Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Human Rights
Issue 18 - Evidence - June 15, 2005 - Morning meeting
CHARLOTTETOWN, Wednesday, June 15, 2005
The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights met this day at 9:05 a.m. to examine and report upon Canada's international obligations in regards to the rights and freedoms of children.
Senator A. Raynell Andreychuk (Chairman) in the chair.
[English]
The Chairman: I would like to commence the meeting by indicating that our mandate is to examine and report upon Canada's international obligations in regard to the rights and freedoms of children and in particular the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We are the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights and are pleased to be here today.
Our first panel of witnesses is from the Department of Health and Social Services.
Ms. McCormack, please proceed.
Ms. Cathy McCormack, Early Childhood Education Consultant, Department of Health and Social Services, Children's Secretariat, Government of Prince Edward Island: Good morning, everybody. It is very nice to have everybody here and some staff and one of our own senators; that's lovely. Our presentation outlines some of the ways P.E.I. is contributing to the goals of Canada's plan of action and response to the May 2002 United Nations Special Session on Children.
I will give some background about our section in government. Carolyn Simpson will talk about how recent federal, provincial and territorial initiatives are supporting this work. Janice Ployer will finish our presentation with some policy suggestions on how to help support children and families.
P.E.I. is working to support the goals of A Canada Fit for Children through our Healthy Child Development Strategy. This strategy aims to improve outcomes for children from prenatal stages to early school years in the areas of safety and security, good health, success at learning, social responsibility and belonging. Our strategy identifies key areas for action that focus on particular aspects of healthy child development: parental support, family literacy, early childhood education and care, family violence prevention, childhood injury prevention, environment, children's mental health, pregnancy, birth and infancy, and children with exceptional needs.
As a province we recognize that no government or individual alone can accomplish these goals, but as a provincial government we have a lead role to play in that. Through our strategy we are supporting partnerships and encouraging participation in a number of ways. Some of these partnerships are very formal and others are very informal.
The mandate of our secretariat is to facilitate interdepartmental cooperation for healthy child development. Health and Social Services is the lead department and we partner with five other departments: the Department of Education, Department of Development and Technology, Department of Community and Cultural Affairs, Department of Energy, Environment and Forestry, and the Office of the Attorney General.
Government and our community partners work together as a Children's Working Group. This intersectoral group includes community representatives from networks that I will explain in a minute, addressing key areas of action. Also, the provincial government representatives from the Children's Secretariat sit on this committee. The Public Health Agency of Canada and our University of Prince Edward Island are also represented on that group.
Our working groups are informal networks of people who are interested in the key areas of action, and participation is open to everybody. The community members serve as chair of their network. They represent that network on the Children's Working Group and that is where the formal and informal pieces happen.
Some of our groups, such as the group that supports early childhood care and education, are quite formal. It is usually members of the Early Childhood Development Association where other groups, such as our Childhood Injury Group, have people who come and go. Right now we are very involved with Zellers because we are doing an initiative on bike helmet safety. Our next initiative is on booster seat safety and we are working very closely with the RCMP, because they do roadside checks and we will be involved in those.
We also have a Premier's Council on Healthy Child Development, and that is a group of individual Islanders who advise the premier on issues affecting children. Every year that council hosts a children's think tank in the fall where parents, educators, health care professionals, community organizations and government officials come together for a day of learning. Through that we prioritize our actions for children for the next year.
This council also recognizes the good work that individuals and organizations do through a Champions for Children Award that is given every year in April.
I will now turn it over to Carolyn.
Ms. Carolyn Simpson, Provincial Kindergarten Program Administrator, Department of Education, Government of Prince Edward Island: Good morning to each of you. I do not know how many of you have had the opportunity to visit our province before. To those of you for whom this is your first time, welcome. To those of you who have been here before, I am sure you are enjoying our fine June day. It is beautiful out there. As Cathy said, my name is Carolyn Simpson and I am a member of the Children's Secretariat representing the Department of Education, and I am the Provincial Kindergarten Program Administrator.
Through the Early Childhood Development Initiativeof 2000, Prince Edward Island received federal support for new and expanded services in early learning and child care. Through this initiative, we have been able to support the implementation of the Healthy Child Development Strategy and some of the objectives, goals and initiatives of that strategy.
One such recommendation was the implementation of publicly funded kindergarten within the province. Our kindergarten program is unique to North America inasmuch as we have chosen as a province to leave our kindergarten as part of our early childhood sector. It has been a highly successful component of our early childhood system for well over 25 years and our province, through consultation with Islanders and talking with early childhood educators, public school educators, parents and others, made the recommendation to indeed develop a cohesive core program. However, one of the key components that families thrived upon was the fact that we could leave our kindergarten system program within our early childhood system, responding to unique family values and needs. That has been quite successful — not without its challenges, but nonetheless quite successful.
As well, the Early Childhood Development Initiative has helped to support a program that we fondly refer to as the MIKE project — Measuring and Improving Kids' Environments. Through MIKE, best practices in the delivery of inclusive and quality early learning child care services are promoted and supported. The MIKE coordinators and kindergarten mentors work together quite closely as a team within our early childhood sector to improve early learning environments for the children of families and staff within the early learning and child care programs.
In 2003 the Multilateral Framework on Early Learning and Child Care was signed. Additional funds to support this agreement were announced in 2004. The multilateral framework provides funding specifically for our licensed early childhood sector.
Most recently, the federal government has announced an investment in early learning and child care, as we all know,of $5 billion over five years to address some key areas that we refer to as our QUAD principles: quality, universally inclusive, affordable, and developmental.
While these agreements are important steps toward a vision for early learning and child care, supporting a system of licensed early learning and child care that can fully address each of the QUAD principles will require much greater investment.
We know, for example, that our professionals in early learning and child care nationally — but I will speak specifically for Prince Edward Island, obviously — are grossly underpaid. Our average wage here on Prince Edward Island ranges from $7 to $10 per hour, depending upon the season, the time of year you are working, and indeed which area of the province you are actually employed. There is a move afoot within the early childhood sector in that the early childhood educators have organized and the Union of Public Sector Employees is their union, their representative.
Retention, obviously, is a key issue that we have also and, needless to say, that is directly linked to the lack of good wages and adequate benefits and working conditions.
Each of the agreements listed above provide funding to jurisdictions based on a per capita funding model. However beautiful we are, we are small and we feel that per capita funding is indeed insufficient for a jurisdiction such as ours with small populations. There are many activities that jurisdictions across the country will take on, and basically the cost is not any different in one province or area than in another. For example, each of the jurisdictions will take a look at their legislation — revise, revamp, rework, rewrite legislation. That cost, regardless of where the jurisdiction is, remains the same. If we were to consider the creation of a database, for instance, to help align our system a bit tighter of how we support children and families, that cost is the same, regardless. So those are some examples of what we mean by that.
I will turn it over to Janice.
Ms. Janice Ployer, Healthy Child Development Coordinator, Department of Health and Social Services, Children's Secretariat, Government of Prince Edward Island: Through the initiative of the Early Childhood Development Association of Prince Edward Island, which is a non-profit organization dedicated to all aspects of development for young children, P.E.I. has been very fortunate to be one of the first six communities to pilot the Understanding the Early Years project.
P.E.I. was unique in that the entire province was considered an Understanding the Early Years community, or "UEY'' as we affectionately call it here. We are very affectionate toward that initiative because it has been a wonderful asset for P.E.I. UEY has mobilized the community through capacity building and learning, supported the work of the Healthy Child Development Strategy and inspired collaboration. UEY has been an excellent source of information to inform decision making at all levels: community, family, municipal and provincial.
Although the UEY-P.E.I. project is now coming to an end, we are looking forward to exploring other possibilities for its continuation, albeit in a different capacity. Through the Children's Secretariat, we are considering other ways of linking data collected through UEY with other sources, and one area we are looking at is environmental data.
We do have some suggestions for some policies. First, we would like to applaud the enhancement of maternity and parental benefits. They help to promote attachment, breast feeding, involvement of fathers in parenting and have been a very positive move for children and families.
However, there are some suggestions. One is to expand the eligibility requirements to allow self-employed parents and parents in non-standard employment situations to access the benefits. Prince Edward Island, in particular, has a lot of seasonal employment, and part-time employment as well, but particularly seasonal, and that can create some challenges to qualify for those benefits. Eliminating the two-week waiting period could help to diminish associated financial challenges for families having a gap in their income for those two weeks. Another suggestion would be to look at increasing the number of insurable hours.
The Women's Network of Prince Edward Island has completed considerable work in this area and they are an excellent resource for further recommendations and suggestions.
The Compassionate Family Care Benefit is an excellent initiative that supports families and caregivers during difficult times. This benefit could be expanded to include those providing care for children or other family members who may not be gravely ill yet require caregiving for a specific period of time. We are thinking of children who might be hospitalized for a month or two months. Children here would more likely be hospitalized at the IWK Health Centre in Halifax; that can put considerable strain on their families, especially those in the labour force.
CAPC and CPNP programs — Community Action Program for Children and Canada Pre-natal Nutrition Program — on P.E.I. have been very successful in providing access to a range of programs and services for children, pregnant women andfamilies facing difficult life circumstances. The programs are very well-established and highly regarded in our communities.
Since their initiation in 1994 and 1995, demand for services offered through the programs has increased steadily. Funding, however, has remained static at 1994 levels for CAPC, and CPNP funding was enhanced only in 2000. Increased costs and staffing challenges make meeting service demand very difficult. CAPC and CPNP are invaluable resources to P.E.I. children and families and should be funded sufficiently.
The National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, or NLSCY, collects very valuable information which helps to inform policies and decision making. For small jurisdictions, however, data is often not collected for a large enough sample size to provide detailed provincial information. Regional aggregates are informative, yes, but they do not necessarily reflect the P.E.I. population. From having the Understanding The Early Years project here, we have benefited from having an over-sampling of the NLSCY during that period of time; that initiative was certainly a great benefit and something we will miss.
As a final note, we would like to make the point that a policy for children is a policy for families. Canadians play many roles within their families and communities. They are parents, employees, employers, students and volunteers. As more Canadians delay their child-rearing years, more Canadians will find themselves caring for both their own parents and their young children at the same time. We need to consider ways that we can support all Canadians throughout their lifespan.
That concludes our remarks.
The Chairman: Thank you very much for the presentation. We will go now to questions.
Senator Poy: My first question is to Ms. Ployer. Could you expand on the Understanding the Early Years pilot project, please? You said P.E.I. is one of the first six communities. Who are the other five?
Ms. Ployer: My colleagues might have to help me on it.
Senator Poy: Could you expand on the project first? I would like to understand what you do in it.
Ms. Ployer: Well, again, my colleagues may help me out but I can start.
Senator Poy: All right.
Ms. Ployer: We came as a group; we support each other. We encourage partnerships and collaboration in everything we do. Understanding the Early Years is an initiative funded by Social Development Canada now, originally through Human Resources Development Canada, which was a community capacity-building exercise in collecting information and doing research about the children in specific communities in Canada and then engaging in a process to exchange knowledge with community members, hopefully to mobilize action for children.
Through the project here, data was collected from four sources. One of the initiatives was actually doing on-site observations to examine the conditions of the community. Is there a lot of graffiti in the community? Are the houses in good condition? Are the roads safe? Data was also collected through the Early Childhood Development Initiative instrument. That was a tool that was used by early childhood educators at the kindergarten level to measure various developmental aspects of the children in their care. The NLSCY also provided some data. What was the fourth one, colleagues?
Ms. Simpson: There was some parent data collection in the NLSCY. Janice talked about the community and the community observations that took place. As well, just to expand a little bit on that, we were also able to get, through early childhood educators, a snapshot of the child's first five years as opposed to an evaluation of where their development is specific to the time of kindergarten. It really is a whole lifespan — what had been the resources in the community within that child's life, and so on.
Ms. Ployer: Actually, the fourth tool that I was thinking of was the mapping study. They took the data that was collected and presented it on maps of Prince Edward Island so that people were able to look at them and see that here, for example, is an area where incomes might be lower or employment might be less secure than in other areas. Then we looked at how children are doing developmentally in those areas so that people could see potential correlations between what was happening in their community and what was happening with their children.
Senator Poy: When you say "early years,'' it is below what age?
Ms. Ployer: It is zero to five years.
Senator Poy: But you do study the community. You mentioned roads, et cetera.
Ms. Ployer: Yes.
Senator Poy: It is a community study. Now you said there are policies formulated. What happened to those policies? What I would like to know is whether or not there has been execution of the policies.
Ms. Ployer: Well, one good example of something that happened recently is through the initiative of the Early Childhood Development Association. They did a number of presentations to the Municipality of Summerside in P.E.I. and later there was a decision made in Summerside to develop a playground specifically for the younger population, because they recognized that they were providing services for the older children, but not necessarily for the younger ones.
In engaging the community it is sometimes difficult to pinpoint specific results that come from the actual sharing of information but there has definitely been a general feeling in P.E.I. that people are talking about the early years, that more people are supportive of programs and policies for those years. In terms of implementing our own Healthy Child Development Strategy, we are frequently using the data that has been collected through the Understanding the Early Years project to help make our arguments for the recommendations we are making.
Ms. Simpson: To form our decisions.
Senator Poy: Would one of you have the answer to the question: What are the other five communities?
Ms. Ployer: Stephenville, Newfoundland. There is one in Manitoba that is a section of Winnipeg, I believe. North York. Initially there were six and that expanded to 12, and now the most recent announcement has been an expansion of the project to 100 sites across Canada. The original sites are not able to reapply for that funding, so while there is indication that a UEY presence across the country in each jurisdiction is something that we are striving for right now, because Prince Edward Island was one of the initial pilots, we are not in a position to reapply. That is why we are looking at a different way that we might be able to have a UEY presence on Prince Edward Island still, but do it a little differently.
Senator Pearson: I would like to follow up on that because it is an opportunity that we have not had yet to talk about some of the kinds of programs that have been initiated at the federal level.
I think it would be useful for us one day to have a whole set of witnesses to describe the research in child development that has been sponsored from the National Longitudinal Survey on Children and Youth, to the UEY programs, to what we have learned from CAPC/CPCN and all that kind of thing.
I think that one of the purposes of the UEY was the understanding that children will be ready to learn when the community is more involved — more children will be ready to learn, which is the instrument that they use at the end — when communities have rallied more around children, so one of the things was the mapping in order to see what kind of association exists between economic development and income and so on. Those maps are extremely interesting when we see the correlations that they discovered. That was part of what UEY was doing. I do believe that was part of the purpose and if you build on it, then you will have spurred community engagement. I think that was the intention, was it not? You start out the program of three years — five years? Five years.
I wonder if you could give us some idea of what kinds of things, aside from the developments in Summerside, that have emerged out of that, that you think will last and work in some other way? Are there now committees and things? Because what we are looking for, all of us who care about early childhood development, is a seamless interaction between the various programs that are out there. And as you get more money for early learning and care and so on, I think you are a model of having a Children's Secretariat as a way of coordinating it. So could you elaborate on what you would envision as the ideal in the end, at a provincial level?
Ms. Ployer: One of the components of the UEY project was to identify some community champions — UEY Community Champions they were called — who are trained in understanding the data and are able to present it to members of their own communities. Those could be geographical communities or their employment or volunteer communities, or what have you. So those people are in place and are in a position to continue sharing the information.
Ms. Simpson: Our department, for example, takes our data to inform us as we continue with curriculum development. One of the findings in our province regards specific pockets of vulnerability, where literacy scores are not as high in particular pockets. Why? How can we support the early childhood educators who are supporting the children and families with family literacy? What does that mean? How can we continue to partner to expand on some of the literacy programs for families? What was in the community that is perhaps a barrier, and what is working someplace else that we could learn from? So linking community to community to support one another is also sort of a vision, if you will, in terms of how we can perhaps not be competitive for some of the municipal dollars, but how can we grow together and that sort of a thing. That has been incredibly valuable from our perspective.
Senator Pearson: Good.
Ms. Ployer: One of the successes of the UEY project was that initially the data showed that there was one part of the province that had some challenges with language development, and as a result the people in that community supported a project called "Little Expressions Mean a Lot.'' A speech language pathologist was hired to do some community capacity-building around speech and language, who worked closely with the early childhood educators in that area. It proved to be very successful and has spread across the Island. It is now a provincial initiative.
Ms. McCormack: The Early Childhood Development Association has been working also on language and literacy. I do not know if you have heard of "story sacks''? If Senator Carstairs were here, she would certainly know about that. The Early Childhood Development Association has partnered with the Women's Institute to actually make a bag of resources that goes along with a story so that it comes alive for children. That is happening all across P.E.I., because of our UEY data and low language level skills, as well as the Little Expressions Mean a Lot project, as Janice said.
Another example would be our three school boards in P.E.I. Our Eastern School Board looked at the mapping for all their seven or nine schools. They looked at all the schools and families and the results for children in those areas. Then they did some education with their teachers around children who were coming in with low literacy levels and maybe not as active as some of the other children; so we have been able to use our UEY mapping data like that. The maps have been an incredibly exciting venture. They are so visual and it just makes it come alive and makes it real for people.
Senator Pearson: I am pleased to have some sort of direct report from this project because we have supported it at the Ottawa end, but to see how it is actually playing out is very exciting.
Senator Oliver: As you know, the reason that we are here and the reason that we have been in Europe and other jurisdictions is to follow up on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Yesterday we were in New Brunswick, the day before we were in Newfoundland, and we have been in places like Sweden.
One of the things that we have learned from all these places is that in order to coordinate the work of this convention, some jurisdictions have looked at having an ombudsman; others, a child advocate. What you seem to have done here on Prince Edward Island is that you have a Children's Secretariat and a Children's Working Group, so it is interdepartmental and you are bringing in all other kinds of groups.
Is there any one person in charge of coordinating it all? If so, what do you call that person? Are they an ombudsperson, a director, a chairman or a child advocate? Who is the person who ties all the work of your secretariat and your working group together?
Ms. McCormack: That is a very good question. Until two months ago, we had a Director of the Children's Secretariat. In P.E.I. we are going through some transition in government; that person took advantage of a package that was offered and she retired at the end of April. That position has not been filled yet.
Senator Oliver: She probably went on to become a child advocate somewhere.
Ms. McCormack: She threatened that, actually, before she left. She will keep us very accountable from the outside. We do not know for sure, but we think that position will be filled and there will be somebody else sitting here the next time you come.
Senator Oliver: What do you call that person? I did not hear.
Ms. McCormack: It's the Director of the Children's Secretariat. It is not really an ombudsman as other provinces have because they are truly an advocate.
Senator Oliver: Would that person be an advocate on behalf of children's rights? That is part of the mandate?
Ms. McCormack: Yes. It is actually written into our job descriptions in the Department of Health and Social Services. My job description says that I am an advocate for children. I do not know about Janice's job description but mine is fairly old at this point. I think it was Katherine Flannagan-Rochon who was the director and I am pretty sure her job description said that too.
Senator Oliver: When we run around to various jurisdictions and hear from many different witnesses, they all give evidence, we pack our bags and we move on to the next place. You may ask how we tie it all together. Well, we have researchers who prepare questions and so on. One of the questions prepared for your group concerns the fact that many of the witnesses who have appeared before this committee have expressed concern about the extent of children's rights training in government departments. Can you tell us about specific children's rights training and sensitivity initiatives undertaken in Prince Edward Island?
You told us something in your report that interested me. You said you have a Premier's Council on Healthy Child Development and that it is a one day get-together. Is there a report that is prepared on that? And is that used as a sensitivity training event or not?
Ms. Ployer: Each year the Premier's Council on Healthy Child Development does issue an annual report on children, and through that they highlight new and interesting initiatives that are happening for children. They present data that is available through the NLSCY as well as our own UEY data, for example, or other data that is collected, as well as reporting on our investments through the various initiatives and agreements.
Senator Oliver: Does it have anything specific to do with the UN convention?
Ms. Ployer: For the UN convention, no.
Senator Oliver: Well, what do you do about sensitivity training?
Ms. Ployer: It is a good question. I do not have an answer to that. I am not sure if my colleagues do.
Senator Oliver: Well, what is being done in P.E.I. to make the rights of children a priority? Everyone is jumping to the microphone.
The Chairman: If you do not mind, Senator Oliver, we are studying the Convention on the Rights of the Child and it is legalistic as well as practical and has social implications. It is a "rights-based'' convention, saying that these are the rights of children, that they have these rights. Some of them are rights that evolve. Some rights may be vested in others until they are capable of assuming them as full adults. We have been going across Canada, and certainly even in our hearings in Ottawa there does not seem to be the kind of awareness of the convention that one would expect 10 years after the implementation of this convention.
Our particular concern has been that children are not aware that they have these rights. The question I think Senator Oliver has very subtly put to you — and I am putting very bluntly to you — is this: Are you educating the young people about their rights under the convention? And if you are, what tools are you employing to do that? I will even give you a hint: If you are saying "not much,'' you are not alone.
How do you use the convention? Do you use the convention? Is it in the Premier's Council on Healthy Child Development? Those are the kinds of things we want to find out.
Senator Oliver: Now you know why there are not more men on the committee. It takes a woman's approach to put it so gingerly.
The Chairman: No, I put it bluntly. You put it rather gently.
Ms. McCormack: I understand what you are saying. In the past we have worked with the Canadian Child Care Federation and Sandy Griffin is quite an advocate for children and for the convention. Through the federation they have done quite a number of things: posters, workshops, and articles in their magazine, Interaction, which goes to all our early childhood educators.
Brenda Goodine, who will speak to you this afternoon, may be able to talk a little bit more about that from the Early Childhood Development Association perspective and what they've done through their educators.
In government, we probably haven't done as much as we could do and perhaps not as much as we will do after this.
The Chairman: Before I turn to Senator Hubley, maybe I can follow up. The Convention on the Rights of the Child, of course, is for children. It is not what we do for them. It is the rights they have and how they are reflected in society. One of the ways that the convention works is that the states have to report to the United Nations Working Committee on the Rights of the Child. We are told in Ottawa that we are having great problems finding out how that report is put together and who gets to say something about it. We are told at the federal level that provinces are consulted, that data is fed into the federal government about issues under the convention and then they go about putting together their report.
Who in P.E.I. puts the report together for Prince Edward Island and what kind of interaction do you have with the federal government on preparing these reports, the next one being due in 2009?
Ms. Ployer: That is a process we will have to start next year.
The Chairman: Yes, and it is a process that goes on. We have heard from groups that they do not have much input into it. Some have been consulted at the federal level but provinces do feed in their information to the federal government, in some way, through this continuing committee on human rights.
Senator Pearson: Actually, they feed in a separate report.
The Chairman: I am trying to find that out, because we have been told that from the federal government; we would like to know from the provincial governments just who puts this report together. Have you been consulted in the past about this report and the information that goes into it from the P.E.I. side?
Ms. Ployer: I participated recently in responding to a general report, but it was a United Nations human rights survey that Prince Edward Island was completing. There were some questions specific to children, but there were also questions specific to other areas; housing, for example. Again, that's specific to children as well. I do not believe it is the same report you're referring to, but I assume the person who has the lead on that will also have the lead on the report that you are referring to, and that is a lawyer based in the province's Office of the Attorney General. For the most recent report, he consulted with the various players across government who were knowledgeable about the specific questions and asked for their response. So there is a person identified, as I am aware.
The Chairman: In the Attorney General's department here?
Ms. Ployer: Yes, that is right, in their legal services section.
The Chairman: We have just had a report from the working group that made certain comments, and not necessarily good comments, about Canada. There certainly were supportive comments in the report, but others questioned how Canada is adhering to the convention. Have those reports ever been shared with you and have you been asked for your comments?
Ms. Ployer: Not in my time.
Ms. McCormack: They could have been shared with Kathy Flannagan-Rochon. That would have been the logical person to whom it would have gone, but I am not aware.
The Chairman: So that knowledge has gone with her?
Senator Pearson: What Senator Andreychuk has been raising is a very important question and it is one we will be exploring in all the provincial meetings we have because the obligation of signatories to conventions is to widely disseminate the information; not only to engage civil society in the preparation of the report — and to engage children themselves — but also, as the committee responds by making its concluding observations on presentations, to disseminate that widely.
We will be making recommendations out of our own report, and they may help you as you proceed, because you clearly care about it. Thank you.
Senator Hubley: Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to say what a pleasure it is to be an Island senator and have the privilege of sitting on one of our committees that is meeting here on a very important issue. Just to follow up, perhaps the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child should be part of the curriculum of the young people who are being trained to go out to work in our day cares and in our kindergartens.
What are the qualifications required for early childhood educators and is that training available on Prince Edward Island? Several times you mentioned different courses that would be available to educators, I believe. Are there national standards for our educators? Perhaps I will let you comment on that first.
Ms. McCormack: We do have a training program in P.E.I. at Holland College. It is the Early Childhood Education and Care program and is a diploma program. We are presently negotiating with UPEI to have that diploma recognized and have people able to go on to get a degree, if that is what they so choose to do.
With the help of the federal government, through our Labour Market Development Agreement, in the past two years we have had accelerated training programs for people who are currently working in the field and want to achieve their diploma. As well, we have just negotiated with the Province of Quebec to come and offer an accelerated francophone training program, and three years ago we had an Aboriginal program offered. We have been trying to upgrade the qualifications of our early childhood educators community. Probably in excess of 80 per cent of our educators have at least a diploma at this point in time.
That is a great suggestion and it may already be part of the curriculum at Holland College; I am not sure. Carolyn and I are both on the advisory committee and we can make that recommendation, for sure. It is a great idea. There is no national accreditation of early childhood educators right now, although the Canadian Child Care Federation is looking at that. The federation does have standards of practice it has developed that it is trying to roll out across Canada as we speak, to give at least that level of accountability, and I guess that was a step before national accreditation. So I think we are doing pretty well.
Senator Hubley: For special needs children of a very young age, you must work very closely with the Department of Health. I think you mentioned that you were actually within the Department of Health and Social Services. Is there any special consideration given for children with special needs within the day care and the kindergarten system? Would that be part of the training that the educators would receive?
Ms. McCormack: Yes, it is. It is an important part of the training. We have had in the past a program at Holland College where people who had either their diploma in early childhood development or in human services, with one more year of training could get two diplomas — one in each. We have about 220 children with disabilities who are in our programs. We provide a grant in order that those children can be included in the programs. We have a very specific program for children with autism. We support them also in our early childhood programs.
Senator Oliver: One hundred per cent?
Ms. McCormack: One hundred per cent, yes. I think we have currently about 17 children with autism who are preschool children and have been supported through that program. As Carolyn said, because we kept kindergarten community based, the Department of Health and Social Services provides the funding for children with disabilities in kindergarten programs as well.
The Chairman: Just to follow up on what Senator Oliver said, what happens at the age of five with autism?
Ms. McCormack: At the age of five they continue in our kindergarten programs.
The Chairman: They get 100 per cent funding after that in P.E.I.?
Ms. McCormack: After kindergarten, when they are in school?
The Chairman: Yes.
Ms. McCormack: Yes, if they need it they would have afull-time T.A. within our school system, and they can stay in our school system until they reach the age of 21. We also have programs, both at our university and this year for the first time at Holland College. The parents of a child whom I used to work with directly in the field of teaching kindergarten were telling me at the Champions for Children Award ceremony that he will go on to Holland College this fall.
Ms. Simpson: There actually is one student enrolled at the college right now.
The Chairman: You have zeroed in on early childhood educators, and that implies to me a more formalized system of child care. The province I come from, Saskatchewan, is a very rural province. One of our problems is that we cannot set up early childhood centres and so often we are looking to extended families to be caregivers and we are looking to support families in the home, to be able to look after their children, whether they are special needs or not. How do you approach that? The federal program seems to be zeroing in, if I understand this new program, to day care centres and to getting more excellence in them. What about the others or is your focus only on these centres?
Ms. McCormack: No, certainly not. The Department of Health and Social Services provides a child care subsidy program for parents. One example is that we do not havea lot of infant-care spaces in this province. We have only about 70. Parents who have infants, if they need to work or to take education, can access the subsidy program and have somebody either come into their home or take their child to another person's home. We try to set up family day care centres where we can in rural P.E.I. and we have been fairly successful in that. A family day care would have a maximum of seven children in a person's home, but they would still then have some inspection-type things and some resource help through the Early Childhood Development Association.
You are right: The new program is for licensed centres. We have been talking to the Early Childhood Development Association about how we could set up something that would give parents some information about what they should expect from their care giver, whether licensed or not. What kind of care and what kind of education should the child be getting, even if they are in somebody's own home? It does not have to be totally different. Even, perhaps, have some kind of a registry. Let the unlicensed care givers register with the Early Childhood Development Association and perhaps have to meet some standard — that they would have emergency first aid — or then they could access some ongoing training through the association. They would put them on a registry and then parents would know where there are care providers.
It is one of the questions I get asked all the time and I am sure Carolyn does too. People do not know where to go to find care givers even in their communities. It seems wrong, somehow, that you go to the grocery store and on the bulletin boards inside the door is where you find a care provider, so we are trying to do some other things to help parents. In P.E.I. we have spaces for about 59 per cent of our children from ages two to six. We have a very high percentage of people who want to access licensed child care and are accessing it.
The Chairman: I recall 20 years ago that all the juvenile facilities for long — term holding — not all, but some — were in Nova Scotia; those specialized services for juveniles who were in conflict with the law were off the Island. What is the situation now regarding your ability to deal with those young people who have to be in custody? Do you do it on the Island and are the facilities totally separate from adult facilities now? Would any of you be able to answer that?
Ms. McCormack: It is certainly not in our area of expertise, but I will make a stab at it. Up until probably a year ago, we were still doing that. Our children were going off-Island if they had behaviour-type problems. We have tried very hard in the past number of years, and to be honest with you it was mostly because of the cost of sending them off- Island, as well as the fact that they had then no relationship with their communities or their families.
We have just taken over, I think about a year ago, one of our young offenders facilities in West Prince. That is the facility in which we now have our hard-to-manage youth who need some protection, both for themselves and for the communities. But at least it is in a small community.
My son lives in a community not very far away and he used to do some volunteer work at the rink; one of his friends worked at the centre. He said, "Why not bring the kids over?'', so they were able to access some ice time last winter and be with other volunteer members of the community in which they were living.
I think we certainly have a way to go because we are treading new ground, really. It is only a year that we have been doing this, but I am not sure; we need our Director of Child Protection to really talk about how successful we have been. But at least they are in P.E.I., their families can visit, they are getting out and having at least some community experience — that I know first-hand. Other than that, I am unsure.
Senator Pearson: Was your question was about closed custody?
The Chairman: Well, all custody.
Senator Pearson: I have visited the closed-custody facility that is near Summerside, which is excellent. It was, when it was constructed, a state-of-the-art, completely separate facility. What I remember about it was that the population was not huge — thank goodness — but a large number of them were Aboriginal children, and one of the great successes of that facility was giving them the education that they had not had previously and getting them through high school in ways that had not been possible before. I presume it is still a good facility. It seemed to me there were 13 or 14 children. It was not a large number of children.
The Chairman: Perhaps whichever department is responsible — the Attorney General's department — could provide a letter, later, to indicate how you hold children under the Social Welfare Act, how you hold them under the Juvenile Justice Act and to confirm whether all the children are now being held within the province and are they being held separate and apart in all cases from adults?
That is part of what we have been looking at because it is part of the convention that has been part of our discussions. If someone could get back to us with that information, that would be helpful.
Senator Pearson: I really appreciate the comments that you have made. I did have another question: Has P.E.I. signed the Early Childhood Care Agreement yet?
Ms. McCormack: No, we have not. As I think Carolyn talked about, the base funding issue is outstanding.
Senator Pearson: That was the next point I was going to make. It seemed to me that between you and the territories, for example, where they also have very small populations, there is a lot of sense in breaking away from the numbers and getting the additional funding. We are glad to have that on the record.
My next question was about the involvement of children in your children's think tank. We talk about a children's think tank and then I see parents, educators, health care professionals, community organizations, and I think, are the kids there? And if not, why not? Or if not, please do.
Ms. McCormack: In our first think tank we also said the very same thing: "We should have children here.'' We did have some children who came. They made pictures about what they thought about, what they needed in their communities, what was important to them. They were probably part of the think tank for about an hour and snack was the most important piece to them, of course. They had balloons and cake and had their picture taken with the premier, and he asked one of them if they knew who he was.
"You are the important person in P.E.I.''
I do not know if the parents told them that or not, but the parents came with the children and they were quite excited that they were getting to meet the premier and eat cake.
We have not had children since. We had a great discussion, though, about how to include them in our think tanks without boring them, and how can they become a real part, but we haven't come to any conclusions really. We are fairly new to this and we have had only three think tanks, so it is still an issue.
One of our members from our children's working group, who runs Anderson House, which is a home for abused women, always makes us have an empty chair at the table for the child, so that we remember the child at all times. But no, we need to do a better job on how we include them in our think tank, for sure. It is a funny comment: a children's think tank and they're not there.
Senator Oliver: Maybe a place to begin is by asking the children how they feel they can best participate in a think tank. Maybe you could have a round table and put the very question to the children; you'd probably be surprised with the variety of responses you would get. It might be a good place to start.
The Chairman: No further questions. We would like to thank you for coming and I do apologize if we put questions beyond your expertise. We were trying to find out — and this is one of our problems — which ministries to call in which province, because nobody has the same system, and what we are looking for regards the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We have miscued in some cases and obviously here we should have had the Attorney General's department. That is part of the problem; the Convention on the Rights of the Child should cover all departments and ministries because the convention is that broad. It has been very hard to see at first blush how each province handles the convention and the issues, so we are going around and it is a bit hit and miss.
So if we put too much on your shoulders it was because that was the best we could do at this point. To underscore, we believe that the convention should be the concern of all ministries, that child policies and children — our clerk has just reminded me they go up to age 18 under the convention — therefore should be something that all ministries are taking into account. I think if you see our report, we will be making some recommendations about how the federal government, and by implication the provincial government, should be taking into account the convention in its day-to- day work and particularly as it develops policies and laws.
So you are not different in that sense. I think we are all struggling to make the convention a reality. One of the questions that we haven't asked you, but you might give back to your lawyers and others, is that the convention is a convention that the federal government signed, but with some consultations with the provinces and certainly the implementation of the convention, many parts of it are within the exclusive domain of the provinces.
We are looking to ensure that, somewhere down the line, the convention forms part of our law in Canada, that we do not just sign an agreement over there with all these rights for children, but that those rights do not have an impact and that the children do not have the rights in reality in Canada. That is where we are coming from and it is an alert to all Canadians that we want to make the convention a real document for young people in Canada. You can be the messengers in this case, rather than having it all fall on your shoulders.
But we thank you for sharing your experiences here and hopefully you will look to our report. If there are any pieces of information in the coming months that you think would be helpful to our study and our work, please forward them to us. We thank you for coming today and sharing.
Ms. McCormack: Thank you very much. We are in the process of rewriting our own legislation and I promise you that we will certainly look at how we can include that. Also, we are on our way now to a meeting with our Children's Secretariat, so we will put that on the agenda and have a discussion with at least six of our departments. I think we have nine. We have nine departments and we have six of them covered, so we are close.
The Chairman: That would be good coverage. Thank you very much.
Senators, we have a special and unusual witness before us today. We have the Honourable Elizabeth Hubley, a senator from P.E.I., who will address us on culture and the rights of the child. We do not need to welcome you to P.E.I.; I am sure you will welcome us. We welcome you to the committee. The floor is yours and then we will have questions for you.
The Honourable Elizabeth Hubley, Senator for Prince Edward Island, Senate of Canada: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Again, welcome, of course, to everyone present. This is a different seat for me but I welcome the opportunity to speak briefly on culture. At any time we discuss, necessarily we open up a very wide subject. I certainly do not pretend to be either an anthropologist or a cultural guru, but I will comment on what I believe to the challenges of cultural continuity and participation within our global community.
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is the most universally accepted statement of basic human rights in history. Built on varied legal systems and cultural traditions, it sets out non-negotiable standards and obligations for peoples everywhere.
As set out in the convention, the rights of children include: the right to survival; to develop to the fullest; to protection from harmful influences, abuse and exploitation; and to participate fully in family, cultural and social life. The preamble takes into account the importance of traditions and cultural values. In the words of the international organization UNICEF, "Every right spelled out in the convention is inherent to the human dignity and harmonious development of the child...''
Article 4 calls on governments "to undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the rights'' agreed to under the convention, but also recognizes the limited available resources of some countries.
Unquestionably, cultural identity is an essential force in our lives. Cultural traditions and customs, along with language and religious beliefs, define who we are, and we should celebrate our diversity. To put it simply, I believe that every child is entitled to be rocked in their own cultural cradle, to hear the stories of their own people, to acquire distinctive customs and ways to pass down from one generation to another; in other words, to be formed by the culture that has gone before them.
Article 20 of the convention points to this "desirability of continuity in a child's upbringing and to the child's ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic background...'' But cultural continuity and participation are not easily assured for many people. It becomes extremely difficult in a country racked by famine and starvation or disease or made unstable by civil violence and war. In fact, cultural development and transmission require social stability.
When a people are threatened and under siege, cultural rights necessarily take a back seat to more basic needs and to survival. How can anyone calculate the cultural loss and destruction caused by the AIDS epidemic in central Africa? How do the children of Iraq recover culturally from devastating wars that have turned much of their country into a wasteland, resulted in the looting of their natural treasures and crippled their educational system? How do the survivors of genocide in Rwanda and Darfur take pride once again in their culture and heritage?
These are questions we need to ponder in our hearts, and if we truly care about assuring cultural rights for children, then as an international community we need to first protect, feed and shelter them. If we are serious about cultural continuity, then we must avoid wars that destroy culture at its very roots and deny children every basic human right.
The second observation I want to make has to do with cultural isolationism. Inasmuch as we should promote and celebrate cultural diversity throughout the world and cherish the rich tapestry that is woven from people to people, we also know that culture can be a negative force when it turns in on itself, when it becomes isolated. The most vibrant culture is one that is confident and secure in its underpinnings and values, and is open to the world beyond its shores. The strongest and most enlightened culture is one that allows itself to be influenced by the ebb and flow of migration and trade.
Maintaining our own distinctive culture is important but we can do it without rejecting the mainstream, without closing the doors and windows to the world outside. Article 17 of the convention encourages "international cooperation in the production, exchange and dissemination of social information and material from a diversity of cultural, national, and international sources ...'' In other words, the convention recognizes that cultural isolationism is counterproductive and that children should be afforded the opportunity to discover and learn about cultures other than their own.
I strongly agree with this approach. My own province of Prince Edward Island has always been an outward-looking little society. In the 19th century, Island seafarers travelled to distant parts of the world. These days, we welcome hundreds of thousands of tourists each year, and in the words of an Island folksong: "They make us more than we have been, they keep our circle wide...'' No culture blossoms or flourishes if it is left unpollinated and uninfluenced by other cultures.
But if cultural isolationism is undesirable, perhaps a greater threat is the tidal wave of mass popular culture that is washing over the entire world, weakening indigenous cultures and creating a kind of homogenous cultural soup that is being consumed by a growing number of children everywhere. We do live in a global community increasingly stitched together by the Internet and other forms of mass communications. J.K. Rowling's books, Star Wars, Shania Twain, American Hip-Hop, U2, Batman, the television sitcom Friends — Western popular culture is pervasive. Thanks to the commercial power of the entertainment and publishing industries, its cultural products enjoy a growing and truly worldwide audience.
From the Greeks to the Spanish to the British, and now the Americans, there have been cultural imperialists throughout history. The difference is that now culture is transported, not by railroad or by sailing ships, but in pockets of digital information moving at the speed of light. In this new electronic age, rural and urban cultural realities have merged. Geographical borders mean very little and it is quite possible that in the future all of us will share the same culture. To use scientific technology, I believe our cultural universe is contracting, not expanding.
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is a great achievement. It has been ratified by all but two countries. Cultural continuity and participation are vital processes, but how do we ensure that cultural rights are taken into account? How do we see that children everywhere have access to their own history and indigenous cultural traditions? How do we afford opportunities for artistic expression? And who is responsible for all of this?
First of all, when it comes to culture, I believe the best defence is a good offence. If a society has the necessary tools and instruments and resources, it will preserve and fortify its own culture. Indeed, the best way to combat or counterbalance the plethora of mass American culture I spoke about earlier is to make your own films, publish your own books, develop your own broadcasting system. We have done this in Canada. The effectiveness of Canadian content policies is somewhat debatable; however, as a nation we have certainly encouraged and supported and invested in cultural development.
The educational system, of course, plays a central role in cultural learning and transmission. I remember a Prince Edward Island Teachers Federation promotional advertisement a few years ago, in which the school curriculum was compared to a dinner plate of food. Mathematics and science and English were represented as the meat and potatoes of the meal, while the arts were the garnish, the salt and the pepper. As a dance instructor and artist, I still take exception to that kind of prioritization, this hierarchy of learning, for I strongly believe that the arts — music, dance, theatre, creative writing, painting — are foundation subjects essential to our personal growth and development. I also believe that we need to teach more Canadian history and geography in our classrooms and that regional communities from the Atlantic to the Pacific to the Arctic need to become better acquainted with one another.
Madam Chairman, culture is the fuel of the soul. Cultural rights for children everywhere need to be defended and made real.
I have attempted in my remarks to sketch out the changing world in which the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child must operate. I hope these observations and thoughts contribute to your overall deliberations and I welcome any questions that you might have.
Senator Poy: Elizabeth, it is really nice to see you in your hometown.
Senator Hubley: Thank you.
Senator Poy: I agree with a lot of things you said. I have a question regarding what you said, that "every child is entitled to be rocked in their own cultural cradle.'' How effective is that in P.E.I. such as with the First Nations children? How effective is your educational system here in that regard?
Senator Hubley: I think we address that well on Prince Edward Island. One of the largest Mi'kmaq communities is on Lennox Island. Those students are educated on the reserve and then they go to West Isle High School. At West Isle they have History of Aboriginal People; that is one of their subjects. They also promote the handicrafts that they are very adept at. The Mi'kmaq community has a fairly strong presence on Prince Edward Island. It is well known. It is celebrated in their dance and their music at functions, not necessarily just taking place on the reserves; it is part of other celebrations. We have a pow-wow on Prince Edward Island that is a major event where we have Mi'kmaq from across the Maritimes, who mostly attend. That is a popular attraction for people to be part of nowadays, because it is a community event. It is well advertised. It is part of our entertainment during the summer on Prince Edward Island.
Educationally, I think there are always challenges and I am sure that there is always a better way of doing it; but I think that on P.E.I., especially within the community that I have described, we are doing quite well.
Senator Poy: Would they be the majority of the First Nations people on the Island?
Senator Hubley: Yes, they would.
Senator Poy: Are they taught in their own language?
Senator Hubley: No, they are not. Part of their curriculum includes storytelling in their own languages.
Senator Poy: So do you have the elders telling the stories?
Senator Hubley: That is correct. That the elders are included is very much part of the education system. It was actually a question that I asked. I think the preservation of their language comes mainly through their training and upbringing within their homes. When I asked that of the school system, they did say that bringing elders into the school system to speak the language, to be part of that educational program, is something that they have been attempting to do.
Senator Poy: What is the percentage of First Nations children compared to the rest?
Senator Hubley: I would think maybe 3 to 5 per cent. It would not be much more than that.
Senator Pearson: Thank you so much for a wonderful presentation. You have touched on so many important issues around the child's right to culture, the child's right to artistic expression and so on, that I think are very, very helpful for our study. I liked your image of the salt. I mean, I didn't like it, but I did like it. And the reason I did not like it is the way it was presented to you at that time; the arts were like an add-on. But if you go back to — I forget what the exact Biblical reference is, but when you are the salt of the earth.
Senator Hubley: Salt of the earth, yes.
Senator Pearson: I would like to think of a child's right to art and culture as their right to have salt — as you know, research has shown that participation in artistic and cultural activities is a vital part of healthy child development, and you have spoken to that. The children need opportunities for self-expression and play, and thrive when they get them. You know that from direct experience. Through participation and creative processes in a variety of media, including technology, children experience alternative ways of knowing and develop their imaginations, ideas, observational capacities and feelings. We also know, through some of the research through the Arts Smarts program at McConnell and so on, that the benefits of creative activities throughout childhood have been shown to include improved academic performance, improved health and social skills, improved higher order thinking and reduced involvement in crime. So I think that for all of us who are interested in the rights of children, increasing opportunities for artistic and expressive means and opportunities is really important.
I was wondering, from your experience, what you think would be a recommendation that would be useful for us to make as a committee around the child's right to culture and artistic expression?
Senator Hubley: I am not sure if I can word it, other than to underline what I have already said. I just wanted to share with you an art display that came to Prince Edward Island. It was put together by Jim Baker, who has now passed away. I believe it came from Africa and was an art display of young people's work when they were experiencing a civil war. It was so telling to see the images and how these young people expressed what they were going through at that time — very, very young children. It would be frightening to most people to view. There were no butterflies and there were no flowers; but there were guns and there was blood and there was crying; and where those children were not able to express in words what was happening to them, they express in great detail through their ability to use colour and line and to draw.
The other fear that I have, regarding how important culture is, is that in countries that are in conflict, that conflict becomes the younger generation's culture. That is what they are learning. That is what they know. To replace that with what we think of as their history — the foods they eat, their dances, their songs, their music — takes generations to repair and that is what I feel that generation will be missing.
It is like being on a desert island. You will survive first. You will find out where you can find water and food. It is down the line that you start to express what is inside of you. I am not sure how you could decorate a palm tree, but that would be what you would do. That is when culture as we know it, as we define it, will come in.
Culture is really what happens to you from the time you are born, on up. If we cannot save children from miseries that conflicts bring to them, then I think we are creating a lesser world for ourselves. I think it is that important that culture be in place. I am not sure you can guarantee it, though. I would like to say we can go into a country but before we rebuild and put the educational and the health system back in place, I am not sure that their minds will be open to embracing their traditions and their culture, and I think that is where the challenge with this "Rights of the Child'' will be.
Senator Pearson: It makes me think of the drawings by the children in the concentration camp in Czechoslovakia that travelled around the world and the children's opera that was developed for that particular group that is now being done in Saskatchewan. It is the value of survival through art.
Senator Hubley: Through art, yes.
Senator Pearson: Not to lose that as a lower priority — I am not saying it replaces the priority. As they say, you cannot live on song, but culture is to accompany it, because it gets left behind because people are not thinking of it. They are thinking only of the immediate things and so I really appreciate your comments. Thank you.
Senator Hubley: The only other comment that I would like to make is that probably in times of greatest despair it is your culture that will sustain you. So when these little drawings come out — or big drawings — it is perhaps that song that will bring some comfort, even though everything else in the world seems to be dropping away.
Senator Pearson: Or the poems that the prisoners in Soviet times said to themselves in order to survive long years of isolation.
Senator Hubley: We listen to those stories and we say how wonderful they are, but in many parts of the world today it is very true that perhaps all the people can do is to recall those sayings, scriptures — whatever they have been part of. But children do not have that. They do not have the history of that as yet. We have to ask ourselves this: What will carry that little mind forward to be part of the world to come? I do not want to paint a dark picture here, but I think there is a concern that we have to replace their culture very quickly, the best parts of it. Thank you.
Senator Oliver: Senator Hubley, I want to thank you very much for a most excellent presentation. You said a number of things that I agree with and you outlined a number of cultural concerns that I share also.
The reason that we are here in Prince Edward Island now is because of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. You raised and then went on to answer this question: How do we ensure that cultural rights are taken into account? You talked about the cultural traditions and rights of many different peoples of the world and Senator Poy asked you about one particular group in P.E.I., the Aboriginals.
I want to ask you about something I have read about in the newspapers about Atlantic Canada, particularly Nova Scotia. The newspapers have said that with the inverted age pyramid and the change in demographics, in order for Newfoundland, P.E.I., Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to continue to grow, we will have to look at bringing in more immigrants because we are not producing as many babies as we used to on our own. In order to grow our economies we will have to look at immigration. You actually refer to that in your paper and I quote: "The strongest and most enlightened culture is one that allows itself to be influenced by the ebb and flow of immigration and trade''; that is, new people coming into your country.
In the newspapers in Atlantic Canada there has been a constant reference to the fact that we in Atlantic Canada are not able to keep the new immigrants in this region, that they want to move on to Toronto and to Vancouver and to some extent to Calgary. If that is the case, how will we train our children, under the convention, in the cultural traditions of the globalized world that you talk about? How will we do it if we cannot keep these new people here in Atlantic Canada? It was a long question and I apologize.
Senator Hubley: I think there are many ways of experiencing other cultures. I think on Prince Edward Island we have had immigrants from Lebanon and China and Japan. There is multiculturalism on Prince Edward Island. I think that people who share the same things have a comfort level with each other. I think perhaps immigration on a larger scale demonstrates that when people come, they do like to have a familiarity with other people and maybe by moving to larger centres — not to mention our winters on Prince Edward Island. It may be opportunities too. There are realities; there is the need to have jobs to make more money. There could be many reasons. But I like the idea of embracing different cultures. I think your own culture becomes stronger when you share another culture. In ways it is integrated. I look at what is probably a really pure art form: one of the purest art forms that I see is in step dancing. It evolved maybe from the Industrial Revolution in Europe where they wore the clogs, the wooden shoes on their feet to stand on the cold floors. To entertain themselves they would start maybe on a Friday afternoon, to tap out little rhythms with these clogs and it would go through — one person could start and another person could make it a little different, so there became a little step dancing routine taking place many, many years ago.
On Prince Edward Island, our step dancing, per se, has very strong Scottish elements because the Scottish step dancing developed in a certain way because they were isolated — as were the Acadians, as were the Irish. And now we have all of that on Prince Edward Island and our step dancing reflects all of those. Then we see from time to time, as clogging becomes popular, that there are little clogging step slides into the step dancing steps. We have even had the Charleston influence in step dancing. But it always comes back to the original. It is always kept back to the original because the music governs it. The music is the disciplinarian in the dance so that if you can do it to the music, you may be able to slide it into the step dancing genre, but the music will keep it as pure as it can.
I do not know perhaps where I was going with that, other than to say that influences will come and go, but it will always bring new interests to your own traditions. It will add to them rather than take away. It adds another element to your tradition. It is not that you replace your own; it is not that you have lost your values. I think because you are born in a land, your land will define you, whether you are prairie or mountains or sea or Nova Scotia, or city. It tends to define you as a person as well. It has a great influence on how you grow up and on your culture. That doesn't leave you; that stays there.
Senator Oliver: My concern was, however, that since there has been a lot of media recently about the fact that new immigrants coming to Atlantic Canada, particularly from countries like Africa, the Middle East, the Muslim countries, China, Thailand, the Philippines and so on, do not stay here but they move on — to Montreal, to Toronto, to Vancouver and so on. If our children in Atlantic Canada are not having the influence of growing up with new Canadians from the Middle East and elsewhere, will they not lose out on something very important? Yes, they can always click on the Internet to learn something about it there or they can go to a movie; but there is a big difference between those electronic means and meeting someone and playing with them and telling stories one-on-one. That is what I was concerned about. Will we in Atlantic Canada not be losing out as far as our children are concerned?
Senator Hubley: I would think we would be. I would think that would be an experience that they would not have and it is one that I think would be important to have. I am not sure how we resolve that. I could not agree with you more that first-hand, personal experience is absolutely the best way to learn about another culture.
The Chairman: I have read through your statement when you were presenting it and I have looked back at it. I wonder if you could expand on a couple of points. The same sentence that Senator Oliver read out, I want to bring to your attention under "Cultural Isolationism'' on page 3. You said, "The strongest and most enlightened culture is one that allows itself to be influenced by the ebb and flow of immigration and trade.'' I thought that was an interesting phrase that you put in. Then on page 4, under "The Threat of Mass Culture,'' you point out that "From the Greeks to the Spanish to the British, and now the Americans, there have been cultural imperialists throughout history.'' You then make the conclusion under "The Threat of Mass Culture'': "To use scientific terminology, I believe our cultural universe is contracting not expanding.''
I see a bit of a contradiction in what you are saying there, plus you have entered into the debate and I would like you to expand it. There is one school of thought, in the World Trade Organization, for example, that certain aspects of culture are in fact trade and it is to our benefit to commercialize it, to extend it. It is one of our survival tools and one way we put the face of Canada forward. You have put Shania Twain on the list; we could list a whole bunch of others there, too, including the Montreal Symphony, et cetera, that we benefit from both commercially and culturally when we go around the world.
There is the other school of thought, through UNESCO, where Canada has played the role of trying to stop what you have said is cultural imperialism. Which is it that you think is the strongest influence, because we are talking about children; we are not talking about the debate about trade commercialism versus culture and its protection. We are talking about children. You end up saying that you believe the "cultural universe is contracting not expanding.''
Children will argue that through their technologies they are developing their own culture and that they are becoming truly more universal citizens than we ever were, so that it is not imperialism from their point of view. It is a reflection of the child, of the children they are today, as opposed to the kind of children we were. We were influenced by our parents, by our neighbourhood, by our school. Young children today are influenced by all kinds of forces from around the world: some of them are very positive, that they are creating, and some of them negative because they can reach into chat rooms and get kinds of information they could not otherwise.
So that's a bit of contradiction that I saw here and you might want to expand on this trade versus culture. Where are you in that camp? And secondly, are children actually profiting from the new technologies and this new, expanded world that they live in?
Senator Hubley: There are a lot of questions there.
The Chairman: You put them on the table.
Senator Hubley: When we think of contracting versus expanding, I think what I would be referring to there is the diversities of culture that the world supported, as each nation had its own culture. We had many, many, many of them. Now, because we have such a universal system of knowing what is going on in other parts of the world, is that now replacing what might have been picked up at a different time? Is this electronic world that we are living in the best for culture? And if it is not — and that is what we would have to decide — what can we do, then, to enhance culture in other ways? How can we bring what is important to us as a people to our children? It is a competition; there is no question about it. Time may prove that this is a wonderful way to go or we may in fact have lost a lot of wonderful traditions and cultures that just will not be carried on because the children are so involved in Internet and chat rooms.
Having said that, and bringing it back to experiences, I tend to think that experience will become part of the culture also. I say only part of it. I do not want it to be the largest part but it will become part of the world as we know it from now on. This is what our children will see.
In one way, I see the culture contracting, in that it will be somewhat replaced — there is no question about that — rather than expanding. I think there will be more people in the world doing the same things rather than people doing a lot of different things, because of our ability these days to tap into any part of the world and watch what is happening there and the pervasiveness of one culture — the Shania Twains or the U2s. It creates its own momentum around the world, and it is what is prevalent that will affect societies. I used to wonder when I would watch the television of Third World countries, far-away countries — they all wore jeans and I thought, "Wow, isn't that something? It is just like our kids; they all look the same.'' They are all the same because that is the way they see other children dressing, not to mention that when we send packages and clothing abroad, they are getting what we would wear. A lot of their clothing comes that way. Blue jeans are universal now, as are baseball caps; that is all part of culture. That is how either the good or the not-so-good is spread around the world. Perhaps we do not think that is important, but it is culture. Now we have the suit and tie around the world. It wasn't at one time but there have been influences that bring dress — what is appropriate, what is acceptable and what people are doing in other areas — into play. Now a suit and a tie are for everybody.
The Chairman: Did you want to touch on the trade issues?
Senator Hubley: Well, I think you did. I will go back again to just touch on what was said previously, that a culture is a living thing. It will obviously be affected by migration, which I think would be wonderful, as Senator Oliver has pointed out. It is an experience we all should enjoy.
I find that very few children know the difference in cultures and the difference in — they accept each other on a very basic, loving level. Biases are learned and having children experience other cultures is really important to understanding who they are, to acceptance, to tolerance, to all those good words that come out of it. I think that migration would be part of it and the sharing of your culture, too. Here on Prince Edward Island, culture is a commodity. It is what people come to see. They want to see Anne of Green Gables in the summertime. We send Anne of Green Gables to Japan because that has been a country that has embraced her, beyond all expectations. That is a sharing of culture, but the other thing about culture, and we are talking about the performing arts now, goes back to the small communities and their opportunities for learning the cultures, learning the music of their people. It has to start at a ground level. The fact that we can export it and use it then as a commodity is really a success story, I think, for culture, in that it flows around the world. It is very interesting, the trade aspect. When we trade cultures, we trade one of the purest forms of them in that we try to define who we are as a people and put our best foot forward when we trade our cultures and when we send those around the world.
I may not have hit your question right on the head, Madam Chair, but I am trying very hard to do that.
The Chairman: Well, it is a very difficult field. As you were talking about the technologies, I remembered when the — I am old enough, and that is the wonderful thing about being in the Senate, that you can talk about the good old days when television hit. Elvis Presley was shocking on television and our newspapers were filled with, "This will destroy our culture and really do things to our youth that we do not want done.'' The Beatles, et cetera. Well, I think some of us turned out quite well, you know.
I am always worried when we judge what the influence will be of the new wave of wearing jeans, or chat rooms — is it because we do not relate to those children from the same perspective, because we have already lived through our own era, breaking out of that? That is really where the debate is.
The other is something about being Canadian. There are immigration waves. I came from a Ukrainian wave. To try to inject the Ukrainian culture as a legitimate Canadian fact was difficult, so we all joined dance groups. The day I knew that we were part of the Canadian fabric was when the best dancer of Scottish dance in my city was Betty Chan.
Senator Hubley: Yes, exactly.
The Chairman: She won for her excellence. She kept her Chinese culture and she was identified with that, but she embraced another culture as part of being Canadian — and I said, "Yes, we are on the right road.''
Senator Hubley: We are on the right track. Absolutely.
The Chairman: I think there are many layers and you have been trying to point them out to us. Senator Poy has another question.
Senator Poy: I would like to carry on the discussion, but we will bring the discussion back to Canada. You were talking about cultural imperialism and how we counterbalance in Canada with what is happening with American culture; that is, the effect of American culture on Canada. You talk about making our own films, publishing our own books, et cetera, and having our own broadcasting system, which we do have. What our chair was talking about was the Canadian culture. To me, Canadian culture is really multiculturalism because there is so much immigration into this country. I would like to hear from you whether you think the federal government is doing enough to promote the publishing of books written by people from different parts of the world — say from Asia and the Middle East — who are Canadians.
I am very involved with that. You have Asian Canadian writers, or films that are made by Asian Canadians about Canada and their experiences in this country. Is the federal government doing enough to promote that as part of Canadian culture? Because to me that is what it is: It is a mixture and it does not matter where we come from; it is Canada. We are talking about Canada and all our different experiences. What do you think and how would you make it better?
Senator Hubley: Is there ever enough money? I do not think so. You can always do more of that. Senator Poy, I believe there was a group of Asian Canadians who produced a film that made it to Cannes this year, if I am not mistaken. They wanted their own vehicle of expression and that is how they did it. Yes, we can do a lot more. Any government — provincially, municipally — we can all do more to promote ourselves and to embrace the arts. What you have demonstrated in what you said is that sometimes our recognition of who we are comes from being involved in our multicultural society.
As the chair just mentioned, I think Betty Chan was the highland dancing champion. It happens quite often, I think, that as Canadians we can embrace, we can move forward and be part of other cultures and learn about those cultures, while we still maintain who we are. That becomes part of us; it does not take part of us away. I think that is what the importance of culture is. You had another question, Senator Poy?
Senator Poy: I would like to hear your opinion of whether or not the federal government, such as Canada Council or CBC, is doing enough to promote multiculturalism in Canada, because to me this is Canadian culture, when you read books written by people from Japan or China who were born here and have written about their Canadian experiences. Is enough is being done? From my perspective, the people who are sitting on the boards of these government corporations are actually controlling how much money is given and what is being done in promoting "Canadian culture''; if you do not have enough people from different parts of the world on the boards, that will not happen, again and again.
Senator Hubley: So that if we do not have multicultural representation on boards, we will not enjoy what that body might present to us by the way of culture?
Senator Poy: That is right.
Senator Hubley: I would have to agree with you. Perhaps having said that, and it seems to be an area we have identified we can improve, maybe it could be a recommendation in your report that in order to sustain, develop and enhance our Canadian culture, we must ensure that at the table when decisions are made on funding for culture. It very definitely reflects in our boards; yes, very much so.
Senator Poy: Board appointments, very important.
Senator Hubley: Yes, I think there is more we can do.
Senator Poy: A lot more.
Senator Hubley: Yes.
Senator Oliver: I think Senator Poy is to be commended for raising an extremely important point.
Senator Poy: Thank you.
The Chairman: And I am sure Senator Pearson will raise an equally important question.
Senator Hubley: I might say that we have yet to have an Asian Anne of Green Gables, so until we do, perhaps we still have a way to go.
Senator Pearson: We are talking a bit on the same line because it is the right of all children in Canada, I think, if we are talking about the convention and Canada's implementation of it, to feel proud of their citizenship and their national identity and you have always mentioned that, and it is whether they are citizens by birth or by choice. You mentioned the need for a little bit more history and geography and so on; I agree with that. I am not sure that we are respecting adequately our right to learn more about ourselves in our manifold variety. On the other hand, I am extremely encouraged over the many long years, as Senator Andreychuk is talking about Elvis Presley. I go back further than Elvis Presley. When I say Frank Sinatra, I speak of the young Frank Sinatra. I think all that complaint about losing Canadian culture is very interesting for us to note in that many ways we have diverged more than I would have expected, in terms of overall Canadian values and culture, from our American neighbours. I think it is the richness of human beings, their capacity; you cannot define them by jeans. You know, that is a surface expression. There are other things going on and I appreciate very much your discussion about culture, not just as arts and so on, but as the whole environment that surrounds us. That is why it is so important that we respect the rights of children, because what we want to create is a culture of respect; it is another aspect of culture. Coming back to the convention and to the ideas that are imbedded in the convention, if you could make just a further comment on the culture of respect for children.
Senator Hubley: Children, like any human beings, know when they are respected. Well, I should not say that they know; I think presenting things to children — education, health care, a safe environment — gives them the assurance to go forward. I do not think that a child who is burdened with illness or poverty or famine has the mindset to dwell on what we might think as cultural issues. That becomes their culture. If we cannot alleviate that, if we cannot set that child free so that they can develop and become — we use that old term — "contributing members to a society'', if we do not present the child with a culture that is nurturing, then we are the ones who will be the worse off. There is such an extreme within the world. We look at our Canadian children and say how fortunate and lucky and wonderful this is to live in Canada. We look at conditions in other parts of the world and we say, on the negative side, that it must be terrible. I think it is wrong. I think it is not only terrible, but to be raising a society that is totally on that survival line is not a wise thing for a world community to tolerate.
Just getting back, you had mentioned our geography and history. Absolutely, we have to learn about ourselves, too. We always prided ourselves on knowing more about our country than did our other friends to the south, and we knew more about their country — I think it is a global society that we are living in. As such, we as a people have to position ourselves; we have to feel part of that global society as well as part of our Canadian society and our communities and so on and so forth.
The term "respect'' is a term that, having learned it, you'll share it. If you treat children with respect, then I think you will be able then to expect that they will treat the other parts of their world with respect as well. But if we do not respect the children and if we do not engage them — asking five—year-olds for their best ideas might be a challenge, but it is part of it. They are learning; they are given so much information so quickly these days from our media, from our homes, from our communities. There is so much information available to children these days that we have to be sure that we are giving them the best information. I think we have to be protective of that information as well. We have to have an eye to what exactly that information is.
The Chairman: Thank you, senator, for your presentation. You have ended on the note that the convention really was there for children. Self-esteem is a very important part of growing up, if you will be a contributor to society, and it was in that context that the convention developed the right of the child to participate fully in family, cultural and social life. If a child is afforded the right of some family, however that is defined; some culture and awareness, however that is defined; and some social life, which means the ability to grow; then I think their own self-esteem will grow and they will be part of a contributing community.
These terms are very general, they are very difficult, and so I thank you for trying to struggle with them. What we want to do is to encourage governments to start looking at these issues, not as issues of adults but from day one for children in our society; and we as adults need to look at children and their perspective. If we do the right things with children at the start, they will be able to tackle further some of the negatives that perhaps we see looming in the future.
On a personal note, I want to thank you for including children of Darfur and other areas. These children are not being afforded the basic right to life and all else starts from there, so I think we should remember the global context of the convention and you have done that also.
The committee adjourned.