an action plan to follow up on the survey findings. When funding is allocated to the regions, we will be ready to proceed with the action plan.

    A total of $185 million has been allocated to the early childhood development initiative. We have received confirmation that funding will be available on an ongoing basis, except that in this instance - and I'm sure you can provide me with additional details - the process must go to Treasury Board for approval, and this won't happen until year's end. Therefore, the money will not be distributed among the regions and communities until next January or February. Funds must however be spend before March 31. Each time, this becomes a major problem for us.

    How can we ask communities to comply with administrative requirements and provide adequate levels of service when they have only two months to put something in place? This is the kind of situation they repeatedly face, and even though we've denounced, not much has changed. To counter these effects, we've tried to be more proactive and to prepare ourselves in advance. While we don't know how much funding we're going to receive, we do put some kind of structure in place. In our region, we have a first nations committee that draws up a plan. At least then, when the funding finally comes through, we have a structure in place so that we can move forward. However, as I was saying, we have a big problem with the funding formula and with the fact that we must spend any money allocated to us before the fiscal year runs out. Usually, we're fine the second year. The problem is the first year. I'm not sure what to recommend to avoid a repeat of this situation. Over the past five years, we have had a number of programs and each year, we've encountered the same situation.

º  (1640)  

    Ms. Monique Guay: You need to find a way to facilitate this whole process. When you don't know the amount of funding that you're going to receive, it's difficult to develop a programming strategy. Perhaps we can include a recommendation to this effect in our report.

    Thank you very much for coming to speak to us today.Your submission was excellent. We'll refer to it in our report on children from birth to six years of age. Thank you.

    The Chair: I have one final question for you. You commented on the dangers associated with pilot programs. However, I think we're moving a little in the direction of pilot communities, so to speak. Let me explain what I mean.

    Mr. Picard, you talked about paradise. Obviously, we're not talking about paradise here on earth, but in several communities across the country, we have tried to show that... If we were to take the right approach, that is if we integrated services properly, provided sufficient funding over a long enough period of time, bearing in mind the cultural context of each community, and if we were to try and evaluate the impact on children over a five-year period , instead of allocating funding to communities in a haphazard way, would there be some benefit to promoting universal programs? If this approach proved successful, we could say: See what can be achieved with the proper resources! Given that current funding levels are limited and that we can talk about billions of dollars right now, if we had adequate resources...

    Ms. Monique Guay: We have surpluses.

    The Chair: Do you see any danger in this? Would you not agree that this represents a political challenge for you? It's never easy to favour one community over another. I'd appreciate your comments.

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: Basically, we're at the mercy of the government, so to speak. Despite the many public representations made to government, until such time as the government party hears and understands our concerns and takes action in very specific areas, namely programs for children from birth to six years of age, we will be forced to accept whatever you are prepared to offer us.

    Regarding special education, a topic I alluded to earlier, after 10 years of work, we inherited a budget that addresses only one-sixth of actual community needs nationwide. What more can I say?

    In Cabinet, a reference group is focusing on issues of concern to us. What is this group currently studying in the way of issues and what is it focusing on in terms of issues of concern to Canada's aboriginal peoples? The answer to that question appears to be a complete mystery. All that we can suggest - and that's more or less the aim of today's presentation - is a global approach aimed at identifying programs geared to the target group, namely children from birth to six years of age, provided the other side is truly prepared to listen.

    We've been making similar representations for years and we don't want this to become a waste of time for us. These issues were thoroughly probed by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples over a five-year period and very clear recommendations were issued. If we continue to ask the same questions over again every four or five years, we'll continue to spin our wheels. This isn't helping us at all. Demographics should play in our favour but under the present circumstances, the challenge of providing services geared to our people is two or three times greater for us.

    Therefore, while we're certainly in favour of pilot programs, we want to see some results. As I see it, when pilot projects are funded, the goal is ultimately to provide permanent funding for the services involved.

º  (1645)  

    The Chair: Thank you all for your words of advice and your experience in this field. We appreciate your coming here and the efforts you put in to preparing excellent presentations. On that score, I concur fully with Ms. Guay.

    We'll stay in touch because once we've done our report, it's important that we continue to consult with those who testified before our committee. Thank you for your hard work and see you next time.

    Mr. Ghislain Picard: Thank you as well on behalf of the regional commissions. I'd like to leave you with a thought shared by a growing number of people in our community . When we stop reacting to government policies and programs, perhaps then we'll have more time to act for the benefit of our communities.

[English]

    The Chair: I would ask folks to stay behind a little bit while we offer some help to our researchers.

    We can go in camera now.

    [Editor's Note: Proceedings continue in camera]