THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON ABORIGINAL PEOPLES

The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples is meeting to examine the federal government’s constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Metis peoples, and other matters generally relating to the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada (topic: issues concerning First Nations Education).

Click here to hear the presentations to the committee posted online

Ottawa, 15 June 2010 –

Senator Gerry St. Germain (Chair): The committee is undertaking a study to examine possible strategies for reform concerning First Nations primary and secondary education, with a view to improving outcomes. Among other things, the study will focus on tripartite education agreements; governance and delivery structures, and possible legislative frameworks.

This morning we are fortunate to have with us David Newhouse, Chair and Associate Professor of Indigenous Studies at Trent University and a member of the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board, and representatives from the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation, Roberta Jamieson and Noella Steinhauer. The National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation is a charitable organization with a mission to promote, support and celebrate the achievement of Canada's Aboriginal Peoples in partnership with Aboriginal, private and public sector stakeholders.

Roberta Jamieson, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation:

Good morning. We are in the traditional territory of the Algonquin Nation, so I begin this morning by acknowledging and thanking them.

I wish to congratulate the committee for undertaking this study on this critical issue. My involvement with the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation includes First Nations people on and off reserve, Metis and Inuit. I was once a child living on reserve and went through the entire system, and I am the mother of a child who went through that system, so I know why this study is necessary. From my experience, I know that dramatic and immediate change is essential.

I hope to encourage you to be bold and courageous in your work. There is no cause on the social agenda that has greater merit than this. You will find the answers if you put the students first. Do it not only for their sake but also for the sake of Canada.

The National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation is a charity that has, for more than 25 years, promoted, supported and celebrated the achievements of our young people in particular. It has a bold mandate to support them financially toward achieving their tremendous potential so that they can experience brighter futures.

To date it has provided more than $37 million to almost 10,000 recipients -- more than any other nongovernmental organization in Canada. In fact, $18.7 million of that was awarded over the last five years. It is regarded as a solid, credible organization by the public and private sectors alike and is highly regarded by Aboriginal organizations, First Nations, Metis and Inuit people.

We are focusing our work more and more. We are known for the awards, and we do them well. Role models are a vital source of inspiration. We do our post-secondary education programming well, but we are focusing on younger and younger children because the fastest growing demographic group in Canada, our young people, are the least likely to get out of high school.

We are working hard. We have rolled up our sleeves. We are holding dynamic motivational conferences with youth across Canada and in the North. We are using round tables and think tanks. With partners in industry, we are promoting careers in the classroom. We have produced quite a number of modules featuring our own people in careers in justice, transportation, broadcasting and health, and we connect employers with our young people for job recruitment.

We listen to the voice of Aboriginal youth in shaping our work. Under the guidance of Dr. Noella Steinhauer we have held workshops with youth at risk both in urban areas and on reserve. They are telling us what their issues are. Why are they not getting out of high school? Drugs, alcohol, bullying, gangs and poverty are the main reasons they are dropping out of school. They told us that mentoring and support are critical factors in successfully completing their high school education.

Therefore, we are designing a mentoring program to link our bursary recipients, of which we have almost 10,000, with entire classes of young Aboriginal youth in grades 7 and 8 so that they can be fostered.

With the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada we will be holding a summit later this year on closing the gap in educational attainment. We have a bold new realizing project that is a research initiative to identify, evaluate and link educators across Canada with school boards and principals. Those who are succeeding and making a difference in changing high school completion rates will be able to connect with those who need support, help, ideas and models.

I am soliciting the support of several provinces. I have support in principle from the Government of Canada for this project. Private sector partners are willing to be involved and to commit resources, provided the public sector takes the lead.

Senators, just as the Foundation wants, you also want improvements to K to 12 education so that more First Nations children on reserve graduate from high school.

Then what happens?

Please do not lose sight of the fact that most children who graduate will not be able to go on to post-secondary education. We are struggling to support those who have achieved high school and post-secondary education. In health, we supported 524 recipients this year. They needed $11 million; and we were able to give them $3 million.

We supported students who want to be nurses, PhD candidates, 129 who want to be doctors, and so on.

Thousands of other First Nations students are qualified, ready, accepted and willing but they cannot afford that education. I would like you to keep those students in your sight because if they graduate from high school, we cannot fail them. They are such a small percentage. I believe we must act because change will not just happen.

The Auditor General told us in 2004 that there was a 28-year gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal students in high school completion. It would take 28 years to close that gap. A few years later, in 2010, what did she tell us? Things are getting better for non-Aboriginals and better for Aboriginals but, guess what? The gap is widening. The fact that we are not closing this gap means that Canada will pay dearly.

In 2009, I commend to the committee and researchers the report of the Centre for the Study of Living Standards, which contains a hard-nosed economic business case. If we were to close the gap, we could save $115 billion in expenses and gain $410 billion to Canada's GDP. The report is a call to action to invest in Aboriginal education. I caution against any thinking by the public that Aboriginal peoples do not aspire to higher education.

Environics did a study last year, which I commend to the committee. For the first time, they interviewed urban Aboriginal people and non-Aboriginal people. Many of our people live in urban settings, as you know. They found that the leading life aspiration for our people is higher education and training and that the greatest barrier to that is financial support. There are three challenges, senators:

First, we have to graduate many more of our students from high school, both on and off reserve.
Second, those who want to pursue post-secondary education must have access to it in terms of both finances and removal of the barriers that keep them away.
Third, we need the infrastructure and a legislated mandate to make this happen.

I know that the committee has heard some discussion on organizational infrastructure, which I would like to talk more about in the question and answer session today. Whether there is a national school board, regional school boards, a national Indian education act, a First Nations education act or tripartite agreements, there is no single answer.

There is no cookie-cutter approach. If it works in British Columbia, it might not work in Southern Ontario or in the North. You have heard examples from witnesses of what will work for them. Please keep flexibility in mind.

There is also the matter of financial resource infrastructure. For this, there is a single answer: We need a firm legislated mandate to ensure that the resources are in place. Parliament should pass legislation stating that every First Nations child on reserve should have access to an equitable education that is funded at the same level as their non-Aboriginal neighbours.

The committee has heard compelling hard facts in evidence, such as the example given by the witness from the Pic River First Nation, that show that is simply not the case today. There should be the same level of funding for Aboriginal language immersion studies as there is for French immersion studies. The capital provided for First Nation schools should cover facilities equal to those of neighbouring schools.

Asking the committee to do this is like raising a point of order in Canada's political system for me. The point of order of equitable funding should take precedence over all other business. The point of order to make equitable funding available now is not debatable.

Should the provinces participate in the funding? I say, yes, because there is a role for everyone; but that is another debate. We need to put the children first. Let us not wait until federal-provincial relations are resolved adequately to find the money. Following Jordan's Principle2, we must first provide the funding and then have the provincial debate over where to find it.

One witness told the committee a couple of weeks ago that we have to stop making Indian Affairs the scapegoat. I like that comment because Indian and Northern Affairs Canada cannot provide funds for First Nations education unless Parliament allocates it. This is a Canada problem, not an Indian Affairs problem.

Let me be clear. Senators, I urge you to realize that you can make all the difference; and you must. I hope this committee will make a commitment to seize this issue and not let it go until the goal has been reached of every First Nations child having access to an education as good as the neighbouring child has and that every student who wants post- secondary education has access to it. That is not too much to ask in Canada. When that happens, First Nations, Inuit and Metis peoples will be able once again to contribute their full share to their communities, to Canada and to the world.

Nia:wen kowa for listening to my words. I look forward to the discussion.

David Newhouse, Chair and Associate Professor, Indigenous Studies, Trent University, as an individual:

Thank you for inviting me this morning and for undertaking the study. I agree with much of what has been said. Professors normally speak in 50-minute chunks, so speaking in a five-minute chunk will be quite a challenge.

I do not want to start by arguing about the need for improvements in Aboriginal education, which is well documented in a vast amount of research literature and political documents that talk about the need for improving Aboriginal outcomes. They simply have to be part of our public policy agenda. They are important to the improvement of the quality of lives of Aboriginal people.

We have been following a policy of Indian control of Indian education for about three decades. It is important that we step back and look at what we have achieved and what we need to go forward if we are to begin to put that policy into full effect. Over the past 30 years, we have developed a form of infrastructure of Aboriginal schools; one Aboriginal university, which is in some difficulty these days; some Aboriginal post-secondary education institutions and Aboriginal/provincial education agreements. We have at least some of the basics in place.

Going forward, it is important that we establish some national Aboriginal institution, a national Aboriginal education council, that will guide all of these efforts. It will begin to be able to work with local school boards, with local First Nations, with local tribal colleges, with First Nations post-secondary education institutions and the provinces. That will bring the best thinking to the table and what some people call best practices, and will commission research that will keep the pressure on.

I have been chair of a university department now for close to 17 years and dealing with Aboriginal issues inside a university environment. I have discovered that, unless there is a senior official who has the responsibility for dealing with Aboriginal issues, then not much happens.

Clearly, Aboriginal issues are only part of the issues that Canadian politicians, Canadian parliamentarians and that the Canadian Council of Ministers of Education deal with. Unless there is someone who deals with Aboriginal issues and has the responsibility for bringing issues forward in a variety of forums and keeping the pressure on, not a great deal will happen and we will be in the same situation 28 years down the road. We will be commissioning the same studies and asking the same questions. We will ask: What happened? Why is the gap not being closed?

There are things under way in Australia in terms of a national Aboriginal education council that are beginning to come to fruition. That sort of national attention and infrastructure is extremely important. If not, we will be in the same position 30 years down the road.

The second point is that what we want, as a university, from the educational system is for it to produce students who have at least what I call the three Rs these days: Reading, writing and research skills. They need to be able to read; they also need to be able to write; they also need to be able to conduct research. They also need to be adept at creating knowledge and evaluating how knowledge is created. That is very different from what the system would have produced two or even one decade ago.

We also want the system to produce students who are
culturally knowledgeable -- students who understand their
culture and understand what it means to be an Aboriginal
person and can engage the world as an Aboriginal person,
whether First Nations, Metis, Inuit, Onondaga, Mohawk or
Cree. The system needs to have a component that helps
people to identify and understand their culture in a
positive way and to think about their culture in a
contributory fashion.
Third, it is important to focus, as part of the solution, not
just on the infrastructure and organizational part but the
attitudes that we bring to the table. It is extremely
important that we begin to think of Aboriginal people as
contributors and begin to think about Aboriginal cultural
values, ethics and standards of learning as being important
and fostering excellence.
Often we think of Aboriginal students in terms of survival.
We gear our efforts towards survival. I keep coming back
to a seminal incident in my own life as chair of a
university department. At convocation at the end of the
year, when we are beginning to think about academic
awards and we give with the awards for proficiency in the
Ojibway language at Trent, the winners of the awards
were German-speaking students. None of our students
who were proficient in the Ojibway language won the
awards. They were mother-tongue speakers. This ought to
be an easy thing for them to do.
As I began to think about it and watch what we were
doing, we were talking about our students in terms of
survival. We asked them to survive, and they were
surviving. They were getting Cs. The students had
performed to our expectations. We had to begin to change
our rhetoric. We had to begin to talk about excellence. I
began to talk about how we would do that. I began to talk
about what it means to be an educated Iroquoian person.
My grandfather spoke five languages. My great
grandfather translated the Great Law into English and
codified it. My father was a speaker in the longhouse. He
was an educated person. We talk in terms of the idea of a
good mind. We began to talk about excellence in cultural
terms.

I talked about the hoop nets as an excellent example of
cultural excellence and the ability of an individual to
aspire and achieve excellence. You cannot be a good hoop
dancer unless you can do many things simultaneously.
You have to be aware of the environment, your body and
what your mind is doing. You have to know the
connection between mind and body. If you are to be a
good hoop dancer, you have to have a good mind. It is
important for us to begin to think about the attitudes that
we instill in the system of education that we create.
Finally, it is important that we not neglect the urban
environment. About 54% of the Aboriginal population
lives in the urban environment. That will not change. The
long-term, historical studies suggest there is a growing
increase. There has been some movement back and forth
to reserves but, for the most part, Aboriginal people are
part of the urban environment. That means that they begin
to attend public schools and not just Aboriginal-run
schools. That is where they begin to encounter
discrimination and prejudice. The Environics study talked
about the prejudice and discrimination that Aboriginal
people face.
Part of the effort that we must undertake is not to only
focus upon Aboriginal education and infrastructure, but
also to work with the mainstream education and infrastructure
to help them begin to understand Aboriginal
issues and create a climate of excellence for Aboriginal
students so that they do not continue to stream students
but help them to achieve.
I know the rhetoric is out there – I have read the research
reports. I see what people are trying to do, but it needs the
push of a national Aboriginal education council that
begins to focus the attention and the effort. Thank you
very much.
The Chair: Thank you, professor. We did not just happen
upon this. This evolved as part of something that began
with Senator Sibbeston, who is from the Northwest
Territories. We started on an economic development
study, which Professor Newhouse is familiar with, and it
evolved.
We could see the linkages between economic
development, good governance – which we have also
gone into -- and elections. We could see that education
was the key to unlocking all this stuff, from the studies
that we have been doing and the witnesses we have heard
from right across the country.
In my case, as a commercial pilot, we were in Thunder
Bay at Wasaya Airline, which is owned by a First Nations
group. I asked them how many First Nations pilots they
had out of the 100 odd pilots. They told me they had one. I
asked why and they said they do not have the strengths in
maths and science to meet up with the requirements. That
is how we evolved.
I will not carry on at great length; I just wanted to give
you an overview. On behalf of the people who have been
on the committee for several years, it has been an
evolutionary process that has brought us to this point. We
will start the questioning with Senator Stewart Olsen.
Senator Stewart Olsen: . . . Ms. Jamieson, these are
informational questions that I do not understand.
Aboriginal students going to university, do they have
access to student loans in the same way that non-
Aboriginal students do? You are saying we need more
financing. I had thought -- and this is probably my error –
that Aboriginal students could go to university for free. Is
that correct?
Ms. Jamieson: Thank you, senator, for the question.
There is a common belief amongst Canadians that all
Aboriginal people have a free ticket to university from
birth to death, and that simply is not true. First, there are
funds available for First Nations to attend post-secondary
education. It is very limited funding, not enough to send
the students who are succeeding and who want to go on to
post-secondary education. That is a huge area of need.
You will hear people talk about 2 per cent cap, and that is
what they are talking about, many First Nations chiefs.
The other part of your question, do they have access to
student loans, yes. Anyone in Canada can apply for a
student loan.
Senator Stewart Olsen: What would be the ratio of, say,
Aboriginal versus non-Aboriginal students being granted
loans?
Ms. Jamieson: It would be very low of those applying for
loans. However, many of our students at the Foundation
that we support, we assess need as well as marks, as well
as Aboriginal identity, as well as have they planned their
career, but many of them do have loans. Many of them
have accessed whatever is available to them and simply do
not have enough to go. Maybe it is $1,000 for day care or
maybe they have gone to their First Nation and their First
Nation is all out of money.

When I was chief at Six Nations for three years, one year
stuck out in my mind. I had 400 students accepted to
college and university that we could not support. It was
incredible and we were so proud, but we could not support
them.
Student loan access, yes. However, let us think for a
moment. The part of your question that really struck me is
"the same access." Can they also apply? Yes. Is the
financial literacy there amongst our people? No, by and
large.
Through generations of welfare and social assistance, you
may be the only person in your whole family who has
achieved high school completion. The thought of loans, of
that whole process, is intimidating and foreign, the fact
that you will have the wherewithal to pay back a loan.
There is a whole financial literacy piece there. I am not
saying our students should not apply for loans; they
should. However, let us not assume that they are in the
same place as non-Aboriginal students as they think about
applying for loans.
Senator Poirier: My question has been partly answered
because it was in the same line of questioning that my
colleague was questioning on, the availability of applying
for different programs for the post-secondary education. I
understand where you are saying the difficulty is the
programs are there and yes they can apply but sometimes
the fear of applying is different definitely because of, as
you said, all the social background behind it and being
able to get there.
Does the band council have funding or programs where
they can help the students? The background of the original
students, if their parents and grandparents and other
siblings have never gone to university and all this looks
overwhelming to them, is there some kind of counselling
through the band office that can help them through the
process?
Is that available to help them through the process of
coaching them? This is available, we can help you do the
application and find out where the different programs are
and the places where you can apply for bursaries that
non-Aboriginal students are applying? Is that open to
them? Is there some kind of communication that could
help the students along the lines that are available there
now?
Ms. Jamieson: In some cases, yes. However, frankly, the
funding available is woefully inadequate at the community
level. This is an ongoing problem. You have heard the
horror stories. We certainly hear the horror stories, where
a community will receive "X" dollars and then chief and
council have to decide what the needs in the community
are and what resources they have. There is mould in the
houses and E. coli contamination in the water. The
following challenges have to be dealt with. Where will the
funds be invested?
You need to put it in that context, and that is real. I am not
using a dramatic illustration. It is quite real. Having said
that is one of the reasons why I say students first. We
should be able in this country to set aside the funds to
make an investment into every Aboriginal child's
education so they are not in the position of being on the
receiving end of that kind of very tough decision-making.
We should have those funds set aside and oblige
government to set them aside and report.
I am a big believer in outcomes. I was Ombudsman in
Ontario for 10 years, and I know the power of reporting in
Parliament and at the legislature. If we had an Indian
education act or First Nations education act that set aside
"X" dollars, with outcomes, and let us have the
accountability strings, let us transparency required, then.
Let us annually require a report to be tabled on how we
are doing at changing the landscape of high school
completion and have public scrutiny, the public eye.
When I talk to the public, CEOs of corporations and
members of the public, they tell me they really do not
know what to do. They feel helpless. They keep reading
that $8 billion or $9 billion is going into Aboriginal
people and things are not getting better but worse. They
ask what they can do.
I am with you, Senator St. Germain – education. I was a
lawyer; I was a chief; I was the ombudsman. I am at the
Foundation now because that is where we will make a
difference, with students first. Give them that entitlement
to the education. They will change their family, their
communities, this country.
Senator Poirier: In many of the presentations we have
had over the last weeks, the importance of culture and
understanding one's culture has come up with pretty well
everyone we have listened to in the last while.
You have the Mi'kmaq, the Maliseet, and all the different
tribes and nations. I assume each one has their own
culture, which is different from one another. Can you give
us an idea of how we could go about putting something into place that could be taught not only in the First
Nations schools, to help them understand their culture, but
also taught to non-First Nation students in public schools
so that non-Aboriginal people also understand the culture?
How do we go about that when there are so many different
cultures?
Ms. Jamieson: It absolutely can be done and must be
done. I will ask Ms. Steinhauer to speak on this. She has
been a teacher and a principal, and she has done this kind
of work on the ground. She is our director of education.
You are quite right that our cultures are critical. The
Environics study said that even if we are in an urban
setting, we value it and are in touch with it and we want to
maintain it and keep it.
Noella Steinhauer, Director of Education, National
Aboriginal Achievement Foundation: This is a very
important question. People talk about culture, and there is
often a misunderstanding about what culture is. It is a way
of knowing and of seeing the world. It is about perspective.
When Aboriginal people talk about culture, that is
what they are talking about. It is about honouring our
ways of knowing.
Having worked with the provincial ministry of education,
the big issue was always how to teach other people about
the culture. However, it is really about honouring and
validating that there are other ways of knowing than one
simple way. Mr. Newhouse talked about the importance of
cultural proficiency and the importance of ensuring that
we honour all those cultures.
It seems much greater than it actually is, because it really
needs to come from inside out rather than from top down.
At the community level, there are ways of doing it that are
much easier than we envision them to be.
I have been a teacher for many years. We always find the
greatest resistance with teachers, because they think they
must know absolutely everything about Aboriginal people
before they can teach students about Aboriginal people or
about this group of Maliseet or Cree kids or Mohawk kids.
That is not the way. I have been a Cree woman all my life,
and I still do not know everything about being a Cree
woman or a Cree person.
It is really about honouring that knowledge at a
community level, but honouring more than anything that
there are different ways of knowing. In terms of
curriculum and outcomes, it is about validating other ways
of knowing. The simplest place to start from is just
acknowledging, because we have so many cultures from
other places in the world, and we acknowledge that.
So many times we acknowledge those as the exotic other,
yet we have so many exotic others in this country that we
do not honour in the same way. That is the overarching
way you would approach that, but really it is about the
community level. It is easier than it sounds.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Thank you for your
presentations. It is nice to see you again, Ms. Jamieson.
You mentioned legislative frameworks. Aside from that,
what policy measures could be pursued to improve
education in First Nations for the learners on reserve?
Ms. Jamieson: Thank you for the question, and it is nice
to see you again.
The policy framework needs to encourage appropriate
curriculum, and it will differ across the country. What is
common amongst Aboriginal people is our historical
experience, our respect for the environment, for one
another and for different ways of knowing. If we could
teach that, it would be a first-off. We have much to bring
to botany and plant life, and we could open the school
doors to involve elders, teachers, keepers of our culture, as
we call them. That would be marvellous and achievable
and local and not expensive and all those things.
This is a wonderful dialogue that I would like to see
expanded. The policy in place should encourage retention,
preservation and evolution of our indigenous cultures,
because we are not under glass. We are evolving and
changing people, just like everyone else, and we should be
able to change, but be in charge of that cultural change
and make space for that growth and development.
We could require access to Aboriginal languages
throughout Canada, the same access as we provide for
French immersion and French-language services, for
example, even to the point of the employment setting,
which we do not do at the moment.
We do not validate first languages in this country in terms
of employment and increase in pay, educational leave and
so on, and that would be wonderful. It would be wonderful
to tell our young people that if they pursue their language,
look at what they can contribute to their own community
and what they can offer to the greater public.
Those are some of the policy pieces I would put in place.
As well, the framework for ongoing monitoring and
evaluation is absolutely essential. I would also encourage coaching. I would encourage the sharing of best practice,
because as much as we are different from one another, we
also can learn what techniques are working in northern
Saskatchewan or northern Alberta, with e-learning and
Sunchild, and there might be some lessons there that we
would love to hear about in the eastern Arctic, for
example. Those things should be shared.
Policy support for coaching environment and sharing are
all pieces I would put in place. Underlying that has to be
that in this country, if we lose the indigenous culture and
languages, they are gone from the face of the earth.
Therefore, they should be a number one Canadian priority,
because what makes Canada distinct from the world is the
indigenous underpinning of the soul of Canada. The other
cultures are welcomed and enjoyed today, and we have to
get that into the psyche.
Look at New Zealand and the Maori culture and the
validation of the Maori language. Every person in New
Zealand is knowledgeable about the Maori. Every person
in New Zealand can speak a few Maori words. It is there. I
could go on, but those are some of the policy pieces that
need to be understood and validated.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: You mentioned that after
getting their education, it would be nice for these people
to go back into their communities to teach their people. It
is good to have an education, but there is a "but." Many
of these places do not have the resources to bring these
educated people back and provide jobs for them, so the
sad part is that they have to go outside. It is sort of a bad
example. I am not saying education is a bad example, but
what is the use of going to university when they come
back home and cannot get a job?
Ms. Jamieson: You make a very good point, senator. That
is why the adequate funding for appropriate educational
experts available to students needs to be within the
community as well as without, because to educate and
then beggar the community just does not make any sense.
I was very interested to read the evidence given at this
committee. I believe it was a witness from the Pic River
First Nation who said that for special education planning
and design they got a total of $660,000 for 81 students,
that being $8,000 and change for each student. If they
were to go off-site, they would get $15,000 per student.
We need to look at the obvious disparity. Perhaps your
researchers could choose ten places in the country and
validate that comparison for you. It is tough to get figures.
I did some research to try to get figures to show you the
disparity. People give anecdotal examples, but we do not
have a good costing. We know it is chronically
underfunded and that there is disparity, but no one is
keeping track at the end of the day, and that is a concern
of the Auditor General.
The Chair: I do not think there is any dispute about
inadequate funding. We have undertaken this study in
order to build a sound foundation. Both Mr. Newhouse
and Ms. Jamieson have said that we should have
legislation, and that is really the focus of this study. There
is no dispute that funding is currently inadequate, but we
need to put structures in place, which is why we have
undertaken this study. I would like us to focus on how to
build a foundation so that when we build the house of
education there is a solid foundation in place and whatever
we put into it will not be wasted in any way.
Professor Newhouse, would you comment on Senator
Poirier's question about the various cultures that exist?
How do we take culture into consideration when building
an infrastructure that will work?
Mr. Newhouse: First, on the issue of outcome, it is
important that when we build a structure we have a sense
of what we want the structure to do. In part, we want the
structure to facilitate choice. We want students to be able
to participate in the Canadian economy and Canadian and
Aboriginal society. We want them to have the choice. We
do not want to force people into communities where there
are no jobs for them. That is a recipe for disaster. It leads
to more and more despair, and people drop out. They need
to come out of the system with a sense of choice and a set
of skills that enable them to act upon those choices.
Second, in terms of culture, it is important to understand
that culture is not just a set of practices. Culture is a way
of engaging and understanding the world, and with it
comes a set of skills and knowledge, and those skills and
knowledge will be different in different parts of country.
The skills and knowledge that one needs to live well in
West Coast culture are different from those that one needs
to live on the Plains. The educational system that evolves
has to respond to those different environments.
We do not expect the educational system in British
Columbia to be the same as the educational system in
Ontario. We expect there will be some common
denominators and outcomes, but must we allow for
regional variation. The British Columbian culture is very different from the Ontario culture; the Quebec culture is
different from the Ontario culture; the P.E.I. culture is
different from the Newfoundland culture.
We currently allow and encourage the system to be
different, and we need to do the same in terms of
Aboriginal culture. When we talk about Nova Scotia, we
will be talking about what the Mi'kmaq want to have
expressed in their educational system. British Columbia is
a more complex situation as there are more cultural groups
there than in any other place in the country. Negotiating
the political terrain will be difficult, although there are
some commonalities.
You want the system to help people to have a sense of
self, a sense that they are an Aboriginal person who can
engage the world and make a contribution to the world. It
is extremely important that they can make a contribution
as an Aboriginal person, and that they understand their
culture, not as a set of practices but as a way of seeing and
living, and that they can help other people to understand it
as well.
Senator Dyck: Welcome to the committee. It is a pleasure
to have you all here today. I have interacted with all of
you before. I have good memories of dealing with the
Foundation and of visiting Trent University about five
years ago.
I remember that at Trent you offered me a strawberry as
part of the culture. That is not part of the Cree culture on
the Prairies, so it was new to me. At the time I was not
sure what it meant, so I had to find out.
In our education study we have chosen to focus on
kindergarten to grade 12. Ms. Jamieson, you were talking
about the need to ensure that funding is equitable between
First Nations schools and other provincial schools. You
suggested that that be done through a legislative mandate.
Professor Newhouse, you spoke about a national
Aboriginal education council. Presumably the two would
interact. What would you suggest that the legislative
mandate look like?
Who would design the national council? Who would sit on
it? Should it be funded? Who would the senior person in
charge of the council report to? We do not think Indian
Affairs and Northern Development should be the
responsible body, so who would they report to? Do we
need a different government body? Should they report to
Treasury Board?
Mr. Newhouse: You are entering into the realm of
politics, which is a difficult area. Being an academic, I
would say that academics ought to design it, but I am not
sure that is the answer you want.
From the perspective of public policy and management, if
you are going to achieve something, you need to have a
senior official in charge of it. That is the simple premise
upon which I am operating. In this case, this being a
national priority, I would see an organization that reports
to the PCO or the PMO, as it is that important. Perhaps it
should even report to Parliament, since Parliament is
higher than both the PCO and the PMO. It needs that level
of attention, because if it does not have it, we will be in
the same situation in 30 years.
The design of the council requires some accord between
the three national groups: the Assembly of First Nations,
the community of Aboriginal people, and the Inuit
organizations.
It also requires the presence of the National Association of
Friendship Centres or an organization that deals with and
services Aboriginal urban populations. Those groups need
to come together and put their attention to these issues.
They have all spoken individually, and everyone says it is
important. We might be able to get some degree of
consensus.
We have done it on a First Nations governance centre and
other issues as well. Its job is to do the monitoring and
reporting function that Ms. Jamieson talks about. It should
be enshrined in legislation so that there is a requirement
for an annual report. More than that, it begins to
commission research, to assist and to be seen as a support
institution. A great deal of support is required.
Improving educational outcomes for Aboriginal students
is not the work of teachers only. It requires a whole series
of other efforts. It requires attention to health, to incomes,
to the cultural teachings of elders, to tackling the attitudes
of discrimination and to other types of support mechanisms.
It is a fairly complex undertaking. A national organization
or council can begin to set out the program model and the
efforts required, after which it can begin to cajole and
advocate the commissioning of research and bring to bear
the best of thinking. That is the important part of it.
Ms. Jamieson: Thank you for the question, Senator Dyck.
I will focus on the First Nations because I understand that
it is the focus of the committee's study. You might want to
have a peek back to the 1980s and the Penner Report of the House of Commons Special Committee on Indian Self-
Government. I had the pleasure of being on that
committee. The report was accepted unanimously by all
parties. We advocated for the creation of a mechanism that
was a federal-First Nations relations contact point not
unlike one that is federal-provincial.
I am practical. I want to get funds out there to educate
young people quickly. I do not think we should wait for
the federal and provincial governments and national
organizations to reach an accord. I was with the
Secretariat of the National Indian Brotherhood/Federal
Cabinet Committee in the 1970s. In the 1980s, I was at the
constitutional meetings. I have seen these processes,
which are important, but they tend to take on a life of their
own.
I would like the legislation to guarantee funds for every
student. Our students are failing so I would like to see this
mechanism created whereby First Nations could elect
from a number of choices, but they would all have strings
of accountability, transparency and reporting attached.
They could offer the education themselves, which many
would do if they were adequately resourced. They could
elect to have funds go to a tribal entity, because some
places in the country work extremely well at that level.
They might elect to do a province wide initiative or a
tripartite arrangement with the provincial government.
There should be a menu of options with all of them having
some common features, such as curriculum and language.
We have talked about those.
I would also like to see encouragement and support for the
research capability and the sharing of best practices. The
National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation's institute,
which you will see in some of the materials that have been
shared with you, should be among them. Not every First
Nation will be able to do that. We need economy of scale
and the sharing and incubation of good ideas.
The beauty of this is leveraging. One thing that the
Foundation does well is leverage resources, matching
federal, provincial and individual corporate entities, who
all want to be part of this solution. Let us give them an
opportunity to play.
Individual Canadians also want to contribute to educating
our students. The more I hear about what the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission is bringing out in Canada, the
more I realize that Canadians will be either overwhelmed
and not know what to do or will look for a way to
contribute to a healthy future for all of us. What better
way is there than to promote educating our young people
so that we can all live together on the same playing field?
There needs to be a role for charities like the Foundation
that can leverage and have additional players. It will take
the public and private sectors and individual Canadians to
change the picture. If we are to close that gap, we have to
get going tomorrow. Those are my thoughts. The
education council is a great idea. It could inform the
research, the broader level of thinking and move agendas
forward while sharing with Inuit and Metis. That is what I
would do in Parliament on First Nations education over
the next six months.
Senator Hubley: I compliment you on your work and the
positive aspect of providing scholarships to students.
When we looked at K-12 education, we heard witnesses
tell us in many different ways that a hungry child will not
learn or that a child from a dysfunctional family will have
challenges and education often will fall by the wayside.
Our current education system is demanding.
We as a society look to our educational system to solve
many problems not related to the ABCs of life. In a
national Aboriginal education council or a national
strategy for education, how would we address those other
social needs that must be part of that educational system if
we are to begin to break the cycle?
For example, many schools have breakfast programs for
those in need. Who would have thought? We ask our
educational system to complement and support our
lifestyle, which works. Most mothers and fathers work full
time, and some of our young people get left behind or do
not have their needs met to the fullest. We look to the
educational system to fill that gap. Do you have any
insight for us on that?
Ms. Steinhauer: Thank you for that question. It is a
complex question and one that every public and First
Nations school district would deal with in this country. I
have been a principal both in the public school system and
in a First Nations school. I have seen kids come to school
hungry. I have seen all of those factors that lead to kids
not learning.
However, both Ms. Jamieson and Mr. Newhouse alluded
to the importance of looking at this complex issue. It took
us a long time to get here, but it is also a multi-faceted,
multi-layered issue that will take a multi-pronged
approach. We need the involvement of elders. Some
school districts are taking that on and seeing positive outcomes from having elders in the school as part of the
community and creating a community environment in the
school. There are so many other components that could be
taken on.
The unfortunate thing is that we look to schools in this
country to solve all of our problems, as a society in
general. I have had parents who wanted me, as a school
principal, to discipline their child because they could not
control them at home. There are those issues. We look to
schools more and more -- not only in First Nation
communities but society in general -- to teach kids values.
The school system was never designed to do that but our
expectations of the entire system across the board are
growing.
The issue becomes even greater when you compound that
with the other issues that Aboriginal students would come
to school with. It is a complex issue. The statement that it
takes a whole community to raise a child is really true
when you think about it, because that is what we are
expecting our schools to do.
However, our communities have not stepped up in many
ways. I am talking about a community on a large scale, but
within our First Nations community the problem is even
more acute. These are insular communities that can be
recognized and set apart, especially for First Nations out
there on their own. Those schools become more of an
issue because there is no infrastructure or support for
them. The English teacher has no one else to go to except
herself.
Senator Hubley: That is the scenario that I have heard.
However, if we are to put the student first and take that
young, keen mind in kindergarten and ensure that that
child will be able to move through each grade -- and I will
not say success, but however you want to classify it -- then
your school system must address that. The school system
must come to the mark on that.
I know we will fall right back into funding here in the next
two or three sentences. However, that is what society is
asking the school systems to do, is to solve many of the
issues that perhaps, at another stage or in another time,
would have been done within a family circle. Now,
because of our lifestyles, that is no longer available.
If we are to put the student first, then we will have to look
at that and say must have those support systems in place.
That is a real challenge to an educational system that is
stressed, too, to its financial limits.
Senator Raine: I am enjoying your comments. I have
watched the Aboriginal Achievement Awards for many
years.
The award show itself is excellent, but I did not fully
realize how involved you were in the bursary program and
the percolating down of the inspiration from the top.
Congratulations on that.
I am looking at the chart of bursary and scholarship
allocations over the last five years. Where does your
funding come from? What portion is from federal,
provincial and private sponsors? Is there a national
campaign to raise money to be allocated through your
programs?
Ms. Jamieson: Thank you for that question, senator. To
give you some perspective, there are about 80,000
charities in Canada. Most charities receive 60% of their
funds from the public sector. We are below that -- we are
at about 55%. Most charities receive 1% to 2% of their
funding from the corporate sector. Ours is 30%. The rest
is from foundations and individuals and interest that we
earn on an endowment that we received from the
Government of Canada over time, as well as other
endowments. We now manage $26-million in education
endowments.
We encourage corporations as well as individuals to be
involved in this picture. I am delighted and would be
happy to send you our latest publication on the range of
private-sector corporations that are involved because they
know we have to grow students. They range from Citibank
to Suncor to CIBC to Fort McKay First Nation, we have
Aboriginal corporations taking leadership now in
supporting the work of the Foundation, I am delighted to
say, but there is much more to be done.
Senator Raine: What is your percentage of administration
costs versus other types of charitable organizations?
Ms. Jamieson: We are under 15%. We were at about 13%
and a bit the last time I answered that question, but I know
we are under 15%. Many charities are 20% and above.
Senator Raine: Congratulations. Our study is focusing on
K-12. It is nice to know that when we get all our kids
graduating you will be there, hopefully expanding and
growing. All university students, no matter where they
come from, are struggling to pay for tuition. Education
costs are increasing and it is a challenge for everyone.

When I look at the First Nations communities that I have
seen, there is a group of solid performers at the top of the
scale that have families who support them and are attaining
education, graduation and going on to become super
achievers. There is also probably a bigger percentage of
the spectrum that is underachieving and really need help in
terms of special needs. That will also require a huge
amount of investment.
Knowing that you are from the Six Nations of the Grand
River, where your school system is delivered by INAC,
they have done a good job with you folks.
Ms. Jamieson: That is right.
Senator Raine: Do you have any comment on why Grand
River still has their education delivered directly by INAC?
Is it a good model? Share with us some of that experience.
Ms. Jamieson: That question would need a whole other
hearing. Why is it still controlled by INAC? Politics;
history. It is woefully underfunded. It is woefully
inadequate and does not have the diagnostic support that is
needed for counselling and psychometrics. It shares with
all First Nations in Canada the characteristics that I have
outlined.
How is it that I got out of that system as a success? We do
have successes. We are not saying all is lost. I am not
brilliant. I am not Einstein. I had a supportive family. I am
one of eight brothers and sisters. I had a strong sense of
culture, who I was, that was healthy and supported. That is
what many of our kids do not have. What is the most
important thing that many of the young people we are
working with at K-12 – that Dr. Steinhauer is doing round
tables with – are telling us? Family and support. And many
of them are in care.
These kids are 11, 12, 13, 14 dealing with bullying, drugs,
prostitution and are taking their own lives. These are
extraordinary circumstances unique to Aboriginal kids in
Canada. Yes, there are pockets in cities everywhere that
have those characteristics, but we have more of them than
anyone in the country. Please take on board all the
dimensions of that picture. If you want to talk more about
Six Nations, I am delighted because I was a student, a
mother, a chief there who tried to change the education
system. I would love to tell you my story offline.
Senator Brazeau: Thank you for your presentations this
morning. Ms. Jamieson, certainly your presentation was
compelling and I agree with practically almost everything
you have said. There are a few things that stuck with me.
One was the issue of a legislated mandate. You said you
were a practical person and that there should be more
accountability, transparency and results attached to the
resources that are spent by the government for Aboriginal
education, and I wholeheartedly agree with that. However,
the thing that struck me the most is you said that students
should be put first and thought of in that manner.
You were talking about accountability. Unfortunately, that
is not the system we are currently under. INAC's own
internal audit has confirmed this. They have also
confirmed that funding is not necessarily being spent on
Aboriginal education when it should be. There is also this
issue of always demanding more funding.
While that may be true, what would your thoughts be on if
INAC were to tighten the nuts and bolts on their operations
to ensure that there are more results-oriented criteria based
on the funding that is currently being provided to ensure
that students graduate, go to school and continue going to
school and to ensure that the administrators of the funding
-- that is, band councils -- spend the money that they
receive for education on education?
It is no great mystery that the education funding is one of
the only pots of funding that band councils can utilize
towards paving their roads and debt reduction. There is
very little accountability attached to that stream of funding.
Do you have any thoughts on the current system and the
need for more accountability?
Ms. Jamieson: Yes, there needs to be greater accountability
and transparency, but this is not limited to INAC. As I
said earlier, this is not an INAC problem. If you say to
INAC, "We know the need is $1. Here is 4 cents, now do a
better job with 4 cents," knowing that you cannot possibly
meet the needs but account more, what is the sense in that?
I used to have to do 200 reports a year in my First Nation
to government. Do you know what that takes? The number
of Treasury Board directives that are out there now?
I would like to bring Parliament to get a hold of this and
bring some simple, overarching framework to bear that had
inherent in it accountability and transparency, that held all
to account -- not just INAC and not just band councils or
First Nations but the entire picture and Parliament themselves held to account to the Canadian public for the
education of our First Nations children. That is what I
would like to see.
I am not adverse, as you know, to accountability and
evaluation; we build it into every program that we do.
Should there be greater lengths? Yes. Do we collect
statistics at the Foundation that we openly share? Yes.
Should everyone? Yes, including the Government of
Canada.
It is not just about INAC, though there are enough reports
and they would be the first to say, "We know."
Senator Brazeau: I agree with that, which leads me to my
next question. We often talk about the federal
government's responsibility for Aboriginal peoples and
Aboriginal education. What about the administrators of the
education funding -- again, the band councils? What are
their roles and responsibilities in all of this?
About three weeks ago a First Nations woman from the
North contacted me because she was in dire need of help
and assistance in trying to access post-secondary
education. I know our study is K-12, but in any event, she
cannot access post-secondary education funding because
she does not live currently in the North; she lives in
Alberta. The community is under a self-government
agreement, so they have jurisdiction over how they
administer their education funding.
She was asking me for help, and so I basically told her to
get the answers she was requesting on paper, to get it
documented, and so she did that. The director of education
in her community told her if she wanted to access postsecondary
education funding, she needed to move back to
the North for a year and then they would consider her.
This is just one example that I have documented amongst
many, and this is happening. As I said, INAC admits that
education funding delivered to the communities is not
necessarily being spent on education.
When I hear you say put students first – and I
wholeheartedly agree with you – what about the role and
responsibilities of those administering those funds who are
shortchanging their own people?
Ms. Jamieson: I have a couple more questions to fill out
that picture. One, what is the population of this
community? How many students are eligible for funding?
How many students are going to post-secondary, and what
is the allocation that this community is receiving overall?
It is easy to go to the conclusion that this person is being
disenfranchised.
Senator Brazeau: I have the answer to all those questions.
Ms. Jamieson: Great, because those are critical to round
out the picture.
We are all accountable, and should be, to putting the
students first. It is easy to go into the realm of Aboriginal
politics and federal and provincial and First Nations and
say, no it is your job; no, it is your job. No, it is all our
jobs. We should really keep that student centred and first
and ensure that they have the right to call on resources to
achieve their potential.
Should they be able to do it in their home community?
Sure. If they cannot, should they have a place to go? Sure.
Do they now? Not much. We need to come to terms and
explore those anecdotes in rounding out a system that
would put the student first.
I can give you many examples on the other side of the
coin. I am just saying let us keep the students and what
they have to contribute.
I am mindful of what Senator St. Germain said earlier: The
funding issue is important but it is not the only issue. If we
would expand the discussion to know what we are losing
as a country by not supporting these young people to
contribute and see it from that end of the telescope, I do
not think we would have such a hard time with public
policy because we are losing to the extent that we do not
have a chance for these people to bring all that they have
to the country that is theirs and that they love.
Senator Brazeau: I have a final, short question talking
about the legislative mandate. There have been some
progressive communities who have entered into tripartite
agreements in trying to develop a framework that would
work for them, and that should be applauded. You also
mentioned there is no cookie-cutter approach that would
apply for all. Again, perhaps a legislated mandate would
be required or needed in many parts of the country; maybe
not so.
Having said that, what about reality, where many
communities or the leadership of those communities
oppose legislation that is created to either benefit them or
affects them?
How do we break through those barriers, especially when
the provinces are involved? Many First Nations
communities are reluctant to involve the provinces. Again, there is this jurisdictional issue that no one wants to tackle,
but it is there and, in my opinion, it is a current barrier to
moving forward. The federal government has jurisdiction
for Indians living on reserve, and the provinces have
jurisdiction for education. How do we break through those
issues that no one wants to tackle?
Ms. Jamieson: Senator Brazeau, you have asked many
questions. Let me quickly skim the surface. Many
communities would regard themselves as progressive and
are running their own immersion schools and maybe are
not in tripartite agreements. There are many ways forward
that may or may not be progressive.
We grappled with the question of prescriptive or
facilitative on the Committee on Indian Self-Government
legislation. I think you will find that there still is
reluctance on the part of many First Nations to see the
Government of Canada legislating over them, but there is a
difference between legislation over them and legislation
obliging Parliament to set aside adequate funds to provide
support for students.
That kind of legislation that is available in other programs
in the country would certainly not be condemned, I would
suggest to you. It would not be prescriptive or obliging. It
would not be empowering First Nations; it would instead
be facilitating supporting students to succeed and putting
the requirement for resource allocation into legislation. I
do not think you would run up against that problem.
Senator Demers: Thank you for the great presentation. I
have been here for several months, and I have been taking
notes. I would make just an observation, for which maybe
an answer can be given. Whenever we come here, the first
thing we talk about is money. My thinking is that we
should talk about structure first. We could give you all the
money in the world, but we need the structure first.
We talked about young Aboriginals going to school with
no breakfast, but in the province of Quebec, we have some
young kids who are non-Aboriginal who also go to school
with no breakfast. Do you sense that too many Aboriginal
people are stereotyped and there is discrimination and
many roadblocks? Senator St. Germain said something
interesting about all the pilots. He said there was just one.
They have to be smart. There many smart First Nations
people. That really hit me.
Mr. Newhouse: The Environics study indicated that most
Aboriginal people experience discrimination and prejudice
and stereotyping in the urban environment, and it is
probably the same in other environments as well. Certainly
it is important to try to change the attitudes of individuals
within the system.
I have been involved over the last year with the reform of
Aboriginal education in Ontario and the new curriculum. It
has been difficult to try to get a view of Aboriginal people
as contemporary peoples into that system. They want to
focus on history, which is important, but it has been
difficult to get into the system the idea of Aboriginal
people as contemporary peoples, looking forward,
beginning to live good lives today and dealing with issues
in a contemporary world.
The cultural stereotypes that we have of Aboriginal people
still persist, and they are hard to change. There is a lot of
effort to try to change those. They are real and they have
effects. They cause some streaming of students within
schools as well.
Structure is important, but we have to ask what we want
the structure to do, and then we can ask how much funding
is required in order to achieve that. Then we can begin to
ask the question around equity. The equity question is
extremely important, but we ought not to limit ourselves
only to equity. We need a system that will, at least in the
short term, do more. It needs more funding than the
mainstream systems do if we are going to begin to close
this gap. The question of equity is important, but it may
have to be more than equitable over the next short while.
The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples talked
about that concept as well. They talked about the need for
funding for catch-up over, in this case, a 15-year period,
but there was not much support for it. Hopefully there will
be some support for it in this environment.
Senator Sibbeston: I think you are all brilliant and smart
and I am glad you are here.
It is so important for parents to inspire their children and
also to make the point that nothing can happen in a
vacuum. Something development must happen to inspire
the kids.
I will tell you a story about my mother. When I was young,
my mother used to tell me, “Some day, you will wear a
white collar or white shirt.” The background and the way
of making a living in our area was hunting and trapping,
and she recognized it was a pretty hard life. The only
people she saw in town were the priest, who had white
collars, and then teachers. I have to say that I failed her
badly not becoming a priest; I was not even close.

I went to university and, in my first three years, I took
education, but I flunked out and eventually became a
lawyer.
I make the point that it is so important for the children to
be inspired and encouraged and to see something that they
can do.
I will use the example of the Dogrib people in the
Northwest Territories. They are the most traditional group
of people in terms of hunting, fishing, and living off the
land. However, since the diamond mines have come into
the area, there has been great movement to getting jobs
with the diamond mines. They have come from a
traditional life to an industrial life in just decades, and
their children are doing so well. They have students taking
training. From the money they get from the mines, they are
subsidizing them so they can go as families.
You alluded to corporations and industry. Could you say
something about this? While our focus when we are
dealing with education is governments and that
governments needing to spend more money, et cetera, do
you feel that the role of industry and private enterprise in
this country is becoming more important in the education
of Aboriginal people, and do they have a responsibility and
obligation, as it were?
Ms. Jamieson: I would say yes, they do, and they wish to,
for the reasons that Mr. Newhouse just cited about the fact
that equity is important, but there is a major investment to
be made to even get on the playing field with respect to our
young people. We have an aging population in Canada.
Our labour shortage is well known, and our avail-able
labour, Aboriginal youth, are not getting out of high
school. We should be able to put this picture together.
Industry sees that. The corporate CEOs to whom I speak
see that and are willing to contribute and grow employees.
However, they want and are entitled to see government
take the lead role, make the lion's share of the investment
up front and lead the change, which must be transformational.
It cannot be a little bit more, more of the same,
tighter rules. We need transformational change in
educating our young people.
Our young people also need to see that there is a future for
them. That is one of the biggest challenges we face. When
we do career events for high school students and go into
classrooms with role models, either on video or in person,
they are powerful. Students tell us that they are life
changing experiences, because for the first time they can
see that it is possible, that they are worthy, that they can
dream and realize their dreams. They can see that someone
cares about them and will support them, that there is a
world for them if they stay with it.
Sadly, many of our young people do not believe that. They
need to see the job down the road; they need to see that it
is possible and within reach. That is why role models are
so important.
Everyone will play a role. Diavik Diamond Mines, now
Rio Tinto, is one of our supporters at the post-secondary
level, but they want government to play the lead in our
communities for the much younger students. They will top
up and do breakfast programs, but they want to see
leadership from the Government of Canada, in particular,
as well as from provincial governments and First Nations
governments.
The Chair: We have tripartite agreements and a lot of
infrastructure at the provincial level. I would never suggest
that the federal government should abdicate its fiduciary
responsibility to First Nations. However, the provinces
have infrastructure now and the cultures are similar in
many provinces. In Manitoba, there are Ojibwa and Cree.
Perhaps I misunderstood, but you have not really focused
on this aspect. We have to be practical. The provinces
would benefit greatly from an educated workforce in our
Aboriginal communities. There would be a huge
socio-economic benefit. It is ridiculous how many First
Nations people occupy our prisons.
Is there a danger, from your perspective, in working
aggressively with the provinces? The federal government
will try to support you, but as we develop this legislated
structure, should the provinces be first and foremost in the
minds of those who will design this vehicle?
Ms. Jamieson: I am saying that there is no cookie-cutter
approach. If it works for the communities in the area, we
should go for it, because if they are invested, it will
succeed. It will not work everywhere. I would avoid
limiting the flow of funds in one direction. Choice should
be available.
Some communities have their own system that works in an
immersion setting not at all connected with the provincial
system. If it is producing successful outcomes, that is
terrific. Others are in tripartite agreements. If they are
successful, that is terrific. We should do whatever works
that will bring positive results.

I want to underline what Mr. Newhouse said about
outcomes. We want success. Let us take a hard look at what
is working and why it is working. Let us evaluate it and
share the features that are working. That is what we want to
do through the Foundation’s Istitute that we are building.
We also want to run pilot projects in areas that you raised
earlier, such as having no breakfast. In some areas it is
about the parental responsibility for getting the kids to
school in the first place. We have a community that wants
to work with us on a pilot project on how to you change
that.
There is room for all of those things, and there must be
because, as we have said before, we are very different
across the country.
I have not spent a lot of time on tripartite agreements, but I
know there are places in the country, B.C. being one of
them, where they are working and the communities are
behind them. That is wonderful, but let us maintain
flexibility for other approaches in other places as long as
they are producing the result that we are seeking.
Senator Raine: You have given us a lot to think about.
Thank you very much.
The Chair: That is right. Senator Sibbeston exhibited the
honesty and straight-forwardness that exists in this
committee, although I am not sure that failing out of
education and going into law is necessarily the standard.
Colleagues, we are, unfortunately, going to lose someone
who has contributed greatly to this committee over the past
few years. I have been on this committee for about 17
years, and I have seen the good work that people do,
including our reporters, our translators and our clerks. We
also have our researchers from the Library of Parliament.
I must advise you that we are losing one of our key people.
Tonina Simeone, our researcher, is choosing to go
elsewhere. She has produced incredible work for us. Our
reports are crafted by the researchers, with a lot of input
from us, but they are the artists. The legislation on specific
claims virtually mirrored our report, which was drafted by
Tonina and others. Thank you, Tonina, for everything you
have done for us. May God bless you in your journey
forward. You are always welcome to come back.
Senator Dyck: I would like to thank Tonina as well. Her
work is of exceptional quality. I spent many years at
university in graduate studies, and I know that her work is
exceptional. All committee members will affirm that.

“The Penner Report,” 1983 Parliamentary Task Force on Indian Self-Government

External control of the education of Indian children has been destructive of Indian culture. . .

The 1971 Sub-Committee on Indian Education found that federal, provincial and church schools had failed to educate Indian students. In 1972, the National Indian Brotherhood’s paper Indian Control of Indian Education was endorsed by the Minister of Indian Affairs Jean Chretien. The new arrangements replaced the drastic unilateral measures of the past with bureaucratic systems that call upon the resources of Indian communities, but result in no real Indian control.

The Manitoba Indian Education Authority spoke about the difference between the per capita cost for an Indian student in a public elementary school and the per capita cost for an Indian student in an Indian-run school.

Many witnesses recognized and emphasized the need for education as a means of both recovering the cultural values and skills of aboriginal societies and acquiring the skills needed to survive and prosper in non-Indian society. Indian control over education was seen as an essential component.

Throughout the Committee hearings, witnesses provided examples of arrangements or structures that might be used to achieve these goals. This might mean that a tribal council would be empowered to act on behalf of a number of bands, or a special education authority might be created. In some cases, Indian First Nations might wish to make agreements with the provinces, but would negotiate their own arrangements regarding funding and the inclusion of cultural and language studies. The James Bay Cree School Board has special powers unequalled in other schools. Central to this process is the principle that it is the Indian First Nations that should have jurisdiction over and responsibility for education.

Education is a central area in which Indian people wish to exercise jurisdiction. In order to pursue their goals, Indian people want real power to make their own decisions and carry out their own plans for Indian education.

The Penner Report was adopted unanimously by Parliament 27 years ago.

++++++++

On June 1, 2010 Northern Nishnawbe Education Council, Barry McLoughlin, Director of Lifelong Learning, and, from the Manitoba First Nations Education Resource Centre, Gwen Merrick, Associate Executive Director, from the Indigenous Education Coalition, Bruce Stonefish, Executive Director, and from the Ontario Native Education Counselling Association, Cindy Fisher, President provide the committee with information about their work and challenges with the present situation of underfunding for First Nation Education.

From Cindy Fisher's presentation: First Nation schools are not equitably funded, while they must deliver programs comparable to those of the provinces. As I said earlier, I am a First Nation education director. One thing that I am told when I talk to INAC about the level of funding is that we receive comparable funding. I took all the money we receive for council-operated schools — school operations and maintenance — and if we compare the rates per square foot between the provincial schools and the federal schools, we see a big difference. They were not comparable. An audit report prepared last year talked about the capital projects as well.

I also included enhanced teacher salary and low-cost special education planning and design. That gave us a total of $660,663. We have 81 students. To calculate the per-student rate, I used simple division and did not use any formulas. It works out to $8,156 per student. Of the 81 students, 58 are at the elementary level. If they were to go to Marathon High School, which is 15 to 20 minutes away, Canada would provide $15,211.53. We have 23 high school students. Canada will provide secondary education tuition fees of $17,131.88. If Canada can provide those dollars to a board to educate our kids, why can they not give it to us? What is the difference? We need to question that.

If we had that budget, we would receive a budget of $1,276,301 per year to run our schools. What is holding that money back? I seriously question that. Is it really Treasury Board guidelines? Is it the glass ceiling out there if we become too smart or too good? Who is feeling good by keeping us down? That is one thing. I question that.

We have to stop saying "INAC." I was thinking about that last night. INAC is becoming the scapegoat for Canada. Instead of Canada accepting its responsibility, INAC is the scapegoat. Canada is responsible. Everyone in this room is responsible. I cannot understand why this is happening. I am leaving my notes but I have to make one more point, and then that is it.

First Nations do not have secured funding to support capacity-building and provide third-level services. There is none. Look right across Canada. Where are the curriculum development units? Where is our ministry of education? Ontario spends well over $20 billion on education. Where is ours? Canada has to stop this.

Pic River First Nation, where I am from, is small. According to the audit, which I brought with me, between 2003 and 2009, we spent $1.5 million from our source revenue to keep our school running, and we are not even providing the available programming. The teachers in the school board nearest to us are trained by the world's leader in oral language. We are managing but the gap is becoming wider and wider. What will happen to our kids when they have to compete in the mainstream? Will they be at the same level? They have that disadvantage.

In essence, Pic River is bailing out Canada. Unfortunately, this cannot continue. Two weeks ago, there were major cuts. We had to cut our educational assistants. We have to cut a teacher. We have to cut all our support staff. Then last night, the final budget, again, there were big-time cuts. What will happen to our children?

I came home from the meeting about the first cuts and my grandchildren were playing outside. I looked at them and I thought, why are they not worth it? Come to our school and look at our kids. Go to any school in any First Nation and look at the kids and tell me why they are not worth it. Why are they not worth it? Why are our kids only worth one half the funding? Why are you allowing Canada to continue to devalue our kids? Yet, you expect them to grow and to be strong? A lot of things need to happen. Our students not only need to know who they are as Nishnawbe, they need to be confident in who they are. We all talk about self-esteem and how important self-esteem is, but it is more important to have self-control. Those are the things that we lost and we are just getting back.

Seven generations is not a long time. With these eyes, I have seen seven generations. I am a proud member of the Ojibway of the Pic River First Nation. I am a proud Nishnawbe woman. I love being Nishnawbe. I love it immensely. It is unbelievable, but, despite that love, I am not too proud to beg. I beg you: Please do something. If you have to walk bills through Parliament yourself, whatever it is — I do not understand the parliamentary process — then walk them through. Thank you.