Skip to content
 

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Human Rights

Issue 3 - Evidence, June 5, 2006


OTTAWA, Monday, June 5, 2006

The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights met this day at 4:03 p.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: Honourable senators, I see a quorum so we are able to commence. I will have the witnesses be seated, please.

This is the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights and we have been empowered to examine and report on Canada's international obligations in regards to the rights and freedoms of children.

We have some witnesses before us today, honourable senators, and then I would like to take a few minutes to present the budgets that we have already discussed but we have to go through the formality of approving them. That should not take long.

I am pleased that we have, from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Ms. Sandra Ginnish, Director General, Treaties, Research, International and Gender Equality Branch. We also have from the department, Ms. Havelin Anand, Acting Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch; and Mr. Bruno Steinke, Acting Director, Social Programs and Reform Directorate.

Welcome to the witnesses. I do not know who will be commencing, but if there is an opening statement, please be brief in order to leave time for questions from the senators, which usually leads to a rather fruitful debate.

Sandra Ginnish, Director General, Treaties, Research, International and Gender Equality Branch, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: Thank you for welcoming us. We are pleased to be here today and to represent the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. We have reviewed your interim report entitled ``Who's is In Charge Here?'' and we look forward to the opportunity for dialogue this afternoon.

[Translation]

The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is committed to making Canada a better place for all Aboriginal Canadians, and understands that such work must begin with a focus on children and families.

More needs to be done to ensure that Aboriginal youth have the educational and skills development programs that will prepare them for the economy of the future.

[English]

We look forward, together with Aboriginal peoples, to focusing on priority areas where we feel we can make improvements in the months ahead. In particular, our department is committed to making a real difference in education, to creating new opportunities for Aboriginal youth and doing more to support Aboriginal women, children and families.

The Government of Canada plays the role of the provinces and the territories in delivering social services to First Nations on reserve. In this regard, our department will work with First Nation communities to address challenges impeding the effectiveness of these social programs. All parties have a desire to make such programs less remedial, more proactive and, ultimately, more effective.

As you are aware, many Aboriginal children face significant challenges compared to the mainstream population. Our government recognizes this and has announced a $450 million investment to improve the quality of the water supply on reserves, to enhance housing on reserves, to increase educational outcomes and to better address the socio- economic conditions of Aboriginal women, children and families.

[Translation]

The Government of Canada recognizes that in order for children to grow up healthy, clean, safe water is a must, and adequate housing is a necessity.

In relation to drinking water, the Government of Canada is addressing all high-risk water systems in First Nation communities. Remedial plans for the 21 communities identified with high-risk drinking water systems as well as drinking water advisories, are being developed with the First Nation communities.

[English]

As announced on March 21, 2006, Canada is developing a plan of action in collaboration with the Assembly of First Nations to ensure that residents of First Nation communities have access to clean, safe drinking water. On May 31, our minister, together with Phil Fontaine, the national chief, the Honourable Tony Clement and the Honourable Rona Ambrose, announced the creation of a panel of experts who will examine and provide options on the establishment of a regulatory framework to ensure safe drinking water in First Nation communities.

A protocol establishing clear standards for design, construction, operation, maintenance and monitoring of drinking water systems in First Nation communities is being implemented. It provides a proper basis for our accountability and that of First Nations. Mandatory training of all water plant operators, and a regime to ensure the oversight by certified water plant operators, is also underway.

As with clean, safe water, most Canadians also take adequate housing for granted, but without adequate housing children are clearly disadvantaged.

[Translation]

In 2005, the Government of Canada announced an investment of $295 million to provide additional houses, renovation of existing units, and additional infrastructure in First Nations communities.

[English]

This funding is aimed at reducing the current housing shortage through the construction of 6,400 units, including related lot servicing. It will also improve housing conditions on reserve with the renovation of approximately 1,500 units of existing housing stock. This investment responds to the need for immediate action to narrow the housing gap between people on reserve and other Canadians and thus advance the situation of children.

This government is also proposing a new approach to child care. Aboriginal families, like other families, face challenges, which include trying to strike the right balance between work and family life. We all know that child care is expensive and quality care is difficult to find. As of July 1, 2006, Aboriginal parents, together with all other Canadian parents, will receive direct financial assistance of $100 per month for each child under the age of six for a total of $1,200 per year for each child. This income will provide flexibility by enabling parents to choose between putting children in daycare and staying at home with their children, or it will help them cover the cost of providers of daycare. It will also provide support to low-income families without increasing the disincentives to work that arise due to the income-tested nature of some of our benefits. The Government of Canada is aware of the challenge that families face with respect to the availability of child care spaces.

[Translation]

Starting in 2007-2008, this government will invest $250 million a year to help employers, both business and non- profit organizations, to create spaces in their communities. Consultations with provinces, territories, employers and community organizations are to begin immediately, aiming to launch the initiative in 2007.

Aboriginal communities will be consulted on the design of the Child Care Initiative as part of the overall consultations.

[English]

Canada is also working to address the unacceptable gap in educational achievement between Aboriginal and non- Aboriginal children. Improving educational outcomes for all First Nations, Inuit and Metis people is an important factor in improving their quality of life as well as their socio-economic status.

Despite recent progress, there is still far too much to do. Too many Aboriginal children perform poorly in school, too few graduate and too many are poorly quipped for post-secondary education or the labour market. We are committed to working with First Nations, provinces and other partners to ensure that children and youth all enjoy the same educational opportunities.

[Translation]

This means continuing to develop and implement a comprehensive policy framework on First Nation education which outlines roles and responsibilities, as recommended by the Auditor General.

[English]

Since 2002-03, investments have been made in new initiatives such as a parental and community engagement strategy, as well as measures to assist in the recruitment and retention of well-qualified teachers. In 2005, $120 million over five years was also added to the special education program.

We also share the concerns of all Canadians on the issue of family violence amongst Aboriginal communities and have been taking concrete measures to address this in a meaningful way. Since 1988 the Government of Canada has addressed this issue in three successive multi-departmental family violence initiatives. Under the current initiative, it has been given more attention. This has been demonstrated in the past year by the creation of an interdepartmental working group that has enhanced coordination and has begun discussions with officials at all levels of government to identify common priorities for action.

Our family violence prevention program provides annual funding of $17 million in support of 35 shelters and approximately 350 family violence prevention projects each year. The program currently serves 265 First Nations communities, and in the past fiscal year served 1,966 women and over 2,000 children who accessed shelter services.

The Chairman: We have your brief, so we can refer to it in the questioning.

Ms. Ginnish: I would like to touch on the issue of adoption.

While adoption services are a matter of provincial or territorial jurisdiction, Canada provides funding support to 103 First Nations child and family service agencies across the country. They are mandated in accordance with provincial standards and legislation and provide culturally sensitive services to children and their families.

We recognize First Nations' sensitivities regarding past adoption practices, whereby child welfare organizations placed many children for adoption with non-Aboriginal families, away from their homes and communities, and in many instances, out of the country.

[Translation]

The Government of Canada is deeply concerned about child and family services, including the welfare of children in care, and is working with First Nations to obtain better outcomes for First Nation children and their families.

[English]

A comprehensive strategy is being developed with the Assembly of First Nations and First Nations child and family services agency directors to help ensure that more First Nations children and parents get the help they need to prevent the types of crises that lead to intervention and family breakdown.

We are also deeply concerned with the rate of suicide amongst Aboriginal people. We recognize that too many First Nations communities continue to suffer social problems to which there is no simple solution.

[Translation]

That is why the Government of Canada has worked with National Aboriginal Organizations over the past year to develop and finalize a framework for the National Aboriginal Youth Suicide Prevention Strategy.

[English]

The purpose of this framework is to reduce the risk of suicide among Aboriginal youth by undertaking activities in prevention, early intervention and crisis response. This strategy will receive $65 million over five years, and Health Canada plans to implement the framework this fall.

In conclusion, the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, in partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Métis across the country, continues to be committed to improving the quality of life for Aboriginal children.

As you know, the Aboriginal population of Canada is young and growing, and these demographics create pressure for additional services, such as schools, housing, public infrastructure and increases in social services to support the high rate of new family formations.

Given such pressures, as well as the fact that socio-economic indicators for Aboriginal Canadians remain far behind those of non-Aboriginal Canadians, it is clear we have a lot of work to do in the coming years to ensure that Aboriginal children in Canada fully enjoy the rights articulated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Senator Carstairs: I found it interesting that you made note of the work done by the House of Commons committee on matrimonial property rights, but made no reference to the work done by the Senate, which predates that in the House of Commons. We have been after successive ministers to prepare the legislation and make the required changes.

Do you have any indication as to when that new legislation will appear?

Ms. Ginnish: When our minister appeared before the Aboriginal Affairs Committee last week, he spoke to the issue of matrimonial real property. He has renewed his commitment to addressing that issue and identified it as one of his priorities.

In our discussions with both the Native Women's Association of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations, one of the concerns raised was the need to complete consultations at the community level. This issue has never been discussed at that level.

We continue to work with both organizations to move forward on this file. The minister will be discussing this issue with his colleague soon, and we should be in a position to speak about it more pointedly afterwards.

Senator Carstairs: This committee was hoping that that kind of consultation had been going on for the last year. It apparently has not, and that is a great disappointment.

You did not substantially address the issue of children in care. We know that Aboriginal children are 10 times more likely to be in care than non-Aboriginal children, and we also recognize that the budget for that is 22 per cent less than that spent by provinces. Therefore, Aboriginal children not only go into care more often, but they have much less chance of successfully getting out of that care.

Could you give us any indication of what changes will be made in that venue?

Havelin Anand, Acting Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: Over the last couple of years we have undertaken research in collaboration with our First Nations partners. When I talk about First Nations partners, I am talking about national Aboriginal organizations, their affiliates, and First Nations practitioners at the field level, such as social workers.

INAC has spent about half a million dollars through Cindy Blackstock — the caring society — and her team of researchers. We are pleased the research has been completed. We are in the process of analyzing those findings along with our partners. As a start, Budget 2005 announced $125 million over a five-year horizon, some of which will go into prevention services.

Prevention supports are required and we want to move forward with that. We are also undertaking a complete review of our social development policy suite, including the child and family services program. We are up for authority renewal on March 31, 2007. We hope to have ready a cabinet submission sometime in the fall to review the policy suite.

We are cognizant of the fact that additional prevention support is needed so children can stay with their families in the communities. We know early intervention and risk-mitigation measures are required, so we are working on that with the partners and with the national advisory committee comprised of all our First Nations partners.

This review is ongoing as we speak. The research was completed not too long ago, and we want to go forward with their recommendations.

Senator Carstairs: Could you explain why there is money for a child to be taken out of the home but there is no money to keep a child in the home?

I can give you a specific example where it was determined by the Aboriginal child and family service agency that the parents should be taken out of the home and the children left there. That was impossible because there were absolutely no dollars available to do that.

Ms. Anand: As I said, we are looking at the recommendations. We are happy the research has been completed. We recognize the need for relational supports, particularly on the prevention side.

Some of the directives were promulgated in the 1970s and 1980s. They were probably appropriate at that time, but they have outlived their usefulness.

As I said, we are going through a complete policy review. We will go forward with the recommendations on early intervention and prevention so that the children remain at home.

We are also looking at a broader suite of social development programming in terms of the reasons children are coming into care. Is there a need for early childhood development in the community? Is support needed in that area? Is there a need for additional economic support so that children are not coming into care as a result of poverty?

We are working with departments such as Health Canada and Human Resources and Social Development Canada to discover whether supports are needed for children with complex medical needs or special needs. Is that why children are coming into care?

We are taking a systemic or holistic approach with our partners. We are also working closely with our partners at the provincial and territorial level. For example, I work with the inter-jurisdictional steering committee made up of provincial directors of child welfare at the ADM level.

Some of the provinces have implemented both on a pilot and an ongoing basis, programming that has been quite successful. We are learning from provinces as well.

There is much collaboration going on. When we go forward for the renewal of our policy authorities, we want to recommend some of these best practices and promising practices, a change in the way we approach it, as Ms. Ginnish said, to make it less remedial and more proactive and effective.

Senator Mercer: I am not a regular member of this committee so I am the new guy on the block here. One of my major concerns has been the rate of suicide among Aboriginal youth. You mentioned in your presentation that the government has worked with national Aboriginal organizations over the past year to develop and finalize a framework for a national Aboriginal youth suicide prevention policy. You go on to tell us that $65 million will be allocated toward that over five years. You use this term twice: ``undertaking activities in prevention.''

What are those ``activities in prevention?'' Sixty-five million dollars is a great deal of money. My ultimate question is how do you measure your success with this? If you are to spend $65 million, how will we measure whether this program has been successful?

Ms. Anand: We are working closely with Health Canada. As Ms. Ginnish said, Health Canada has the lead on the programming in this area. We have an interdepartmental committee on which INAC is a participant, with the RCMP, Solicitor General and Justice Canada, to ensure that an Aboriginal lens is put on any youth suicide prevention programming, and that money is allocated.

In the context of the review of our suite of social programs, and indeed our social development policy framework, we want to engage youth. We are in conversation with Aboriginal organizations about a youth engagement strategy to find out what kinds of measures youth want to see to prevent suicide.

When I talk to people at the community level, particularly the social workers, they often tell me that one of the problems with youth is the lack of engagement — in sports, in community activities, in extracurricular activities at school. We want to use youth themselves to find ways and means to prevent depression, disenchantment and disengagement. This is part of our strategy to prevent youth suicide. That is what we meant by early intervention and risk mitigation.

Senator Mercer: In reality, we do not actually have a program; we have money allocated to help design a program after consulting with Aboriginal youth. At the same time, Aboriginal youth are killing themselves at an alarming rate.

Ms. Anand: Health Canada has the lead on the programming generally. We bring the perspective of Aboriginal youth and their concerns to the table at all kinds of fora.

We are also engaged with Health Canada in looking at different ways to alleviate youth suicides in communities where this has reached epidemic levels. We are working with Health Canada in funding and supporting research into new solutions. A leadership laboratory is currently being discussed. The current solutions to the problems are not necessarily working. Are there new ways to find solutions? In addition, we also want to engage youth themselves in addressing some of the issues that they are facing.

Senator Mercer: My concern is that we are, again, talking about research. We are, again, talking about consultation, when in reality, we need programs on the ground that help young people find an alternative, find some hope in their communities and in their lives so that they are not turning to suicide.

Ms. Anand: I agree with you. We are working with all our partners.

Senator Pépin: I am part of a group of senators who studied mental health. We met with people from different Aboriginal communities. It is extremely important that treatment be organized by people of their own culture. Today, we see that the Aboriginal community is well represented. However, within the organization, the decision-making group at Health Canada that decides such items as the amount of money, what will be done and what comes first, is there a high percentage of people from the Aboriginal community?

Ms. Anand: You are talking about at the interdepartmental fora or at Health Canada itself, the complement of staff there who are Aboriginal?

Senator Pépin: I am talking about the people at the decision-making level. Are there many people from the Aboriginal community who are part of the group that makes the decisions?

Bruno Steinke, Acting Director, Social Programs and Reform Directorate, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: I will take that question. In all government policy developments, there are discussions with departments. We cannot speak on behalf of Health Canada here, but as an example, where INAC is working in the social program area with First Nations, we are developing the policy with them. Our discussions are with them. We developed a policy framework. What is their vision? What is the vision of the government? We develop our goals and objectives with the First Nations communities.

Senator Pépin: Are they part of the decision-making process?

Mr. Steinke: They are part of the process of developing the policy, and they take that to their leadership for approval and we have to do the same. It is a joint policy development in agreeing how to move forward with these programs. There is joint work.

Senator Pépin: Also, we are talking about the prevention of suicide. You are talking about money. You said that an amount of money was put forward for prevention. What is the percentage allocated to suicide prevention, for example? My friends say that we know that it is one of the big issues for youth. You explained to us what you intend to do and how you need to involve them. Do you have a large enough budget for that?

Ms. Anand: I can address it from the perspective of the family violence prevention program.

Senator Pépin: This is my next step.

Ms. Anand: We have a family violence prevention program with approximately $17 million, out of which $7 million is allocated for prevention projects. We hope that that money will be augmented through the announcements of Budget 2006.

In terms of slicing and dicing the $65-million pot into prevention and ongoing programs, I think we will have to get back to you on that.

Senator Pépin: I am asking for the percentage. I am not asking for the amount of money.

Ms. Anand: We can get back to you with the percentages of how Health Canada dissects that $65-million pot.

Senator Pépin: It is most important. You have been saying that prevention services are important for every aspect, not only for suicide.

Ms. Anand: We can get back to you on Health Canada's numbers and the amount they actually allocate to prevention projects.

Senator Pépin: Returning to family violence and shelters, people like to be surrounded by others from their community. Do you have enough Aboriginals in shelters looking after those people, including the children who go there with their mothers? Are the social workers from their communities? We had a two-hour presentation on the importance of that. Is there a high enough percentage of people from the Aboriginal community looking after mothers and children when they go to shelters?

Ms. Anand: Almost all of our shelter directors are from Aboriginal communities. Most of the counsellors working at the family violence prevention shelters are Aboriginal people, as are most of those who do programming on the prevention side.

Senator Pépin: We learned how important it is to have people from your own culture help you.

Ms. Anand: It is important that they be of the same culture, speak the same language and understand the customs and traditions. We meet with shelter directors two or three times a year, and they tell us that Aboriginal people are very reluctant to go to non-Aboriginal, off-reserve shelters, precisely for the reasons you are citing. They do not feel comfortable about expressing themselves. They are emotional and have lost their self-esteem, and they do not necessarily want to go off reserve. As well, they do not necessarily want to confide in shelter directors or shelter workers who do not understand their culture, language and background, and the circumstances they face.

Senator Pépin: Returning to child care, you said that parents will get $100 per month per child. How much do child care services cost in those regions? We know that they have no money and that they experience much violence. Does care cost much more than what we are providing them with? We want them to send their children because it could help so much.

Also, will those child care centres be directed by people from their communities?

Mr. Steinke: Generally, INAC funds daycare centres in Alberta and Ontario. In addition, there is the First Nations and Inuit Child Care initiative, which is funded by HRSDC. Both of these programs help parents with the cost of daycare centres in First Nation and Inuit communities. They help offset the costs you are talking about.

In addition, there will be that direct funding to parents. Both of these programs require parents to pay fees, so that will help them out.

The reach needs to grow in these communities. There is more need for child care there. The costs are higher in the North, as we all know. We are looking at those options and working with HRSDC, Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada in developing an approach to early childhood development that meets the needs of the communities.

Senator Pépin: If the children were able to go to child care, perhaps there would be fewer suicides when they become teenagers. Perhaps they will be much more motivated because they know someone will be helping them. That would also help the mothers.

Mr. Steinke: We know from the research that earlier intervention will make a big difference, especially in child development. From the health and the educational perspectives, the more programs we have that reach out to children to ensure that they get access to quality support and appropriate programming, the better their lives will be. We need to do more work in this area and look at expanding it.

Senator Pépin: We were also told that the community will be consulted regarding the organization of child care.

Mr. Steinke: Yes. This is the spaces initiative. The government will be looking at consulting with Aboriginal community groups on spaces. We are still working with our colleagues at HRSDC on how and where that consultation will take place, but that is what is anticipated. Prior to the launch of the money in 2007, there will be consultation with the communities.

Senator Lovelace Nicholas: It is not only youth who are committing suicide; it is men in their 30s and 40s. They commit suicide because they have low self-esteem. First, they do not have jobs. The most important thing is for these people to have jobs. Without jobs they cannot support their families. To end the depression they are suffering as a result of that, they simply opt out and commit suicide. That is happening in my community.

The government said that experts would provide a framework to ensure safe drinking water in First Nation communities. Who will be on these panels?

Ms. Ginnish: You are referring to the panel of experts that will be looking at the issue of water. We do not have an expert on the water strategy here, but we can get back to you with information on what the process will be for consultations to develop the regulatory framework. I am not sure whether there will be community-level consultation or whether it will be with organizations and experts in the field.

Mr. Steinke: We can provide you with specific information on that.

Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Thank you.

You mentioned that housing conditions will be improved. You have said that approximately 1,500 units will be provided. Is that 1,500 units in each community or a total of 1,500 units divided among all the First Nations communities?

Ms. Ginnish: I understand that it is 1,500 nationwide. Of course it will not meet the need that exists. We all recognize that there is a gap in housing requirements. This is just the beginning of addressing that issue.

Senator Lovelace Nicholas: I would like to see some of this housing set aside for elders. Elders live with their families and they feel that they are out of place; they feel that do not have the right to take a shower whenever they want to. I believe that some of this housing should be allocated to elders.

Senator Nancy Ruth: How does your department meet its gender-based analysis obligations? Has INAC done any gender-based analysis of its child-oriented initiatives? If so, what results are available that you can share with us?

Returning to suicide, what is the gender breakout of those committing suicide?

Ms. Ginnish: We have a gender-based analysis policy that has been promulgated throughout the department. It was implemented in 1999. The policy has been provided to every employee.

We have what is called a gender-based analysis network within the department. Each branch and regional office has a gender-based analysis representative who is responsible for promoting the policy amongst colleagues. We have a computer-based training program that is available to all employees. As we speak, we are holding an annual workshop with all the gender-based analysis representatives to talk about best practices in keeping colleagues informed of the policy and making them aware of its importance and use.

We have an associate deputy minister and a deputy minister who are committed to the use of gender-based analysis in all our program, policy and legislative development. We are concentrating our efforts on providing tools to individual employees to undertake gender-based analysis as part of their daily work.

I will let Ms. Anand speak to the issue of child care.

Ms. Anand: In all the social policy development areas — that is, income assistance, child and family services, early childhood development, family violence prevention, the National Child Benefit — with the help of Ms. Ginnish's shop, we did a gender-based analysis and are reviewing our policy, programs, terms and conditions, data collection instruments, evaluation strategies and results statements, if any. That is the first tranche.

The second tranche is actually drilling down into the social program areas. We know how many children are in care. We know how many income assistance recipients there are. Given that this government has expressed a keen interest in the theme of women, children and families, we are disaggregating the data right now to find out the gender breakdown and what kind of supports are needed for that part of the universe who are women. That is the second step.

We completed the first step, we are drilling down to the second level, and we are preparing for our authorities renewal in the fall. We hope, with the disaggregation of data, we will be in a position this fall to ask for the additional supports required for women.

Senator Nancy Ruth: You are telling me it has taken seven years to decide to break out the information, for example, on children in care, to find out how many are boys and how many are girls? Is that what you just said?

Ms. Anand: No. One of our problems, senator, is that we do not have the information technology infrastructure, particularly in First Nations communities, to collect this data. Some of the communities utilize paper and pencil technologies.

Senator Nancy Ruth: That is pretty good.

Ms. Anand: Some communities have high-level, sophisticated technology systems. That is part of our problem. It is not that we do not want to collect the data. Most of our information comes from First Nations and some of the communities do not have the technology to collect the data.

They might have anecdotal information or stories, but the capacity is not there to collect this information systematically over time and do a historical trend analysis; it is not that we do not want to do it.

Senator Nancy Ruth: Can you give me some examples, though? In the seven years you have been working on doing gender-based analysis, what policies have changed, and based on what data, be it anecdotal or statistical? What difference does it make, if any?

Ms. Ginnish: We have done a fair amount in terms of applying the policy. In the past, we were concentrating on ensuring that gender-based analysis was done on every memorandum to cabinet that went forward from our department.

We have increasingly, in terms of our research, ensured that when data is available, it is disaggregated. We have developed guidelines, for example, for negotiators of self-government and land claims agreements to ensure that they consider gender issues.

We undertook a project with our education branch to look at gender-based issues as they were reviewing their program. Gender-based analysis is done on a daily basis.

Senator Nancy Ruth: Give me some examples, though. What difference does it make, if any?

Ms. Ginnish: For example, when a gender-based analysis was done of the Food Mail Program, it was realized that the detrimental effects of PCBs were more relevant for women and children than men because women were breast feeding their children, and there was a realization that the pollutants were being transmitted from mother to child.

That had an impact on the program. It depends on the situation and on the policy that you are looking at. It depends on the project that you are working on.

Senator Nancy Ruth: What would your best guess be as to whether more boys or girls commit suicide in the Aboriginal community?

Ms. Ginnish: That is not something I would guess at, but it is certainly information we could obtain from Health Canada.

The Chairman: I hope these questions do not sound unkind, but having been involved in this field since the '70s, I have frequently heard phrases such as: ``We need more research. We need to consult. We need to get the experts in place to analyze it.''

My concern is that we continue to examine this in depth, but it does not translate into changes in the field. We have known about all of these issues for years. We have known about suicide; we have known about lack of housing; we know that the Aboriginal children are in jail in greater numbers; we know that the children are being apprehended; we know there is a level of poverty. Yet we continue to be researching, attempting to find the facts, developing the program, consulting with the Aboriginal community.

I think there have been some good people involved — ministers, bureaucrats, Aboriginal leaders — but it has made little difference on the ground. Why are we still researching, consulting and studying? We have a new minister. Why could we not just produce a time frame in which we need to do A, B, C; for example, consult over six months as to what we need to put in place?

Surely we have the answers on child care. We do not need to be studying issues that have been studied. Some are pretty intuitive, and you do not need to study them. We do not seem to have the programs and the dollars on the ground. It seems to be still churning in what I call ``administration.'' Do you have a response to that?

Ms. Ginnish: I can certainly start. As an Aboriginal woman who comes from the community, and as an employee who has worked in the department for a long time, I can certainly understand the frustration that some people might feel when they see that Aboriginal people do not enjoy the same progress as other Canadians.

One of the messages that I would like to ensure is understood is that has been an improvement in the very research that you say we constantly do. We have looked at the Human Development Index for First Nations people from 1986 to 2001, using census data, and we found there has been a reduction in the gap in the quality of life between Aboriginal Canadians and other Canadians.

In terms of consultation, in my opinion, it is fair to say that historically, we have found that unless we design programs and policies in close collaboration with First Nations people, they will not work in the community. That is an understanding that our department has accepted within the last 10 years. I believe prior to that, there was not that much collaboration. Policies were developed at headquarters and imposed.

It takes longer, in some cases, to address these issues because we want to develop policies, programs and legislation with First Nations, Metis and Inuit partners so that they will actually work once implemented.

Ms. Anand: I appreciate what you are saying, and I feel the frustration of my First Nations colleagues myself. We are doing it incrementally. Budget 2005 did announce $125 million for child and family services. Out of the $450 million, we hope to get some money for family violence prevention, for example, and, hopefully, for child and family services. We have completed the research. We have the recommendations. We are ready to rock and roll, if you will, as soon as that money comes down. What portion of that $450 million will go toward family violence prevention, as an example, is still under deliberation. We are in a state of preparedness or readiness to make things happen as soon as the money flows.

The Chairman: This committee did some in-depth work on women on reserve. If more consultations are necessary, there must be a time frame, because when you have open-ended consultations, no one comes to a conclusion. You have to drive to a conclusion. We heard a strong message from communities that they want the answers. I think the leadership have to get together and make some decisions. I am a little surprised, as are my colleagues, that you would come to this committee and not address the very real concerns in our report on women on reserves, in that it affects children dramatically, or how you are dealing with that report and our recommendations.

Rather than take the time of the committee now, I strongly recommend that you go back and apprise your new minister that we take those reports most seriously because we take those witnesses seriously. They were witnesses from these communities who said, ``You must solve it.'' We hope that by the time the minister comes before us there will be a timetable in place. The message I want you to get back to him is this: There must be some resolution to this issue.

I will stop there and go to the second round of questioning. Please make crisp interjections. We must be finished by 5:30.

Senator Carstairs: What is the attitude of INAC to Aboriginal child and family service agencies? Just to highlight the issue, I come from Manitoba, where we have more Aboriginal-run child and family services agencies than anywhere else in the country.

Ms. Anand: What is the attitude of INAC toward First Nations child and family services? We take them very seriously. That is why we have 102 —

Senator Carstairs: I am talking about the agencies themselves. Are you in favour of Aboriginal agencies or not?

Ms. Anand: We are very much in favour of First Nations child and family services agencies because they were created, in the first place, to provide culturally appropriate services to ensure that the children are in their homes, with their families, in the communities, so that to talk about what Senator Pépin said, we do have Aboriginal workers working with them. Aboriginal child and family services agency directors collaborate and work with their provincial and federal counterparts. We have a national advisory committee comprised of a number of agency directors who work closely with us. That is going extremely well. They were created in the first place and supported by INAC precisely for the reason you mentioned.

In addition, we are working with the provincial agency directors from Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan and British Columbia, where large numbers of Aboriginal children are in care. We have taken collective ownership of the need both to reduce the children coming into care and put a strong emphasis on the prevention side.

Senator Carstairs: My second question has to do with Head Start programs. There are 9,100 children on reserve and 4,500 children off reserve, so why is less money spent on the children off reserve as far as Head Start programs are concerned?

Mr. Steinke: The Aboriginal Head Start On Reserve program is funded by Health Canada, and the urban and northern Head Start program is funded through the Public Health Agency of Canada. I cannot speak directly about their allocations and how they are funding these programs, but I do know that in the off-reserve setting, some provinces also cost share these programs. I am not sure if your numbers capture all the funders of the program.

Senator Carstairs: It was your number.

Mr. Steinke: I do not have a number here.

Senator Carstairs: I got it from your opening remarks.

Mr. Steinke: We can follow up and give you exact numbers on how many community members are accessing those programs and services, but generally, I do know that the territories are cost sharing it with the federal government in the North. On reserve, generally it is just federal-specific money.

The Chairman: Does the money go to the leaders of the band, who then apportion it out, or does it go directly to the children through these agencies? In other words, is it reserve controlled, and therefore any children who may get the money in urban areas would still have to go through their treaty entitlement? Is it going directly now to children?

Mr. Steinke: All these programs have their accountability regimes in place, and the resources are going to communities. Depending on where we are talking about across the country, some communities will deliver it through an organization with a board that is independent of the political leadership and directs all the resources to specific programs or services. In others a couple of members of the community run it as a separate agency. It is run through their health commission or their child and family services, or it is attached to their school. It depends on the program specifically, but generally, there are appropriate accountability systems in place to ensure that the resources are targeted toward the children.

Senator Carstairs: My final question has to do with accountability. We know of one community of 180 persons that had to file 160 reports with the federal government. I know, for example, that Head Start is funded by a variety of agencies. Some comes from Heritage, some from Health, and some from INAC. How many reports are these people required to prepare?

Mr. Steinke: All I can say is I know that under early childhood development, we have been working with our colleagues from HRDC, the Public Health Agency and Health Canada to look at reducing the reporting requirements and the administrative burden for First Nations and Inuit communities, as well as in the urban context for other Aboriginal communities. We are getting ready to present something for the minister's consideration later this year on reduction of reporting requirements for communities. I do know that even within the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, we try to reduce the reporting burden by markers of 25 per cent within a defined time period. We are taking this seriously and looking at ways we can reduce reporting and make it more results focused, so it is telling us how children's lives are improving, not just about how the money is spent, but how it is actually changing the lives of the children and families in the communities.

Senator Carstairs: Excellent.

Senator Pépin: My question is on suicide prevention. You said earlier that youth from Aboriginal communities will be consulted in an attempt to create suicide prevention methods and programs. I was wondering if there is or will be a national program or conference for youth from all over the country to share their ideas and develop these suicide prevention programs.

Ms. Anand: I am glad you asked that question, because I was talking with my colleagues at the Assembly of First Nations, and we have not quite called it a ``summit'' or ``conference.'' However, we wanted youth to come together to talk about it, and give us their insights as to what is going well, what is not going well and how we can improve current programming so that it can be more targeted particularly to the prevention side. I am glad you raised that.

Senator Pépin: Will you bring them together to discuss Aboriginal youth difficulties?

Ms. Anand: The Assembly of First Nations has a youth council and counterparts in the provinces also have youth counsellors and advisers. We hope to do that. It is part of our work plan, and although we have not called it a conference or a summit, we want youth to come together and talk to us.

Senator Pépin: That will be in the coming year, I hope?

Ms. Anand: It would be for this fiscal year. We have that as part of our work plan.

Senator Dallaire: My question is about Aboriginal children — street kids — with respect to sexual exploitation and drugs.

Are Aboriginal girls or boys involved in the drug trade, or are they principally drug users? Are the girls being sexually exploited predominantly to feed a drug problem, or is it simply a means to gather funds for other essential needs?

Ms. Anand: We work with Health Canada on that particular question through the ADA program, that is, the alcohol and drug abuse program, and with the RCMP and SolGen to provide the Aboriginal perspective on these issues.

I will have to get back to you regarding the details and the numbers, unless my colleagues have them.

Senator Dallaire: I am looking for more of a trend. Is there a trend? There is a dominant element of street kids, early sexual abuse and the sex trade. Is the drug dimension one of usage, or are they involved or being used in the actual trading of drugs?

Ms. Anand: In the cases I have come across, most of the time it was related to usage. In terms of a trend, I will have to get back to you. With respect to most of the suicide cases, in the anecdotal information that I have come across it is related to usage.

Mr. Steinke: I have worked on this file in past years, and it is a growing concern across the country for Aboriginal communities because of the number of individuals being sexually exploited and how it is linked to the drug issue. The growing amount of drug misuse that is occurring in communities is another big concern.

I would ask the RCMP or the public safety and emergency preparedness department for a discussion on exact numbers and how they are linked. From my experience, they are easily intertwined. You do see individuals recruited in the community to move to the urban environments to work in the sex trade. Often, it starts in the community, it is somewhat organized, and it is becoming a bigger issue. There is more recruitment going on, bringing many children into it, which is a sad state of affairs for all of us. That is why, with respect to our coordination — not just within our own department, because we are dealing with First Nations on reserve and the child welfare stream — we have to work with the provinces, because one day the children are on the reserve, and then tomorrow they are in an urban environment. We need the provinces and the First Nations agencies to talk on a daily basis so that they know this is going on and can try to stop it from expanding.

Senator Dallaire: I was in Brazil with the children involved in the drug war, and they are young children, a lot of them girls. The sexual exploitation and the drug wars are all intimately interrelated for children from nine years old and upwards. You never hear of that dimension in Canada, namely, the children, the drug war, the drug trade and the sexual exploitation all being linked, versus simply usage. We always speak of usage, yet the children are often an instrument in getting the drugs moved in the community. If the Aboriginal children are a dominant force among the street kids, then we have a targeted group in attempting to alleviate the situation.

What instruments are operational between the criminal, cultural and health aspects? What operational headquarters did you have working to fight this kind of drug war, or this dimension in the streets?

Mr. Steinke: I know that the Department of Public Safety and the RCMP are engaging in various prevention strategies, as are municipal police forces across the country. INAC does not have a direct link there, but we would support agencies in those discussions and how they move forward on that issue. It does become a criminal matter, and there are experts across the country within the RCMP, municipal police forces and provincial police forces looking at this issue and developing mechanisms to stop it.

Senator Dallaire: If most of the kids are Aboriginal, then the leadership role in pushing that envelope should come from your department.

The Chairman: At this time, we will adjourn. I would like to thank our witnesses. You have a heavy load because you have to speak for all the others who work in this field. If we have conveyed to you our concern and our anticipation that the pace of progress will be faster, we have done our job, and you have done your job in bringing forward your point of view.

There is a concern that although we are talking about the Convention on the Rights of the Child, it does not seem to have embedded itself in the psyche of the bureaucracy or, perhaps, even Parliament, to the extent that it should.

The second point is that when you read that document, it talks about a child, and it has many facets. Your job and our recommendations will have to deal with the fact that we will be talking about one Aboriginal child, and yet we hear, ``It is not my responsibility. It is the police.'' We will have to think collectively about how we can work with the child for the betterment of that child, rather than maintaining our separate areas and responsibilities, if we are to succeed. I will end on that comment.

The committee adjourned.


Back to top