Media.Knet.Ca

39th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development
Wednesday, May 31, 2006

http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/cmte/CommitteePublication.aspx?SourceId=146652
 
The Chair (Mr. Colin Mayes (Okanagan—Shuswap, CPC)): I will open this meeting of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, this meeting of Wednesday, May 31, 2006.

    Members, I just want to say before we begin that Ms. Neville said she would be away and apologized for her absence. It is no indication of her lack of interest in this committee. I want to pass that on, on her behalf.

    We have the orders of the day before us, committee members: pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), a study on ministerial priorities. Appearing before us is the Honourable Jim Prentice, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, with witnesses from the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development: Michael Wernick, deputy minister; Paul LeBlanc, senior assistant deputy minister, socio-economic policy and regional operations sector; and Caroline Davis, assistant deputy minister, corporate services.

    Hon. Jim Prentice (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It gives me great pleasure to appear today before the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. As you know, I was a member of this standing committee for some period of time, and I see some new friends and some old friends here.

    As a former member of the committee, I fully appreciate the important role it plays in making progress on crucial national issues.

    As many of you know, I worked on land claims before I was elected, and in opposition I served as our party's critic with respect to aboriginal issues. I enjoyed the opportunity I've had over the course of many years to spend time with many different aboriginal leaders discussing the range of important issues we face as a nation and that aboriginal people face. I am passionate about the issues we are here to address, and I look forward to our time together this afternoon in this committee session.

    Today I would like to share with you some of the guiding principles that have been valuable to me as a minister and also to our department and that will be of value to the government as we move forward and as our relationship with aboriginal people evolves.

    One of the fundamental principles must be adherence to the Constitution of our country. I'm sure you will agree with me that the rights of individuals, irrespective of where they live in Canada, that are guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms must be respected at all times. So must the charter-protected aboriginal and treaty rights, which are referenced particularly in section 35 of the Constitution.

    As well, basic democratic values must be promoted, such as transparency in governance structures among governments, accountability, and responsibility of all elected officials to their members. At least as important as these are the equal treatment of men and women, which is a topic I have spoken with some of you at this table about and which I know we'll discuss today.

    These are basic expectations citizens have of their governing bodies, and we know that Aboriginal people are in agreement with these values.

    As the father of three beautiful daughters, much of my motivation to work in government centers around building a better future for them. I know that Aboriginal leaders feel the same way about youth in their communities.

    I am pleased to say I have just had the experience of getting my youngest daughter through high school. I now have three daughters at university, so I am very sensitive to education and the importance of it to young Canadians.

    By ensuring that aboriginal young people have the educational and skills development programs that will prepare them for the economy of the future, we will facilitate improved access to the same economic opportunities as are available to non-aboriginal youth.

    Aboriginal people must have the tools and training to seize the opportunities presented by the resource development taking place in and around their communities, and to participate fully in the broader Canadian economy.

    Another guiding principle is the availability of programs and services for aboriginal people that meet 21st century standards, which they need to have a modern legislative base—another topic I think we should discuss in detail today. This legislation must be focused on achieving effective and measurable results.

    So as Canada's new government moves forward together with aboriginal peoples, we will focus on priority areas where we can make a measurable improvement in the months ahead.

    In particular, I would say to the committee that we believe we can make a real difference in five areas: firstly, in education, we must create new opportunities for aboriginal youth; secondly, we can do more to support women, children, and families; thirdly, the safety of first nations' water on reserve has been a concern for some time, which we have taken steps to address; fourthly, housing on and off reserves has been identified as a real need; and ultimately, we need to move forward in partnership with aboriginal organizations, first nations, and leaders in all of these areas to change the relationship between first nations and government. We can enhance the capacity of first nations to manage more of their own affairs, and we can move forward towards self-government agreements. These are the objectives we support.

    The last one is obviously a longer-term goal. But to get there, we have to meet some immediate objectives.

    This year's budget allocates $450 million for initiatives in priority areas: water, women and children, housing and education.

    The funds that have been discussed in the budget—the $450 million—are being provided in a clear two-year budgetary framework. I would emphasize that this is real money, flowing into real programs that will make a real difference in people's lives. The most basic of these needs is water.

    It is unacceptable that hundreds of First Nation communities in Canada have not had access to reliable supplies of safe drinking water. My first action upon taking office was to introduce measures to rectify the situation. Two months ago, I directed officials to implement a series of steps that will improve water quality on reserves across Canada. These steps include accountability measures that require regular monitoring of water quality and full reporting of test results.

    Furthermore, today the Government of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations announced the formation of a three-member expert panel that will ensure that all first nation communities have access to safe drinking water. The panel will provide options for a regulatory framework, which would be developed with all partners.

    Ladies and gentlemen, the well-being of aboriginal women and children is another priority of this government and needs to be a priority of this committee. Significant inequities separate aboriginal and non-aboriginal women. We must do more to eliminate the root causes of these inequities.

    During my tenure as minister, I am determined to resolve the difficult issues surrounding matrimonial real property. The government will also continue to deliver programs targeting women and children, and we are implementing the universal child care plan to support both aboriginal and non-aboriginal families.

    Most of us would agree that access to quality education is the surest way to eradicate the poverty that plagues so many Aboriginal communities.

    Since taking office, I have met with representatives of organizations across the country to discuss ways of improving the quality of education in Aboriginal communities.

    The recent budget also included investments relating to housing. The government is committed to addressing the on-reserve housing challenge. In fact, housing production will triple this year, but we also realize that money alone cannot adequately address this challenge. So we are committed to working with first nations to develop more effective and more sustainable approaches.

    There are impressive first nation successes in attracting market investment and promoting home ownership, which are very promising for the future in this country.

    As well, the budget commits $600 million to addressing the housing needs of Aboriginal people living off reserve and of Northerners.

    As we move forward on these priorities, we will have to bring more clarity around the roles and responsibilities amongst all parties, both government and aboriginal. That is something we have striven to do with respect to water. Currently there is a disconnect between government and band councils, between accounting for funding and responsibility for delivering programs and services. Self-government and devolution are two means of realigning accountability and responsibility. I believe these solutions are the way of the future.

    For instance, yesterday the Government of Canada tabled an offer to the Deh Cho First Nation of the Northwest Territories towards the settlement of a land and self-government agreement. This offer provides the basis for the negotiation of a fair and reasonable agreement that can meet the Deh Cho's interests. Those of you familiar with the north will be familiar that this in a sense is the largest remaining outstanding land claim issue north of 60 in this country.

    As the Auditor General noted earlier this month, the last government failed to improve the quality of life of aboriginal peoples, and it also failed to cut the red tape in first nations' dealings with Ottawa. The current paradox is that band councils are the main service providers on reserve, yet responsibility for the programs themselves lies with the Government of Canada. Right now, that means in effect that first nations provide this government, the Government of Canada, with more than 144 annual reports on their activities. This system must change.

    Of course, that kind of change could only begin with broad consultations among First Nations, Aboriginal stakeholders, provinces and territories and others.

    The ideas must be generated first from Aboriginal leaders, not imposed by Ottawa.

    As we move forward, we cannot forget the past.

    The principles of mutual respect and reconciliation must be observed. To this end, our budget set aside $2.2 billion to address the legacy of Indian residential schools. On May 10, the settlement agreement was signed and an advance payment program for seniors was launched. As everyone knows, the agreement is now winding its way through the court process that is a necessary condition for approval.

    As well, we need to address other outstanding issues such as specific claims and treaties. It is also important that all Canadians recognize and accept the contributions that Aboriginal people and cultures have made and will continue to make to this country.

    Mr. Chairman, one of the many lessons that I learned from my time on the Indian Specific Claims Commission, which I co-chaired for some nine years, and on the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development is this: money alone cannot solve the problems that aboriginal Canadians face today. We must apply the same basic principles that guide good government for non-aboriginal Canadians: charter rights, democratic values, fairness, and respect. Aboriginal people in this country deserve no less.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to responding to the questions from committee members.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Thank you also for your willingness to be here and to listen to the questions of the committee.

    We'll start with the first seven minutes from the Liberal side. Who would like to speak first?

    Mr. Roger Valley (Kenora, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity.

    Thank you to the minister for coming here today.

    I had the opportunity to work with the minister when he served on the last committee, and I appreciated the time and effort he put into it. I tried to learn a lot from him in those days.

    I'm very encouraged by a number of the words that you're using, such as “broad consultations among First Nations, Aboriginal stakeholders, provinces and territories and others” and that “ideas must be generated first from Aboriginal leaders, not imposed by Ottawa”. These are all words that we took to heart when we started working on the Kelowna accord. So I'm very glad to see those words in there; they mean you believe that a lot of the work done previously was of value, and we appreciate that. At the same time, you mentioned through a number of your comments that you're going to honour some of the agreements reached by the last government. We thank you for that part of it, because it speeds the process along, instead of having to reinvent the wheel.

    I just want to say that during the election there were some comments attributed to you, so I thought I'd give you the chance to clear them up. They deal specifically with the Kelowna accord. Perhaps I could quote what was purported to have been said by you: “We are supportive of Kelowna. We are supportive of the targets and objectives that were set at Kelowna”.

    Maybe you could answer my first question. Are you planning on reinventing the wheel, or are you planning to carry forward many of the issues from Kelowna? Would you just enlighten us on how you see Kelowna fitting in, and a lot of the agreements in it, given some of the restrictions that you have in your budget?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: I'm pleased to answer that question. I expect some of the discussion today will be devoted to Kelowna, and I'd like to be quite clear on this.

    I took part in the Kelowna process; I was there. I know there are other people in this room who were there as well. I stated at the time that the document that described targets and objectives, which was tabled at the commencement of the Kelowna process, was one on which there was broad agreement. I felt the targets and objectives that were set forth at the beginning of the Kelowna process were ones most Canadians embrace: to eliminate aboriginal poverty, to eliminate the gaps pertaining to housing, education, social services, and so on.

    The difficulty was, from my perspective, that towards the close of the first ministers meeting—frankly, in the closing 10 to 15 minutes—the Prime Minister of the day tabled a single-page document that was a compilation of numbers on one page that totaled $5.1 billion. There was no accord. There was no agreement signed at that time that reflected all of the premiers, all of the territorial leaders, and all of the aboriginal leaders with respect to that document. Frankly, all there was was a press release that was issued by the then government at the close of the conference.

    I took the time at Kelowna to speak with premiers and with aboriginal leaders, and I was struck by the fact that there was no consensus, no agreement on the $5.1 billion: how it would be spent, where it would come from, how it would be distributed amongst the aboriginal organizations, how it would be split up amongst the provinces and the territories. I think that's underscored by the fact that no document was ever signed. There was discussion at Kelowna about producing a document that would be signed, but it never happened, because there wasn't an agreement.

    What I've said in the face of that is that we are supportive of the targets and objectives and will move forward to address those issues, and we'll address them within the budgetary parameters of the government. I think our first budget is an excellent step forward. We will work in consultation with all of the aboriginal organizations that were at Kelowna, and with all of the premiers and territorial leaders, to move forward. I think that's a very reasonable position for the Government of Canada to take.

    Mr. Roger Valley: I would disagree with you on your comments on the budget. I don't believe there's enough in there that addresses the issues of the aboriginal people in Canada.

    I want to take you back to page 5 of your opening remarks. You identify five areas of key concern. All those areas were identified in Kelowna, and you've listed them here. Can you tell us in a very brief answer, because I have a question after this, whether these are listed in priority, or do you see them as all being dealt with at the same time? Can you give me a brief answer on which of these you see as the first ones you'd like to address?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: The areas we've spoken of—these are education, social services, supporting women and children, the safety of water on reserve, housing—are all important issues. They are all part of eliminating the poverty gap.

    The very first issues I've moved on since becoming minister related to water. I did so because I felt the situation aboriginal people were living in was unacceptable and that the circumstance was quite dire. In terms of the immediate task, in the first 45 days I was the minister I announced a national water strategy. We've now appointed a panel of experts that will carry forward with the work. That was done.

    Let us be clear with Canadians about the situation the new government inherited. With respect to water, I asked the department to provide us information on how many aboriginal communities were living at risk. We found 21 communities living at risk. We found another 170 communities beyond that, living at high risk. These are close to 200 communities left to us by the former government with water systems presenting a high risk to aboriginal Canadians. Was that a priority? It was an immediate task to move on to address the situation, and we're doing the best we can.

    We also moved forward on education, housing, women's rights, and these other matters, and we'll do so as we are able to and as we are able to achieve a consensus with other levels of government and aboriginal leaders.

    Mr. Marc Lemay (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ): Good day, Minister. I suggest that you listen to the English feed, for greater certainty, as I have some very specific questions for you.

    I note that on page 5 of your presentation, you've identified education as one of your priorities. Did you realize that tomorrow is the first day of June and that in June, your department is supposed to unveil a new education policy? Your department undertook to do so in 2004, further to the Auditor General's report on education.

    Are you ready to unveil your new policy? Will we be receiving copies of it? Education happens to be a priority of this committee. So then, is the policy ready and will it be released in June 2006? As I pointed out, tomorrow is the first day of June.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: In theory, we must work with Aboriginal committees, with the Assembly of First Nations and with other Aboriginal organizations. We need to formulate an education strategy and policy.

    We are on good terms with Aboriginal organizations and I feel that we are making progress.

    In my view, education is the way forward. It is the obligation that we need to focus on. Let me just say this. I don't think the existing situation is acceptable. We have a Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs who is essentially responsible, in a legal sense, for 140,000 aboriginal children in this country who really are without any of the protections that other Canadian children have in terms of a system of education. Frankly, the system doesn't really exist.

    I think we need to move forward with aboriginal leaders to create systems that are sustainable, that are supported in the communities, that have some of the benefits of an educational authority and some of the centralized services. I think this is one of the most important responsibilities we have as Canadians.

    Mr. Marc Lemay: With all due respect, Minister, we are of two different minds. Your department has had two years to do exactly what you've just said you will do.

    The Auditor General made a clear recommendation in her 2004 report and your department responded that it would develop a policy in 2006 and release it no later than June of 2006.

    I'll move on to another question, since I only have seven minutes. I've put the question to departmental officials and now, I'm putting it to you, the Minister. In her 2006 report, the Auditor General made the following observation in paragraph 5.36: “ the scale of the problem has not been identified, priorities for action have not been established”.

    I'd now like to address the problem of mould in buildings on reserves. With all due respect, Minister, I don't think we should be building new housing until we've dealt with the mould problem plaguing many of the structures.

    Not that there isn't a need for more housing, as the shortage is acute and the need great. However, what about the mould problem that goes unchecked while three parties, including two departments, namely Health Canada, Indian and Northern Affairs and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, continue to play the blame game.

    Are you going to assume a leadership role? As Minister, are you going to take action to address the mould problem?

    If I have time to ask another question, I'd like to speak to you about water on reserves. I understand a policy is in place, but what's happening in the case of Aboriginal communities like Kitcisakik?

    The Chair: It would be better to let the minister answer the first one, or you're not going to get an answer to either.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: Thank you for asking that very important question. In order to improve the living conditions of Aboriginal people, we need to improve their housing.

    I understand that the housing issue is one of the most important issues. We've taken immediate steps. I would point out that there's $300 million contained in the budget specifically targeted for northern housing--$200 million for Nunavut, $50 million for the Northwest Territories, and another $50 million for the Yukon. That will be spent essentially on aboriginal housing in the north.

    I was impressed with what I heard from aboriginal leaders, particularly Inuit leaders, when I first became the minister, about the gravity of the situation in the north, and we moved immediately to deal with that in this budget.

    In addition, I've been struck by what I've heard from aboriginal leaders with respect to the shortage of off-reserve housing, and there is another $300 million contained in the budget that relates to off-reserve housing that has been paid by way of the provinces.

    I would point out that, for example, to go back to the comments about Kelowna, Kelowna called for a total of $300 million to deal with the northern housing issues over five years. In this case this government has dealt with it in a single budget, basically payable over two fiscal cycles. We're clearly committed to move forward on these issues.

    With respect to on-reserve housing, I have discussed that matter with National Chief Phil Fontaine. We've identified it as one of the areas that we're going to work together on. There need to be some institutional changes considered. They need to be done in consultation with the first nation leadership to make sure we have institutions in place that are able to improve the quality of housing and to deal with some of the issues that you've spoken about. Previous governments have not done that.

    At the time of this budget, there was not a first nation housing authority in place that was available to flow money through and that would have let us move forward on on-reserve housing. I've committed to National Chief Fontaine to work together with him on that.

    Mr. Marc Lemay: And what about water?

    Ms. Jean Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan, NDP): Thank you Mr. Chair.

    I would like to thank the minister for coming today. I do appreciate some of the words that you've brought, which do give hope.

    Certainly, in some of my meetings with aboriginal leadership, one of the things they've asked all of us collectively to do is to work together to address the very serious problems that are facing aboriginal communities, and they would like to see us be non-partisan. I'll attempt to be somewhat non-partisan here.

    I want to reference the Auditor General's report. I do understand that it is a damning indictment of previous governments' track records, and so I would welcome a more positive response. I would look specifically around the issue that the Auditor General identified in terms of the funding gap.

    Coming back to Kelowna for one second, that was an 18-month agreement, and although it may not have been signed, there was a certain amount of honour around people gathering to discuss things and coming up even with a verbal agreement. Although the details and the signatures may not have been there, I think there was a broad understanding with aboriginal organizations and many of the premiers that this was actually an intention, an honour, of the Crown to move forward.

    So coming back to the Auditor General's report, she talks about the funding gap, that the funding has basically been around 1.6% and that there's 11.2% population growth. Many people believe that since 1996 there has been a 2% funding cap through INAC. Although the money that's in this budget over this next two years is welcomed in terms of closing that poverty gap, I think many people feel it's insufficient. I would like you to address that broader funding gap and where you see being able to address some of that.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: That's a fair question.

    For the benefit of the chair and the committee, I would point out that I've had really excellent discussions with Ms. Crowder about these issues. I know she's sincere when she says that it's important to deal with these in a non-partisan way.

    The situation we face in this country with respect to aboriginal poverty is one of the most pressing issues we have as a nation. In part, in appearing here today, I wish to challenge the committee. I would like you to be part of the process of moving forward on these issues, and I'd like the committee to be engaged in a constructive way on some of the issues we're going to talk about.

    The point Ms. Crowder makes is that over the past number of years, when one considers inflation and population growth, the per capita funding has started to lag behind in terms of our investment in aboriginal communities. That is something I'm mindful of and that I'm working on.

    I would say this, though. It's not simply a question of money. At this point in time, the Government of Canada is spending, at last count, $9.35 billion on aboriginal programs and services, which is fractured over 360 different individual government programs. It's not simply about money. I think we need to have the courage, collectively as parliamentarians, to look at what isn't working and make the institutional changes, working together in consultation with first nations leaders. But we need to have the courage to actually move forward. Simply putting more money into things that aren't working isn't providing benefits to aboriginal Canadians or non-aboriginal Canadians.

    I'm heartened by what I hear from the first nations leadership. National Chief Fontaine, I think, agrees that we need a government that has the courage to work together with aboriginal Canadians to make the fundamental changes. I hope you'll be part of that.

    Ms. Jean Crowder: In terms of the funding--and I know it depends on whose numbers you have--there is a feeling that first nations on reserve often do not receive the per capita funding directly for programs and services in the communities and that other Canadians are receiving the benefit of services at the municipal and the provincial levels that first nations on reserve do not receive.

    Although a significant amount of money goes into on reserve communities, there still is a funding gap. Indigenous children in care is a really good example of where I would argue that we are probably contravening some of our international conventions on human rights in terms of the significant funding gap. And I understand that an additional $25 million...but the service providers feel there's a $109 million gap.

    In good conscience, how do we continue to have people living in this country in desperate poverty? We're talking third world conditions in Canada. I think we have to move beyond language and into meaningful action that is driven by aboriginal communities. That's more of a rhetorical comment.

    Just quickly, I appreciate your rapid attention to water; you're talking about reliable, safe drinking water. There are many communities in Canada that do not even have access to running water, never mind reliable, safe drinking water. Their water is trucked in. They tell stories about elders having to go out in the middle of the winter and break the ice to get access to additional water.

    What's the plan to deal with this much broader issue?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: To be clear, we are making progress. There are 755 individual first nation water systems across Canada. As I've identified, there are about 200 of those where Canadian aboriginal citizens are living at risk—either at high risk or the community is at risk. We're moving to deal with that. There's been significant money invested; there's significant money inside the fiscal framework right now as we move forward. But clearly there is an infrastructure deficit that needs to be dealt with.

    I would like to come back to an earlier point that you made. There are hundreds, indeed thousands, of first nation communities across the country, and the solution will never be that each one of those communities receives all of the funding that is necessary from government. Part of the challenge we face as a country is that in those communities we need to have an economy and economic activity. There needs to be a tax base within those communities for the aboriginal governments themselves; aboriginal governments have to have the capacity to issue a municipal bond to lay in municipal infrastructure. It wasn't until last year that there was a legal mechanism by which a first nation government could actually go and create a local tax base, issue a bond, and construct infrastructure. It was legally impossible before that, because we are operating under an Indian Act that's a compilation of pre-Confederation laws. It's a preposterous situation that we've inherited.

    So we need to move forward to make sure that first nation governments have the same kinds of opportunities as other Canadians have. Government will never be able to do it all satisfactorily; we have to provide people with the mechanisms to be able to move forward on their own as well.

    Mr. Rod Bruinooge (Winnipeg South, CPC): Mr. Chair, thank you very much.

    I would like to thank the minister, of course, for appearing today before the committee. I would like you to highlight some of the travel you've done throughout the north. As an northerner and an aboriginal Canadian originally from the north, I would like you to explain some of the initiatives you took in the north, and some of the plans you have in terms of spending and other budgetary items for the north.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: Well, I think the commitment to the north is very clear. I know that all three premiers have spoken in very positive terms about their working relationships with the new government. During the last parliamentary break, I travelled across the north for five days and met with all of the premiers and most of the regional aboriginal leaders across the north.

    I think it's very exciting. I think what we've accomplished as a nation north of 60 needs to celebrated. In Nunavut we have a public government that's functioning and doing great things. We have some educational issues that were highlighted in the Berger report that we need to deal with.

    When you move over to the Northwest Territories, with the exception of the Deh Cho, the major claims of first nations have been dealt with. There are some Métis claims that we have to deal with as well, but by and large, up the Mackenzie Valley a number of claims have been settled over the course of the last generation, and we're carrying on with the completion of that work.

    With the Deh Cho claim, the government has put forward $500 million for the socio-economic fund in order to facilitate the construction of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline. We're on top of that issue.

    Of course, we've travelled to the Yukon and met with the premier there and with the Council of Yukon Indians. In fact I'm meeting with them again later today to make sure there's adequate funding for the self-government agreements that we have in place in the Yukon.

    So when you look north of 60, we've accomplished great things as a nation, and I think it's important that we be optimistic about where we're headed in this country. I believe that in the days ahead we're going to see some remarkable progress. I believe we're going to see the Northwest Territories, in particular, emerge as one of the driving engines of the Canadian economy. We're already the world's second or third largest producer of diamonds. The oil and the gas potential up the Mackenzie Valley is enormous, right up to Beaufort Sea, and aboriginal Canadians are at the centre of all that. The Mackenzie Valley pipeline will be owned, in large measure, by first nations and Inuit people. I expect the same will happen in other northern projects.

    So we're very supportive of all of that and we're focused on making sure it comes to reality. We have some challenges in this country, but let's not lose sight of some of the great opportunities we have.

    Mr. Rod Bruinooge: In your speech you referenced that money alone cannot solve the problems. Is that similar to what you're seeing in the north in terms of the northern governments moving forward in great strides, and do you see that same model needing to be moved forward in other parts of Canada?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: I believe so. I think north of 60 there's a different historical context and a different legislative context.

    In the context of Nunavut, we have a public government structure that I think is working very well. And that's the same, frankly, in the Yukon, coupled with aboriginal self-government agreements.

    In the Northwest Territories, we have very strong aboriginal self-governments. We haven't yet completed the process in the Northwest Territories of knitting together the public Northwest Territories government and the five aboriginal governments. I think it will be a challenge over the next five to seven years to make that happen and to carry through with the progress on devolution.

    South of 60, in terms of on-reserve communities, we face a different historical challenge. I think we could all agree as parliamentarians that we face communities that are governed under the Indian Act, which was developed before Confederation. Frankly, we shouldn't be surprised as Canadians with some of the difficulties that aboriginal people are experiencing with development on reserve, when you consider that the governmental structure that applies was developed in the 1850s. We need, as parliamentarians and as a government, to sit down with first nation leaders and find resolution to some of those challenges.

    Ms. Tina Keeper (Churchill, Lib.): Thank you.

    I'd like to thank Minister Prentice for sharing with us here today. It is indeed an honour for me to be here.

    I would like to raise an issue that has been raised a couple of times already--and of course, that is the housing issue. You're well aware that this is probably one of the number one issues facing first nations.

    I represent a riding in Manitoba that has 33 first nations. Certainly the issue of housing, and in particular on-reserve social housing, was a source of disappointment in terms of the budget.

    The issue of mould, as well, as has been mentioned, is obviously a contributing factor to health issues.

    I know you're aware that we are indeed facing a crisis of a magnitude we have never seen before, in this epidemic of tuberculosis in one of my communities, which is situated right near three other communities. I know this is a Health Canada issue, but I'd like to bring it back to the issue of housing, in that we haven't been able to access appropriate meetings with the government. I know Chief Harper will be here this week, and he's meeting with some government officials here in Ottawa. But in terms of the water issue in that community, they truck in water as well.

    In terms of the housing issue, you talk about intolerable conditions on first nations. I know you work closely with the AFN national chief about developing institutions to improve the quality of housing, but in the meantime, in the interim, we're in a crisis in many places.

    So I would like to ask the minister about the position the government is taking, and how do we work cooperatively to respond to these kinds of urgent situations?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: I'm happy to accept responsibility, where I'm responsible, but I think it is important to highlight to some extent the situation that the new government has inherited.

    There is the significant mould problem that you're referring to. Secondly, there is the shortage of social housing on reserve. I can't quantify the number of units, but according to aboriginal leaders, it's very significant. Thirdly, they're once again pointing out that it's not only a question of money; it's a question of changing the way the government gets results.

    There is no mechanism in place to flow money through to a first nations housing authority to create market-driven housing opportunities. This is not simply my idea. These are fundamental changes that were discussed at the meeting of first ministers, changes, frankly, on which there was no consensus at the time, and there was no consensus amongst aboriginal leadership at the time.

    I've said to the national chief that we have to make sure we undertake institutional reforms and institutional changes so that we can move forward. It makes no sense that a first nations Canadian cannot own a home on reserve and be able to mortgage it in the same way as any other Canadian can. The consequences of that are clear. I don't know anyone who is a successful businessperson, man, or woman in this country who didn't start by mortgaging his or her own home to move forward with business. Aboriginal Canadians, first nations Canadians, don't have that option.

    To me, it's not wise social policy. We have to figure out how to make institutional changes so that it's an option available to people. I've been around enough and I've seen enough first nations communities to know that privately owned housing stock is not the answer in all communities. There's a significant need for social housing, but surely it has to be part of the overall equation.

    We need something more than the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation providing funding in the way it currently does. We need a housing authority based on first nations, and we're committed to move forward to put that in place. Once it's in place, we're committed to move forward to fund it.

    Ms. Tina Keeper: But my question was, how do we work cooperatively together to address these urgent issues in the interim? This community hasn't had any new housing since 1979.

    Mr. Harold Albrecht (Kitchener—Conestoga, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you, Minister Prentice, for being here today. It's a privilege to have you here and to hear your expertise on this file.

    One of the things we keep hearing about is the Kelowna accord, and all of the things that were promised in that so-called accord, which I hear was apparently never signed.

    My question is this. How can you help us to compare the kinds of budgetary expenses that have been going on, in addressing aboriginal poverty and ongoing needs, and to compare past budgets with the budget that we've just passed, in terms of some of the investments you've made?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: To again come back to Kelowna, and I'd like to be clear about this, I was there. There was no consensus on where the moneys that were put forward at that time by the Prime Minister would come from. I think it's important to be clear with Canadians on this: none of those dollars were ever budgeted; none of them were ever contained in a budget of the previous government; none of them were ever approved by the House of Commons. They were tabled on a single piece of paper, three days before the last election was called, and totalled $5.1 billion.

    I've been around a lot. I have been to a third to a half of the Indian reservations in this country. I think the problems we have in this country are going to require a little more thought and a little more planning.

    Kelowna represented the start of a process. There were accomplishments. There were targets and objectives set and arrived at in consultation with aboriginal leaders. I've said that I am supportive of those. But the actual plan to move forward to deal with these real issues is going to take time, and it's going to take all of the members of the House of Commons working in a non-partisan way to do that.

    In response to the question, I would also point out that a five-year plan was discussed at the meeting of first ministers. This government has tabled a two-year budget. Right off the bat, it is difficult to make comparisons. If you look at the two-year budget, it contains more dollars in those two years than any previous government in this country has ever put forward, including new initiatives to deal with the issues that were discussed at the meeting of first ministers.

    Mr. Harold Albrecht: I would like to follow up on the question regarding housing. Minister Prentice, you do mention on page 5 that it's one of your priorities, and then again on page 8 you refer a few times to the housing production, first of all, tripling this year, and then the impressive first nations' successes in attracting market investment.

    Would you elaborate a bit on that? You said it's difficult to implement it. I understand we can't do it all at once. What initiatives have been taken? Are they successful? Can these be reproduced across other aboriginal communities?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: In the last Parliament there was legislation brought forward that was initiated, in the main, by first nations. It was first nation driven in response to some of the comments I've heard here relating to the first nation statistical and management legislation--the statistical package, the management package, the property-rights-related legislation.

    For the first time over the course of the last 18 months, aboriginal Canadians--first nation Canadians, to be clear--have had the ability to create a property regime on reserve where they can create private property rights and can create owned market housing. That's a step forward, and this emerged from a series of very far-thinking and courageous aboriginal communities in this country, communities such as Westbank, in particular, and several other communities as well.

    What we've done as a new government is carry through with the process of getting in place the institutions, the first-nation-driven institutions, so that aboriginal Canadians can move forward. We'll continue to encourage pilot projects and to encourage people really to work with us to get beyond the Indian Act into a system where there's the opportunity of private property rights. Frankly, there are reserves such as Westbank that have very significant revenue streams coming from owned housing, including owned housing that is leased to non-aboriginal Canadians. Those are the communities that I think are moving forward and are achieving social progress, because they have independent revenue sources.

    Mr. Yvon Lévesque (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, BQ): Good day, Minister. I'm delighted to see you today.

    Your statement of principle on page 4 of your submission is very laudable. You mention programs and services that meet 21st century standards. Unfortunately, you do not give any kind of timetable for implementing these programs.

    Water is a problem in our communities. One town has no water, no electricity, no sewers and no name. We refer to it as Kitcisakik. Perhaps the government and the department would do well to work together to provide this community with the tools to solve its problems. Water is important to everyone.

    You mentioned that you have three daughters. I don't doubt that your wife sees them regularly, if not daily. You're happy if you see them once a week. Residents of this community must send their children weekly to live with host families so that they can attend school. Residents should have their own community, their own school and all of the services this entails.

    No doubt you will recall that in Nunavik, global warming has caused certain landfill sites to deteriorate and to leach contaminants into the water, notably into rivers from which the community draws its drinking water. It's important that this problem be resolved very quickly. There has been talk of negotiations with the Americans to have them recover old army material buried in landfill sites located near waterways.

    There are still many water-related problems that need to be addressed, primarily in the community of Kitcisakik located in northern Quebec.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: We have met to discuss this matter. I do hope that we will be able to work together to resolve the problem.

    I would hope to visit the communities that you speak of. We've talked about that. Once again I've been impressed to think we can work together in a non-partisan way. I know there are significant infrastructure needs in the communities you speak of. I understand that in your particular riding there are a large number of first nation communities. There are first nation communities that are in need of significant investment.

    I discussed the matter with Ghislain Picard. We plan to continue our discussions and to work together. I'm going to suggest to him that he pay a visit to your riding.

    So I hope we can work together and that we can deal with some of these issues.

    Mr. Yvon Lévesque: Much is said about Nunavut, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon, but very little about Nunavik. Yet, this region is experiencing more or less the same problems as Nunavut. Serious problems with water and septic sludge deposits are plaguing this part of Quebec. Last week, I saw one area near the river and a dump where septic sludge was being dumped into catchment basins. The sludge cannot be completely contained and leaches into the sand and ultimately into the river, the very same river from which towns draw their drinking water.

    I've asked the government to address this situation that also plagues coastal communities. The basins overflow and the runoff pollutes the bay. These problems urgently need to be resolved.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: You're right, but the situation in Nunavik is a little different, given that it's a region of Quebec, not a separate territory. I've spoken to Mr. Kelley, a Quebec minister, and I've met several times with Senator Charlie Watt, who is an eloquent spokesperson for the people of Nunavik.

    Once again, I hope to visit Nunavik this summer to see some of what you speak of first-hand. We need to work together to make sure that some of the housing investment that is flowed through to the province of Quebec makes its way through to Nunavik. Charlie, Senator Watt, has been very outspoken about that. Once again, there are significant infrastructure deficits that this government inherits that we're going to have to move forward on.

    Mr. Steven Blaney (Lévis—Bellechasse, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Thank you for joining us today, Minister. This is the second time that I've participated in the work of this committee and I'm truly proud to be here with you today.

    You have spelled out very clearly what you hope to accomplish for Aboriginal people. You've talked about improving their living conditions, targeted priority areas for economic growth and underscored the importance of creating new economic development opportunities to help them achieve the same standard of living of other Canadians.

    You seem to have a great deal of empathy. That's important and nice to see. I like the way you view the world. Having worked at Indian and Northern Affairs for four years, I can also say that your team of officials is committed to the advancement of the Aboriginal cause. Therefore, I look forward to seeing some very positive results.

    Much has been said, Minister, about the Kelowna accord. It has been said that the accord has had a structuring effect on communities. Given budgetary considerations, what initiatives can we expect to see that are likely to improve the standard of living of Aboriginal people?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: From what I understand, you're new to this committee, Mr. Blaney. How long did you work for Indian and Northern Affairs?

    Mr. Steven Blaney: I worked at Indian and Northern Affairs for about four years as a technical advisor. I worked with Ms. Davies on the First Nations Water Management Strategy. We addressed certain critical housing issues, specifically with experienced officials like Mike Samborski. They helped me a great deal to get a better grasp of Aboriginal issues, including housing. I know that some departmental officials are very committed to this issue.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: In terms of moving forward on the issues that we've talked about arising from the budget, it's important that we do so in consultation with first nations and with the first nations leadership. I think we've built really strong working relationships so far. We have a good working relationship with the AFN, to be clear, and I think at the first ministers meeting this week in Manitoba, all the aboriginal leaders said that, that they were looking forward to working with the new government. We have a good working relationship with ITK and with CAP, and we're taking real steps, with the assistance of the parliamentary secretary, with the national Métis association. I would also add that I think we have a very strong working relationship with the Native Women's Association.

    In response to your question, the way forward is to work together with first nations to define some of the priority items. As you spoke about, the clear way forward is to define some of the changes that need to take place, and once some of those changes have been made, once some of those institutional reforms have been put in place, to then make sure that we're adequately funding the task at hand.

    But I think one thing that is different about this government that departs from previous governments is that we wish to make the changes that need to be made, together with first nations and aboriginal Canadians, Inuit Canadians, so that we can make the kinds of institutional amendments upon which we can base success, upon which we can ensure there's accountability, there are measurable results, and there are acceptable outcomes. Continuing to have systems that don't work, and continuing to fund them at higher and higher levels, isn't really improving the lives of aboriginal Canadians, and fundamentally, that's what we're trying to achieve.

    Ms. Jean Crowder: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I noticed in your speaking notes, Mr. Minister, that you reference self-government agreements and specific claims and treaties, but only referenced it. There was no mention of a plan forward. So I just want to reference some material that came before the committee on May 15 on specific land claims.

    The department official indicated that 250 claims are not being worked on because the federal government lacks the capacity at this point. She went on to say there's a re-engineering process.

    I had somebody do a quick analysis on what was available on the department's website. I won't go through it because I have only a couple of minutes, but the bottom line is that, based on an average of 70 new claims being received in a given year and the number of claims that are currently in the system, it will take 48 years to process the claims that are in the system. During this period, an additional 3,419 new claims will be filed. Average time to settle will be 24 years.

    In your earlier comments, you talked about the importance of creating a climate for communities to be able to move forward. I would argue that without specific claims, comprehensive claims, self-government, and treaty settlement, that won't happen. So in regard to specific claims in particular, could you say more about what the department's plan is to address this very serious backlog?

    Hon. Jim Prentice: I agree with you that there is a very serious backlog. Again, to be clear, I've been very involved in specific claims in the past. I've had a personal involvement in probably as many as a hundred claims, and I've chaired public inquiries into probably 50 or 60 claims.

    There's currently a backlog in the Government of Canada of over 735 specific claims in the system. This is a situation that has really emerged over the last 10 or 15 years. Fifteen years ago, there would have been 200 to 300 claims backlogged in the system. Over the course of the last 10 years, that has swollen to 735 claims.

    It is an issue that I have turned my attention to, that I've met with our officials about, and we are working on it. I'm not in a position today to tell you exactly what we're going to do about it, but the situation is not acceptable and we're going to have to move forward.

    It's going take leadership. It's going to take the work of this committee. I know the Senate committee is interested in this issue as well. But again, the situation I inherit is that it takes the Government of Canada in excess of five years, sometimes up to seven years, to obtain a legal opinion to respond to a claim that's filed by a first nation. I think your suggestion that it takes 24 years to resolve a specific claim right now in the system, frankly, is optimistic. It's taking at least that long, and longer in many cases. That's not a situation we can continue with.

    Ms. Jean Crowder: We can expect to hear back from your department, then, on a specific plan around that.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: Yes.

    Ms. Jean Crowder: I want to flip over to treaties for a second. As you are well aware, I come from British Columbia, where the treaty process is long. This is a suppositional question, but say, for example, the Province of British Columbia were prepared to alter its current position on own-source revenue and fisheries. Would the federal government be prepared to also move forward? My understanding from talking to people is that really this is about political will, and that if we could get both levels of government to come together on those two particular issues, we might see some treaties actually move forward fairly quickly in British Columbia.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: That's a fair question. I can see you're well briefed on these issues.

    There are 47 treaty tables at work in British Columbia, and as I recall there are five or six that are nearing one of the early stages of agreement in principle.

    Own-source revenue is an issue in particular for the federal Crown that needs to be addressed. It's not solely an issue I have control over, but it is an issue that the government will address.

    The subject of fisheries is also a very difficult subject in B.C. I'm sure you know as much about that as I do. We need to work together. We need first nations and non-aboriginal Canadians, sports fishermen and commercial fishermen, to work together first to conserve the resource and make sure the fishery resource is strong and that there is a focus on conservation. Beyond that, we need to have significant discussions about how we're going to share that resource. I would say we're at a very early stage in those discussions as a nation.

    The Chair: Mr. Minister, one of the things the Auditor General discussed in her report was red tape within the department. I know there are some challenges with the Indian Act, and it's a challenge with the first nations, as you mentioned, to develop their own properties. In simple things like land conveyance.... In my former life as mayor we turned over a road right-of-way to the first nations in our community who had reserve lands, and for just a simple land conveyance they were talking about two years. That's not acceptable for a department, and it's very frustrating for the first nations people when they want to move forward.

    Actually, this particular piece of property is the first development of Wal-Mart on first nations land, and they still haven't got under way because of the department.

    I want to know whether you have any comments about any administrative infrastructure in your department that you're looking at trying to streamline in order to deal with aboriginal issues in a more timely fashion.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: The new government has spoken about accountability, and of course the new proposed Accountability Act will apply to first nations—other than first nations that are self-governing, and they're scheduled in the legislation.

    What I've heard generally is a willingness on the part of first nations to function within that system, but I've also heard them say loud and clear that my department needs to be accountable as well; that accountability is a two-way street; and that if they as first nation governments are going to be held to account, they would expect the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs to similarly be responsible and would expect to see progress.

    They ask why it is necessary for a first nation to file approximately 150 reports on an annual basis. Most of the first nations in this country are reasonably small communities, and I think they fairly ask the question why they need one or two full-time people filling out forms that are submitted to the department.

    The regime we'd like to move towards is one that has streamlined accountabilities, and in particular where we take advantage of another innovation that's developed over the course of the last 18 months, which is the organization that has been put forward by Harold Calla and was once again sponsored by legislation last year in the House. It allows for first nations registered financial officers. These would be certified financial officers who are properly trained and who would work at first nations. The first nations would achieve a degree of certification; they would have such a financial officer working.

    In that circumstance, I don't see why we need 150 reports filed on an annual basis. Maybe we need 20. Maybe it's 30; maybe it's 12. I don't know. We need to have that discussion. But if we have suitable financial and accounting officers in place, and clear accountabilities, we can presumably eliminate some of the paperwork, and I hope the department can do so as well.

    Ms. Nancy Karetak-Lindell (Nunavut, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the Minister.

    This is my first opportunity to have a conversation with you, because I haven't been able to get a meeting with you. I envy some of the other members who have been able to access your office.

    You talk a lot about what you have inherited as far as the status of the country, but I think you need to acknowledge that you also inherited, as a government, the best fiscal situation a new government has ever come into.

    I wasn't with the group in 1993, but I know they came into government with the country almost bankrupt. Nonetheless the Department of Indian Affairs was the only department that did not undergo cuts and it was actually the only department that had an increase in budget when we were cutting programs everywhere else in the country. I think that speaks for the determination of trying to improve the lives of aboriginal Canadians.

    I know we're not one of the five priorities of your Prime Minister, but in light of the issues we are faced with as aboriginal Canadians, I think it has to be one of the priorities of your government, because the reputation of Canada is in balance by the great world status that we have. Once we put in the aboriginal people's conditions, that standing in the world goes down very low. And I think we all agree with that.

    You keep talking about the non-partisan work we need to do. Encouraged as I am by those words, the actions speak otherwise. Kelowna is one example where we're questioning whether the government's refusal to go with that is on who made the deal--which government. I'm hearing from people who.... You just mentioned legislation passed before the election but they're having great difficulty in getting the legislation implemented right now.

    I come from an area where natural resources could really be the way that we improve the lives of Inuit people and northerners. Northern development is back within your whole Indian Affairs department. We're having difficulty trying to find that it is a priority.

    There is a lot of development going on. You mentioned the pipeline. There are possible mines to be opened and yet it's all been put back under one department instead of Northern Development being focused on northern development. So those are probably more--

    Having said all that, I'm confused as to what you're saying and what the real actions are from your department.

    Hon. Jim Prentice: I think I can clarify that confusion. I have an enormous amount of respect for you as a member of Parliament and it's my hope that we can work together. Now, I won't get into an argument here, but you've asked me to be fair, and I would ask you to be fair.

    The budget this government has put forward has, on the face of it, $800 million being invested north of 60. That's never been the case in a previous budget. It has $300 million going into northern housing. I don't think it's fair to challenge this government on its commitment under the first ministers meeting, which called for $300 million over five years. We've done it in 45 days, in terms of a budgetary commitment of committed money that will be spent. So clearly, in terms of the area you represent, Nunavut, we have been very fair. The Premier of Nunavut has been very outspoken in supporting the budget and in saying it is good for northerners, as has the Premier of the Northwest Territories.

    There's $2.2 billion for the residential school agreement put forward by this government in this budget. I think that's very fair.

    What I'

AFN Press Release ...

Candidates for upcoming election for the office of National Chief of Assembly of First Nations

OTTAWA, June 8 /CNW Telbec/ - Mr. Robert Johnson, the Chief Electoral Officer responsible for the July election for the office of National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations has received nomination papers from the following persons:

• Mr. Phil Fontaine, a citizen of the Sagkeeng First Nation in Manitoba;
• Mr. Bill Wilson, a citizen of the Cape Mudge First Nation in British Columbia;

According to the AFN Charter an eligible candidate:

• Must be eighteen (18) years of age or older;
• is of First Nation ancestry;
• is a member of First Nation community, in good standing with the AFN; and,
• 15 eligible electors, First Nations Chiefs, have endorsed his/her candidacy.

The election for the position of National Chief will be held in Vancouver, BC on July 12, 2006 at the Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre. The Charter states that the first person that gains sixty (60) percent of the votes will be declared winner. There are more than 630 First Nations communities in Canada that are recognized as members of the Assembly of First Nations.

Biographies of the candidates are available. Campaign contacts and phone numbers are:

For Mr. Phil Fontaine:    

Contact name:   Joe Miskokomon
Office number:  519-264-9298
Cell number:    519-318-9503
Fax number:     519-264-1109
Email:          chiefjoe@sympatico.ca
Office address: 3211B St. Joseph Blvd., Ottawa, ON, K1C 1T1
Office Tel:     613-830-4549

Other: Marsha Smoke
Tel: 613-761-2010
Email: marsha_smoke@hotmail.com

Media Contact:  Roland Bellerose
Tel:    403-861-6415
Email: roland@aboriginaltimes.com

For Mr. Bill Wilson:

Contact name:   Chief Bill Wilson        
Tel number:     604-899-4464
Fax number:     604-899-4417        
Email:          billwilson@uniserve.com
Office address: Suite 1903, 1666 Pendrell St., Vancouver, BC, V6G 1S9

Other: To be advised
     
The Assembly of First Nations is the national organization representing First Nations citizens in Canada.

-30-

/For further information: Media contacts: Don Kelly, AFN Communications Director, (613) 241-6789 ext. 320 or cell (613) 292-2787; Ian McLeod, AFN Bilingual Communications Officer, (613) 241-6789 ext. 336 or cell (613) 859-4335/

From Windspeaker Online at http://www.ammsa.com/windspeaker/editorials/2006/wind-editorial-6.html

Negligence costs - June, 2006 - Windspeaker Editorial

Forget what you've read in the mainstream papers or have seen on the national news: we're here to tell you there are plenty of good people on both sides of the barricades at Caledonia. A mere handful of knuckleheads are getting most of the attention and, while that may feed the media beast, it does nothing to get to the truth of this critically important matter.

Here's what you need to know: Ten years ago, the elected council of Six Nations asked the federal government for an accounting of its lands and monies held in trust by the Crown. Since then, Canada's departments of Justice and Indian Affairs, under the guidance of the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister's Office, have done everything in their considerable power to avoid providing said accounting.

Ten years ago, Six Nations stated it was not interested in displacing third parties. It acknowledged that Canada could never pay what it owed to the community after a century of plunder and injustice. All it wanted was information, to know what happened to their lands and monies held in trust by their fiduciary-Canada.

How much in lands and money? At the time, Six Nations officials refused to say publicly what they believed to be owed, but Windspeaker's trip to Six Nations in May has revealed that at the time of the statement of claim the figure was $800 billion; yes, that's with a 'b'. Steve Williams, the elected leader at the time, said he has no doubt that number stands today at $1 trillion.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he believes in accountability. It's one of the five priorities established by the Conservative government for this Parliament. Can Six Nations then expect that under his watch, a voluntary and spontaneous effort at an accounting of Six Nations trusts will occur? If not, why not?

A similar case played out in the United States in a suit called Cobell and has led to charges of contempt against the secretary of the Interior, that country's equivalent to Indian Affairs minister, for obfuscation and delay. But in Canada, nothing. In the U.S. it is generally acknowledged, as a result of the Cobell case, that the U.S government plundered Indian trusts believing it would never be held accountable. Turns out the U.S. might have been wrong, especially if Judge Royce Lambert has his way. Is there no equivalent of Judge Lambert in Canada?

The one thing that had worked against Six Nations in the past was division in the community. What we saw at three separate public meetings at the Six Nations community hall between April 30 and May 3 was that those divisions are still there, but the outrage within the community over the continued frustration of its legitimate attempts to seek justice have united the Big Six like never before.

And that could mean big trouble for Canada. Especially if residents of Caledonia clue in to why this is happening to them.

If enough voters across this country at any time since 1867 had let their elected representatives know that they expected a fair and immediate settlement to all outstanding Aboriginal land issues, the MPs would have got it done. They haven't so far because Canadians haven't bothered to get informed and demand action. That was because of ignorance or because of complicity in the injustice. The good people of Caledonia are now seeing what that kind of negligence costs.
You saw the burning tires and the scenes of Ontario Provincial Police officers struggling with camouflaged "occupiers" at the site of development on the disputed lands of Douglas Creek Estates. You saw angry town residents spewing hatred across the divide between the police line and the edge of the occupation. But what you didn't see could mark the beginning of a sea-change in Canada.

You didn't see the non-Native women at the barricades arguing for cooler heads to prevail when a few townsfolk got out of hand. You didn't see the queries and the questioning from those regular Joes who thirst for information so they can understand the history of the conflict. You didn't see Aboriginal clergy walking amongst the angry Calidonians, their mere presence in their vestments a plea for calm and rational behavior. These are considered non-stories by the media, but they could be at the heart of a new relationship that is developing between thinking non-Aboriginal people and their long-suffering Native neighbors.

Two opinion articles published in the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail highlight the importance of addressing First Nation land claims in an effective and concrete manner to avoid further civil disobedience. National Chief Phil Fontaine's opinion article challenges the current government to take these claims seriously.

Opinion 1: From Toronto Star at http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1149285032859&call_pageid=968256290204

Coverage can shape conflicts - Jun. 3, 2006

"Media coverage plays a key role in determining how events are dealt with in a democratic society," writes John Miller in his report about daily newspaper coverage of the 1995 Ipperwash crisis. "Accurate, comprehensive coverage can promote understanding and resolution, just as inaccurate, incomplete and myopic coverage can exacerbate stereotypes and prolong confrontations." Miller is a former deputy managing editor of the Star and a journalism professor at Ryerson University. He wrote this column at the invitation of the Public Editor.

Reporters covering the three-month confrontation in Caledonia have faced at least two difficult challenges — sorting out the facts about a complicated, 200-year-old land claims dispute, and reporting responsibly on several outbursts of stunning, modern-day racism.

Both require paying close attention to context, which is not always a strong point with the news media. Luckily, we seem to have been reasonably well served so far.

I've been watching the coverage unfold with a certain trepidation because of what I found last fall when Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto commissioned me to do a major study, paid for by the Ipperwash Inquiry, of newspaper coverage of the 1995 First Nations confrontation in which Dudley George died.

We know now, thanks to testimony before the inquiry, that the OPP was wrong about many key facts, saying the people occupying Ipperwash Provincial Park were armed (they weren't), that they fired the first shot (they didn't) and there was no First Nations burial site there (there is).

Yet my analysis of 496 news and opinion articles, published in 19 daily newspapers over a two-month period — the month before and after the shooting — showed how badly reporters and editors got it wrong: They failed at their most basic task — to find out what happened on the night of Sept. 6, 1995, when George was shot and they weren't there.

The context of the dispute was forgotten. Ipperwash became less and less a story about a 50-year-old land dispute, and more and more about First Nations "rebel" troublemakers clashing with police.

Reporters relied heavily on interviews with "official" sources — police, outside First Nations leaders and politicians. Very little news coverage was told from the perspective of those occupying the park.

"Warriors" were reported to be in the park, but no reporter ever talked to one or provided reliable evidence they were there.

The police version — that the natives were armed and fired first — was almost always given prominence in news stories, over denials from the other side.

Editorials and columns were mostly unsympathetic to the occupiers. Many fit "frames" associated with racist dialogue — that a Canada-wide Indian revolution was about to break out (moral panic); that authorities are lenient to First Nations lawbreakers (double standard); that mainstream Canadian society is under assault (white victimization).

Calls for an inquiry into the disputed events at Ipperwash were not pursued by the newspapers. The actions of the police and the government of Mike Harris did not come under serious examination until years later, when Peter Edwards, a reporter with the Star, wrote his book One Dead Indian, a reconstruction of events that was published in 2001.

My report concluded that "the news coverage frequently strayed from what are commonly understood to be the core principles of journalism (first obligation to the truth, the discipline of verification, an independent monitor of power)."

Did this contribute to the 10-year delay in calling an inquiry? I think so.

Fast forward to Caledonia.

There have been a few dramatic photos taken of self-styled "warriors" (instead of the Clan Mothers who actually organized the occupation). And there have been a few columns based on inaccurate stereotyping.

But there has also been plenty of good, solid reporting, mainly from the nearest local daily, the Hamilton Spectator.

We learned what happened when police moved in. We understood why people on both sides of the barricades were there. And, when the barricades came down, we knew that it was the work of courageous townspeople, native and non-native, rather than posturing politicians.

When Caledonia's mayor uttered racist remarks on air, reporters were quick to find statements of denunciation from fellow councillors.

Perhaps now someone will go after the really big story — why the federal government seems to have bungled decades of land claims disputes and allowed events like Caledonia to happen.

+++++++++++++

Opinion 2: From Globe and Mail OPINIONS at http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060530.wwebcom0531/BNStory/specialComment/home

Web-exclusive comment by PHIL FONTAINE - POSTED May 31/06

It is interesting to hear statements by the media and general public that “the law must prevail” in Caledonia, the point being that First Nations citizens are being treated differently than would non-aboriginal protesters.

Let us first acknowledge that First Nations are often treated differently under Canadian law. Canadian law denied us the right to vote until 1960. Canadian law forcibly displaced our traditional governments and laws. Canadian law forbade us from hiring legal counsel to address, for example, improper land transactions and sharp dealings by the Crown that led to situations like that in Caledonia.

Yet, we agree that the law must prevail. But the real legal issue here is not civil disobedience but the legitimate land claims of First Nations.

Land claims are legal matters, lawful obligations. They are not discretionary spending. They are not ancient disputes to be dismissed at the whim of the state.

Unfortunately, the current claims process is painfully slow and inherently unjust. The Auditor-General recently pointed out the obvious: Canada is in a clear conflict of interest in adjudicating claims against itself.

Under the current system, Canada acts as judge, jury and, too often, executioner. Canada decides what is and is not a valid claim. Canada decides what is on the table for negotiations and then negotiates the claim against itself. Canada places the full weight of the Department of Justice against the First Nations.

The result of this inherent bias is a claims process that is agonizingly slow. It takes an average of 10 years for a single specific claim to make its way through the system. Now consider that there are at least 1,100 specific claims before Canada. About 300 of these have been validated, which means they can begin their long, slow march through the system.

Comprehensive land claims are different and, generally, more complex.

Basically, they relate to lands where there was never a treaty or agreement between First Nations and the government. They require more time and research. The recent Auditor-General's report says it takes, on average, 29 years to resolve a comprehensive claim.

Canada's approach to claims is a national failure and an international disgrace. We need a better process to resolve these claims, one that is more effective, fair and efficient.

Fortunately, much of the work on a better process is already complete.

In 1998, a Joint AFN-Federal Task Force on Claims issued a report with recommendations to create a better process, one that is truly independent, faster and more cost-effective. It had the support of First Nations and federal representatives. All that is needed is the political will to institute this process.

The alternative is more frustration, more anger and more conflict. I am being very careful here because this is not a threat, it is a reality.

The unfortunate lesson our people learn from Oka, Ipperwash and Caledonia is that drastic measures get government attention and action.

If the “rule of law” means delay and denial, why would our young people - desperately seeking a better future - listen to those who counsel patience and obedience?

It is in all our interests to establish a new way to resolve claims. Doing so will provide First Nations a solid foundation to build our economies and improve our quality of life, provide government and industry the certainty they need to get on with their business, and provide a climate of hope and optimism for all Canadians.

The law must prevail in Caledonia and across Canada, and that means dealing with the legitimate, lawful claims of First Nations in a manner that is fair and just.

From the The Timmins Daily Press at http://www.timminspress.com/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentID=54994&catname=Local+News

Lieutenant-governor visits
Scott Paradis / The Timmins Daily Press, May 31, 2006

The cure for high rates of suicide and depression at remote Aboriginal fly-in communities may be literacy, the Ontario Lt. Governor James Bartleman told a Timmins crowd Tuesday.

Bartleman was making his third official visit to the city as the lieutenant-governor. He made a presentation at the Days Inn Grand Ballroom following the Porcupine United Way's annual general meeting.

Bartleman's remarks highlighted his Aboriginal literacy program -- and he announced the initiative will grow from five literacy camps at First Nation communities to 35, including 27 communities north of Timmins.

"I think there's a link between literacy and self-esteem," he told the crowd. "I spoke to a principal in Attawapiskat and he told me since getting a library, students have been reading 30 per cent more."

The project, called the Club Amick Young Aboriginal Reader's program, will arm youth with new books, library access, literacy coaches, the ability to assemble a community news letter and more -- which Bartleman hopes will boost literacy rates within First Nations.

Although Bartleman didn't have statistics to show depression and suicide rates fell with the increased reading, he said anecdotal evidence came from the five literacy camps held in 2005.

"In the communities where camps were held, there were no suicides," he told local media after his presentation. "In surrounding communities, there were."

While the results from the literacy camp are positive, Bartleman said suicide rates among Aboriginal people are still 10 times higher than the national average.

As for the overall quality of living, Canada ranks in the world's top five. But the United Nation's quality of living list ranks remote First Nation communities in Canada far below that at close to 60 -- near many Third-World nations in Africa, he said.

With the new initiative Bartleman said he hopes to change those statistics for the better in Canada.

The Porcupine United Way jumped on board to support the program, dishing out $1,250 to support five children for five years.

The five year support will provide the selected children with access to used books from a library, new books to own, a literacy coach and other literacy-driven initiatives.

Children involved will also develop a news letter for their community.

"When we first heard about the program we were really excited about the potential," said Shawn Chorney, Porcupine United Way executive director.

The United Way had already allocated most of its programing funds when it heard about the literacy initiative, so the group quickly began searching for resources.

The United Way then received a call from a family wishing to remain anonymous. The family has experienced a recent death and, Chorney said, a last will and testament stated "they had a legacy gift for the United Way."

The United Way told the family about the literacy initiative and the $1,250 was quickly allocated to that program.

The rest of the money donated by the family will go towards other United Way programing.

While the program directly benefits communities north and outside of Timmins, Chorney said the United Way is excited because the results will have an impact locally.

"A lot of people living in Timmins are from those communities," he said. "They have relatives still living there."

He also said building a stronger region will lead to a stronger city. The total cost of the initiative will likely be $150,000, and that money will give the literacy opportunities to about 1,500 children.

Bartleman said he has raised about $40,000 for Club Amick thus far and said if more organizations, including other United Way affiliates, come forward, raising the remaining funds shouldn't be too much of a challenge.

From CBC North at http://www.cbc.ca/north/story/nor-healing-fudning.html

Res school healing will take decades, and millions: Erasmus - June 2, 2006 

It will take hundreds of millions of dollars more, on top of the $1.9 billion now set aside for native victims of residential schools, to properly complete the healing process, veteran native leader George Erasmus told an audience in Yellowknife Thursday.

Erasmus, now chair of the Aboriginal Healing Foundation, said his foundation won't have enough money to finish the healing process it started, even with the $125 million it expects from the proposed residential school settlement to help fund community programs.

"Our final report suggests that what is required to complete the healing in Canada is an endowment of $600 million, and 30 more years of healing on top of what we can do with the existing money," he said.

Erasmus made the comments at an Assembly of First Nations-sponsored conference on the $1.9-billion compensation package passed by Parliament last month.

The compensation package provides money for as many as 86,000 aboriginal people who attended church-run schools. The so-called common experience payments release the government and churches from all further liability relating to the Indian residential school experience, except in cases of sexual abuse and serious incidents of physical abuse.

The Foundation, which spends about $60 million across the country, funds about 35 programs in the Northwest Territories.

Erasmus said the foundation will not fund any new programs, but concentrate on existing ones, and encouraged communities to start or continue healing programs on their own, even without money from the foundation.

Fontaine addresses concerns

Meanwhile, the national chief of the Assembly of First Nations said he sees better days ahead for aboriginal people, after years of frustration while seeking healing and compensation for the wrongs suffered in residential schools.

Fontaine was explaining the details of the agreement at the one-day conference.

He says the establishment of a national reconciliation and healing commission will also open many Canadians' eyes to the incredible hardship many natives of a certain generation went through.

"People know absolutely nothing, most often, about this experience," he said. "They don't know that residential schools existed, or why they existed, and the policy that governed the management and operation of these schools. And it's such a tragic part of our history."

Fontaine encouraged former students to apply for compensation. He told the group that benefits received under the deal would not be clawed back by Revenue Canada or territorial governments, and that the system will respond to people who have lost their education records or went to schools not on the official list.

"This agreement is fair, it's just, it's generous, and it actually fixes all of the things that were problems under the old system," he said.

Fontaine says the first payments, advances worth $8,000 to former residential students who are over 65, are being processed now.

Younger claimants can send in their forms in March of next year.

However, the deal must still be cleared by courts in nine jurisdictions, where individual abuse cases are being heard, and could be scuttled entirely if as few as five per cent of former students opt out in writing.

An art exhibition worth checking out if you are in Thunder Bay ... (Admission is $5 for Adults) ... From the Thunder Bay Art Gallery newsletter and web site at http://tbag.ca ...

THUNDER BAY ART GALLERY
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF ART EXCELLENCE 1996 - 2006

Norval Morrisseau - Shaman Artist

Organized and distributed by The National Gallery of Canada.

Dates: June 3 through September 3.

Included, among many more, are the three works below.

The Storyteller: The Artist and His Grandfather 1978
Diptych: acrylic on canvas 96.6 x 176.3 cm
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Gatineau Quebec
From The Canadian Museum of Contemporary Photography, Ottawa

The Gift 1975
Acrylic on paper 196 x 122 cm
Thunder Bay Art Gallery, Helen E Band Collection

Untitled: Two Bull Moose
Acrylic on mill board 81.28 x 243.9 cm
Thunder Bay Art Gallery, Gift of Carl Boggild

Norval Morrisseau - Shaman Artist

In order to prepare for this exhibition, I was privileged attend the show's premier in Ottawa in February.

As I surveyed the work selected, I was struck by one persistent thought: I was immersed in the achievements of a true innovator. Most artists are lucky if they manage in their lifetimes to extend the traditions they inherit.

Real originators are rare - so rare in fact, that they quite often are seen as the instigators, progenitors, founders of entire epochs which bear the impress of their accomplishments. One thinks, for instance, of Giotto, Michelangelo and Cezanne. Undeniably, one must now also think of Norval Morrisseau.

In so many personal ways, Morrisseau is an uncharacteristic hero, but his achievement - as so decisively demonstrated in this project - is the first of its scale ever accorded a Canadian Aboriginal Artist.

Greg Hill, the curator of the Morrisseau project reports, "Viewers encounter an intriguing plethora of images representing animals and plants of the earth, spiritual creatures inhabiting heavenly and underworldly realms, as well as ancestors and human intermediaries who communicate with the spirit world. Drawn from public and private collections in Canada, the United States, and Israel, many of these works have rarely been on view; some have never been exhibited. They include drawings, painted objects, and paintings - including early works painted on such unorthodox surfaces as birchbark and cardboard through to the intensely colourful and large-scale canvases that characterize his maturing form.

The show documents Morriseau's progression as an artist, charting the creative and spiritual journey that would contribute to his unique style of painting known as "Woodland" or "Legend" painting, now called Anishnaabe painting, of which he is the originator. In works that evoke ancient symbolic etchings on sacred birchbark scrolls and pictographic renderings of spiritual creatures, Morrisseau "reveals" the souls of humans and animals through his unique "x-ray" style of imaging: sinewy black "spirit" lines emanate, surround, and link the figures. Skeletal elements and internal organs are visible within the figures' delineated segments. Saturated with startling, often contrasting colours, such paintings appear to vibrate under the viewer's gaze.

This landmark exhibition affirms Morrisseau's reputation as a modern-day master who has achieved national and international acclaim. It also reminds us why this shaman-artist inspired three generations of Anishnaabe to pursue painting and print as a means to recovering their heritage."

Yes, Morriseau had his sources. Yes, he had influences that helped form and shape his vision. And yes, like any artist who has the daring to experiment, his output was at times irregular. His career of nearly fifty years has been marked by transformations. It is clear that Morrisseau was constantly engaged in the search for a visual language to support his evolving vision. And as one bathes in the intensity of colour that radiates from his surfaces, it is easy to ponder the therapeutic values that Morrisseau attributes saturated hues.

I am not qualified to speak to his shamanic participations, not being part of that Anishnaabe tradition, yet as one disciplined by 40 years of cross-cultural reference, and as witness to Morrisseau's achievements recorded here, I do not hesitate to lend credence to the assertion that all of Morrisseau's activity is marked with spiritual intent. Morrisseau's mature work is possessed of such a commanding assurance that it has become an idiom among successive generations. The gift of retrospective vision is that is allows us to trace the initiation of a pictorial vocabulary expressive, not merely of personal exigencies, but of an entire cultural ethos. When power, form, vision and vibrancy are lent to a people in such a way as to expand their identity, I am among the first to define that accomplishment as belonging to a spiritual realm.

At the National Gallery opening, already acknowledged as Grand Shaman of the Ojibwa and honoured with an eagle feather by the Assembly of first Nations, member of the Order of Canada and the RCA, Morrisseau was also one of the first artists to be inducted into The Royal Society: The Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada. This gesture, flowing from the highest level, accedes traditional forms of knowledge and the visual arts as a learned discipline. It was fitting that Norval Morrisseau, Shaman Artist, should be seen breaking through that barrier.

Norval Morrisseau - Shaman Artist is circulating only to the Thunder Bay Art Gallery, The McMichael Canadian Art Collection in Kleinburg, and the National Museum of American Indian in New York City. The project boasts fully illustrated bilingual catalogues. A series of lectures and public activities will complement this exhibition.  

Glenn Allison, Curator - Thunder Bay Art Gallery

From the House of Commons Hansard: http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/032_2006-06-02/HAN032-E.htm
 
39th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION - EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 032
Friday, June 2, 2006

Kelowna Accord Implementation Act

    Right Hon. Paul Martin (LaSalle—Émard, Lib.) moved that Bill C-292, An Act to implement the Kelowna Accord, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

    Mr. Speaker, on too many reserves and in too many cities there is an unacceptable gap between what ought to be the hopeful promise of youth and the experience of aboriginal adulthood, a gap made even more unacceptable by the fact that aboriginal Canadians represent the largest segment of our youth and the fastest growing segment of our population.

    We face a moral imperative. In a country as wealthy as ours, a country that is the envy of the world, good health and good education should be givens. They are the pillars underpinning equality of opportunity, which in turn is the foundation on which our society is built.

    I rise today because the descendants of the people who first occupied this land deserve to have an equal opportunity to work for and to enjoy the benefits of our collective prosperity. Today the majority do not because of gaps in education and skills, in health care and housing, and because of limited opportunities for employment. Put simply, these gaps between aboriginal Canadians and other Canadians are not acceptable in the 21st century. They never were acceptable.

    Last fall the Government of Canada came to an extraordinary agreement with an extraordinary group of people. These included the leadership of the Assembly of First Nations, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the Métis National Council, the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, the Native Women's Association of Canada and the first ministers of Canada's provinces and territories.

    Together we developed a plan to narrow and eventually eliminate the gaps that afflict aboriginal Canadians. It became known as the Kelowna accord.

    The history of aboriginal communities is heart-rending. For a year and a half, we worked to establish objectives in order to make progress in five crucial areas: education, health, housing, drinking water and economic development. Our goal was to make a real difference, to do everything in our power to change what is a harsh reality for many of our fellow citizens through investments that would bring about real change in the daily lives of aboriginal peoples.

    We began by studying the gap in education. Giving young people the chance to reach their potential is essential to all of the other initiatives we set out. This means building schools and training teachers. This means ensuring that students complete their studies. This means making all types of post-secondary education available to young people. This means encouraging them to get professional training so they can get better jobs. We must ensure they have the means to succeed at all of these pursuits.

    This is why the government committed to establishing a network of first nations school systems run by aboriginals in cooperation with the provinces, which are responsible for education. Our plan also included making aboriginal, Inuit or Métis culture an integral part of the curriculum in certain urban public schools.

    The number of major economic projects underway in the north is staggering. Employment opportunities are abundant, and the number of well-paid jobs is remarkable. Aboriginal people will really be able to benefit from this, but only if training starts now.

    This is why we committed to working with our public and private sector partners to create the apprenticeship training programs Canadian aboriginals need to get good jobs. The goal of the Kelowna accord is to close the gap between aboriginals and non-aboriginals within 10 years. The accord will ensure that the aboriginal population has the same proportion of high school graduates as the non-aboriginal population, and it will halve the post-secondary studies gap. That is just the beginning.

    In terms of health care, the gaps that persist between aboriginal health and the health of most Canadians are simply unconscionable. The incidence of infant mortality is almost 20% higher for first nations than for the rest of Canada. Suicide can be anywhere from three times to eleven times more common. Teen pregnancies are nine times the national average. It is evident that these heartbreaking statistics and facts speak not just to health care. They speak to the psychic and emotional turmoil in communities, which we must find ways urgently to address.

    We started this effort two years ago when aboriginal leaders participated in the first ministers meeting on health care. There we recognized the need for a new health framework and we began work on an unprecedented document, the aboriginal health blueprint, a comprehensive plan for the delivery of reliable health care in every province and territory on and off reserve.

    We aimed to double the number of aboriginal health professionals in 10 years from 150 physicians and 1,200 nurses today. We aimed to focus on core measures of health, which we can monitor and improve upon in each community. We set goals to reduce the gaps in key areas, such as infant mortality, youth suicide, childhood obesity and diabetes.

    This is only a start. No one will be satisfied until these gaps are closed completely.

    We addressed the issue of clean water and housing. Housing is about more than having a roof over one's head. It is about dignity. It is about pride of place. It is about having a stake in the community and an investment in the future. We recognize the need to reduce these gaps significantly with a comprehensive effort to expand the skills of first nations, Inuit and Métis to manage their land, infrastructure and financing. It is estimated, by implementing the Kelowna accord, that we could realistically close the housing gap on reserve by 40% within 5 years and by 80% within 10 years.

    The Kelowna accord is a comprehensive 10 year plan to achieve a clear set of goals and targets. We provided $5.1 billion for the first five years. Let me be very clear. The funds were fully provided for in the fiscal framework. The government has the money. It is a fiscal framework, incidentally, which has, since that time, produced a surplus substantially larger than was originally projected. We made it clear that for the second five years of the program, enhanced resources based on the success obtained would be provided.

    It is a measurable plan, with targets to be attained and evaluated every two to three years, giving Canadians the ability to hold everyone who is involved accountable. It was developed through a non-partisan, collaborative approach in concert with the aboriginal leadership. All political parties and government across the country, Liberal, Conservative and NDP, were at the table. The Government of Canada, on behalf of the people of Canada, gave its solemn word that we would work to achieve these goals.

    Aboriginal Canadians, provinces and territories have made it clear that they want to see a commitment from the new government to honour the Kelowna accord. Despite this, five months later, after inheriting a very healthy balance sheet, one much better than it had anticipated, the new government refuses to say whether it will support the nation's commitment to these goals and objectives. Its budget did not confirm the funds necessary to attain those goals.

    Wherein lies the problem? Is it that the government disagrees with the goals that are set out in the accord? Is it that it does not want to work with the provinces, territories and the aboriginal leadership, all of whom share these goals?

    On the other hand, the government agrees with the objectives that are laid out in the accord. Why will it not take advantage of a plan that was developed over 18 months by experts in 14 governments across Canada and in our aboriginal communities?

    Let us be honest, we have consulted long enough. We have studied enough. The time has come for the government to act. Why will the government not recognize that, because of its lack of commitment, it has already wasted precious months, precious months in which critical progress could have been made toward the attaining of our interim targets?

    The goals and objectives of the Kelowna agreement will not go away. This was never a partisan issue. The premier of British Columbia, speaking recently in his legislature, said the following:

     I characterized that agreement as Canada's 'moment of truth.' It was our time to do something that has eluded our nation for 138 years. It was our chance to end the disparities in health, education, housing and economic opportunity. All first ministers rose to that moment of truth alongside Canada's aboriginal leaders to undertake that challenge....

    Similarly, this week during their meeting in Gimli, western premiers said the following:

      Having previously made an extraordinary national commitment, failure to follow through on that commitment will only make us poorer as a nation.

    That is the premiers talking about a commitment.

    The premier of Manitoba, who chaired that meeting, added that it would be morally wrong to walk away from the accord.

    It is because of this that I have taken the unfortunate necessary step of introducing the bill entitled an act to implement the Kelowna accord. I do so with only one goal in mind, and that is to provide the government and the House with the opportunity to reaffirm what was, by all accounts, a historic agreement for Canada, for Canadians.

    The bill is about confirming national commitment lest it be lost. It is also about another potential loss, the loss of the goodwill and the optimism that characterized the Kelowna meeting, the positive spirit, which played a huge role in helping us reach an agreement. All of us at that meeting left imbued with a new sense of hope for the future. That hope was underpinned by an expectation that all the parties to the agreement would live up to their commitment.

    Unfortunately, for aboriginal Canadians, new hope has been replaced by doubt. Goodwill has been displaced by worry as the government engages in red herring after red herring. Too many aboriginal Canadians today endured crushing poverty in one of the world's most prosperous countries. That is why I chose, as a new prime minister, to make it a central issue for my government.

    The new government is responsible for making a clear commitment to aboriginal peoples. It must respect the promises made and honour the Kelowna accord.

    We need a clear commitment, not just in words but in action. We need a clear commitment to meet the challenges facing our aboriginal people by living up to the Kelowna accord.

    I ask the government and the ministers here present to rise above partisanship. I ask them and all members of the House, for the sake of our aboriginal people and the future of our great country, to support the bill.

....

    Hon. Jim Prentice (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians, CPC): Mr. Speaker, my right hon. friend, the former prime minister of the country, and I both share a commitment to improving the lives of aboriginal Canadians. I certainly do not question his bona fides in that sense and, I assume, as a gentleman, that he does not question mine.

    Long before I was elected I worked on land claims. I have spent a significant part of my life working in the aid of aboriginal Canadians. I have seen aboriginal poverty firsthand, both on reserves and in urban centres, which is why I truly believe that one of Canada's greatest challenges is the issue of aboriginal poverty. In that sense, he and I are of common ground. ....

    The problems in this country are much deeper than that. They require a long term commitment, structural reform and renovation in consultation with first nations. Unless that is done, we will not succeed in the eradication of aboriginal poverty.

    I support the principles and the targets that were discussed at Kelowna in the course of that first ministers' meeting. I also acknowledge the efforts that were undertaken to draw together the premiers and the aboriginal leaders. However, the issue is where to go from there.

From the June 2006 issue of BC Business Magazine at http://www.bcbusinessmagazine.com/feathersJune06.htm

Ruffling Feathers -The tough-talking, no-bullshit genius of Chief Clarence Louie.
By Andrew Findlay

In a small boardroom on the second floor of the Metropolitan Hotel on Howe Street, Clarence Louie, the maverick chief of the Osoyoos Indian Band, is doing what he is often asked to do these days. That is, talk to First Nations bands about how to evolve from a culture of dependence into a bastion of independence and entrepreneurship.

“I won’t go to a meeting these days unless it has to do with creating jobs and making money,” Louie announces bluntly to a small gathering of band councillors and administrators from the Saulteau First Nation near Moberly Lake in northern B.C. “I spend my time on economic development and I don’t care what you say; everything costs money. Even our traditional ceremonies cost money.”

It’s the first and last time you’ll hear this renowned (No. 40 on Maclean’s 2003 Watch List of Canadians) First Nations business leader utter the word “tradition” during his PowerPoint presentation, but you’ll quickly lose count of the number of references to “economic development.” In his neat blazer, pressed black trousers and wire-rimmed glasses, he could be mistaken for a Fraser Institute pundit. Before an audience, Louie is a formidable and brazen speaker who isn’t afraid to push buttons. In private, he is serious, intense and straightforward, with a penetrating gaze and an extremely quick mind. He’s been accused by his own kind of sacrificing traditional First Nations culture and values at the altar of capitalism, yet under his leadership his band built the beautiful Nk’Mip Desert and First Nations Heritage Centre which does just that – promotes aboriginal culture. Nobody – First Nations or otherwise – is immune to his critical gaze. In one breath he’ll dismiss the federal department of Indian affairs as an inept bureaucracy that has perpetuated a First Nations welfare state. In the next, he’ll chide fellow aboriginals who claim to be following the “red road” (adhering to traditional values and spirituality) while collecting a social assistance cheque.

Truth is, the 46-year-old’s pro-business views are grounded in a belief that the only way forward for First Nations is to break the cycle of poverty and dependence on government handouts – that have plagued his people since the Indian Act became law in 1876 – through self-sufficiency and economic development. His track record as chief of the 420-strong Osoyoos Indian Band, now in his 22nd year, has garnered attention around Canada and abroad. The accolades are nice, and Louie’s got the financial cred to back it.

The Osoyoos Indian Band Development Corp. currently owns nine businesses, with annual revenues topping $13 million, including the award-winning Nk’Mip Cellars, the first First Nations-owned winery in the world. Every Christmas, 12 per cent of profits are distributed to band members. In 2005, more than 1,000 First Nations and non-First Nations were employed by OIB businesses and joint ventures. That same year, OIB Holdings generated nearly $2 million in lease payments from non-First Nations companies such as Calgary-based Bellstar Hotels & Resorts, which is putting the finishing touches on a four-star property – Spirit Ridge Vineyard Resort and Spa – on the shores of Lake Osoyoos.

Not too shabby for a band that has fewer members than your average urban high school has students.

“Anyone who has been in town for more than five minutes knows about him,” says CJ Rhodes, president of the Osoyoos Chamber of Commerce.

Brett Sweezy is the Sandpoint, Idaho-based president of Winter Recreation, ULC, the parent company of Mount Baldy Ski Corp. When the outfit purchased the small ski resort east of Osoyoos in 2005, Sweezy and his partners approached the Osoyoos Indian Band on whose traditional lands they were planning to build an 8,000-bed resort. After tough negotiations, Sweezy and company signed a precedent-setting agreement that gives OIB a 2.5-per-cent interest in Winter Recreation ULC, a share of revenues from real-estate development, reduced lift tickets and job opportunities for band members at the resort, as well as assurances that archeological sites and traditional land use would be respected. In exchange, the American company acquires a comfortable level of certainty that the band will support its resort plans, wisely sidestepping the thorny aboriginal land title conflicts that have deep-sixed other ventures in the past.

“I give the OIB a lot of credit because there is a lot of pressure from other First Nations not to sell out,” Sweezy says over the phone from Sandpoint about the agreement he hammered out with Louie. “In our meetings with Chief Louie, there wasn’t a lot of open banter. He’s not afraid to point fingers and put issues on the table. He’s a politician and he’s always aware of how things will play out with his council.”

On several occasions Sweezy has had the unenviable task of following Louie on the speakers’ list at various conferences and meetings. “I’ll only speak before him now; otherwise nobody will listen,” Sweezy says with a chuckle, giving a nod to Louie’s prowess at the podium.

In an article published by the online journal Indian Country Today, Ed Romanowski, CEO of Bellstar Hotels & Resorts, says outside investment on Osoyoos band property is attractive because Louie and the OIB have demonstrated that “their word is their deed.”

The OIB’s economic profile has been “an inspiration for many bands,” but it’s not necessarily a model that can be applied across the board, says Stewart Phillip, chief of the Penticton Indian Band and current president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs. “Some bands simply don’t have the same economic opportunities.”

Certainly, the OIB is blessed by its proximity to a relatively vibrant business environment in the south Okanagan, and it doesn’t fault other First Nations for focusing on the treaty process to gain a share of resource revenue from the province. However, he’s convinced the principles of self-sufficiency are sound.

But the doorway to change hasn’t always swung open easily for Louie. It’s taken a lot of debate, disagreement and frank self-reflection among a people Louie says are too often fixated on looking to right past wrongs and sticking Band-Aids on nagging social issues such as alcoholism, drug abuse and family strife. “I like dealing in reality,” he says. “I’m not saying that everybody agrees with me. A lot of elders still hold up the British flag and talk about promises made a hundred years ago. Personally, I don’t have any faith in the Queen.”

Louie was born in Oliver in 1960 and at the age of 18, he enrolled in Native American studies at the University of Saskatchewan, eventually completing his degree in Lethbridge. In 1984, at age 24, he was recruited to run for chief of the Osoyoos band. He won his first campaign and hasn’t looked back since. When he first took over the council reins he walked into a stereotypically dysfunctional band preoccupied with running Department of Indian Affairs (since renamed Indian and Northern Affairs) social programs and crippled by rampant nepotism, acrimonious band politics and social problems. The single band-owned business, a vineyard started in 1968, limped along year after year accumulating losses. Not surprisingly, he says, collectively his band was a symptom of a system the government instituted – one of welfare dependence and shoehorning bands onto marginal lands at the expense of job creation and economic development. But, he concedes, aboriginal leaders are also to blame, too eager to become the servants of federal programs instead of real advocates for change. “Any time we can kick DIA out of our business, we do it,” he says.

Today Louie’s vision is still a work in progress, but the streamlined corporate environment at the OIB is a far cry from the dysfunctional place he walked into two decades ago. It’s no picnic working under Louie’s watch. Some of his HR concepts don’t exactly mesh with supposedly enlightened business models, where every day is a casual Friday. It’s not unusual to see small banners with slogans like, “If your life sucks, it means you suck,” or “A real warrior supports himself and others,” tacked to the walls of the band office. His council recently decided to install clocks at the band council and OIBDC offices to curtail truancy, and strict rules guard against the kind of nepotism that is common on Indian reserves where sisters supervise brothers and the chief hires his wife to do the books. Surprisingly, there’s not a single member of a First Nation on the OIBDC’s board of directors because, Louie says, business isn’t about race – it’s about expertise. “There’s a group of natives that feels entitled, and that needs to be changed to a culture of performance,” he says. “You don’t hand over the keys to a multi-million-dollar business to someone who hasn’t earned it. That’s a recipe for bankruptcy.”

It’s time for Louie to wrap up his PowerPoint. He has a plane to catch back to the Okanagan. These days he doesn’t get too misty-eyed over First Nations spirituality and traditions. In his briefcase, along with his books on First Nations history and politics, he has a set of custom door handles for his kids’ Hummer that he picked up at a Vancouver car dealer. (As he’s fond of saying, there’s no culture in poverty.)

“Our people have the worst social statistics in Canada and our leaders have allowed this to go on for 100 years. I’ve never bought that stuff about natives being non-competitive. Throwing the best potlatch required accumulating a certain amount of wealth,” he says as he snaps his briefcase closed.

Clearly, Chief Louie didn’t get to where he is today by mincing words.

+++++++++++++++

From http://www.bcbusinessmagazine.com/displayArticle.php?artId=471

Chief Executives - B.C.’s First Nations are drumming up big business.
by Ryan Stuart

Profitable since year one: it’s the dream of any start-up, but for the Hupacasath First Nation in Port Alberni, it means more than money in the bank. For this band, it’s the first step toward self-sufficiency and self-determination. “Developing our own source of revenue is a great way of getting off the federal teat,” says Trevor Jones, CEO of the Hupacasath Economic Development Corp. “It spurs an entrepreneurial approach that the whole community notices.”

The key is Hupacasath Woodlot, the band’s forestry company, which opened a 400-hectare woodlot in 2003. Catering to high-end log-home and timber-frame builders, who come directly to the managed forest to select their own trees, the woodlot has generated a profit every year since it started and according to Jones, “It’s created enough money to help us start up some of our other businesses.” A joint-venture micro-hydro project, a granite quarry partnership and a cultural tour company have all been started or supported with the woodlot’s $250,000 to $500,000 annual profit. Thanks to the woodlot, the band is moving toward the day when the Hupacasath won’t need to answer to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) about how it spends its money.

The Hupacasath are not alone in this goal. From tree lots and wineries to salmon farms and cultural tours, First Nations groups across the province are working toward self-determination and freedom from INAC’s transfer payments. Their new economic focus is on band- and individual-generated revenues, increasing cultural awareness and freeing First Nations members from Ottawa’s influence. Non-aboriginal partners are enticed and prejudices are disappearing as First Nations people overcome stereotypes. Unemployment is falling and some B.C. First Nations are now teaching the business world some lessons of their own.

This is a new mindset for First Nations in this province, one that has yet to catch on in some places. Fifty years ago, most aboriginal people were living off the land as their ancestors had, logging, fishing and trapping. “They were fairly self-reliant,” says Vancouver-based lawyer and author Calvin Helin, president of the Native Investment and Trade Association, an aboriginal non-profit society.

A combination of the downturn in the resource sector and increased reliance on financial support from the government gradually created a depressing scenario in which band offices became the only employer on many reserves and all the money came from Ottawa. Since First Nations bands don’t have the authority to collect taxes, they rely on transfer payments from the federal government to pay for infrastructure, schools, roads and band offices on reserves. (It’s similar to the money every municipality receives from government.) For the Hupacasath that’s about $900,000 for 250 people. It’s never enough. There’s no money left to help band members find jobs. Aboriginal people, totaling 3.5 per cent of the Canadian population, account for 30 per cent of the welfare roll, according to Helin. “The only solution for most chiefs is to beg for more money,” he says. “That’s just prolonging the problem.”

Indian Affairs minister feeling heat as Tories put brakes on native spending - SUE BAILEY for Canadian Press

OTTAWA (CP) - The desolate Kashechewan First Nation has become a flashpoint for growing frustration over Tory aboriginal policy.

That anger boiled over outside the Commons on Thursday as Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice turned his back on a confrontation with leaders representing the tiny James Bay community.

It started in the daily question period when New Democrat MP Charlie Angus, whose riding includes Kashechewan, challenged Prentice to recognize a Liberal-signed deal to rebuild what he called the flood-prone "rat hole" on higher ground.

Prentice refused. Instead, he countered over howls from the opposition that the Liberals never budgeted millions of dollars needed for the relocation.

Former Indian Affairs Minister Andy Scott signed an agreement last October pledging 50 new houses a year for 10 years.

"It is shameful that the previous Liberal government would have resorted to misleading the people of Kashechewan with empty promises and with no money set aside in the budget," Prentice said Thursday in the Commons.

"It is a situation we will deal with."

Angus says the minister's staff told him that it will be at least three years before a new site is selected. Moreover, funding expected this summer to repair existing homes and to study potential sites has been cancelled, he said.

Kashechewan Chief Leo Friday says he's worried that any delay will provoke residents, especially young people, to acts of civil disobedience.

"This government is trying to send my people back to that same shit hole that we've been out of for the last months," Friday said moments after Prentice refused to debate the matter in front of reporters and walked away.

"What are we going to do?"

Despite Prentice's claims that money was never budgeted, Friday says about $9 million had arrived in the community since the rebuilding deal was signed last fall. It was used to repair several homes, some of which were redamaged in the most recent flood.

The Cree community was moved against its will by Ottawa to the low-lying land in 1957.

More than 1,400 residents were evacuated for the third time in two years last month. They are now scattered among temporary homes in several northern Ontario cities and towns.

Spring flooding caused sewage backups in buildings, tainted drinking water and shut down hydro. This, after photos of Kashechewan toddlers riddled with skin infections blamed on dirty water made international headlines last fall.

Angus says he and Kashechewan leaders worked for months with the Conservatives trying to iron out details of a new plan.

"If we could (tell) the community, 'Yes, the minister needs more time but recognizes the (Liberal) agreement,' we'd be more than willing to go back and tell the people to be patient," Angus said.

"He has had ample opportunity to find the money and come up with a plan. He has done nothing."

Prentice insisted he is willing to continue talks with Kashechewan leaders.

"We have to patch that together, make it workable and livable and accelerate it as we can," he said when asked what residents are supposed to do in the meantime.

"Clearly, we have to move forward with a permanent solution."

Aboriginal issues may not be one of the Tory government's stated five priorities, but they've quickly become a political headache.

Prentice has taken heat since the maiden Conservative budget gutted a $5.1-billion plan signed by the former Liberal government, native leaders and all premiers to raise aboriginal living standards over 10 years.

The Tory budget commits just $150 million this year and $300 million next year for such goals.

Another $600 million was earmarked for housing and aboriginal programs in the territories - but only if surplus federal funds, to be finalized in the coming months, exceed $2 billion.

© The Canadian Press, 2006