Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 7 - Evidence - Meeting of June 2, 2010
OTTAWA, Wednesday, June 2, 2010
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 6:45 p.m. to examine the federal government's constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Metis peoples, and other matters generally relating to the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada (topic: issues concerning First Nations Education).
Senator Gerry St. Germain (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: I would like to welcome all honourable senators, members of the public and all viewers across the country who are watching these proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples on CPAC or on the web.
I am Gerry St. Germain from British Columbia. I have the honour and privilege of chairing this committee.
The committee is undertaking a study to examine possible strategies for reform concerning First Nations primary and secondary education, with a view to improving outcomes. Among other things, the study will focus on the following: tripartite education agreements, governance and delivery structures, and possible legislative frameworks.
Tonight we are fortunate to have with us an eminent scholar in this field, Professor John Richards of Simon Fraser University in British Columbia. A former MLA for the NDP in Saskatchewan, 1971 to 1975, Professor Richards is trained as an economist. He has written on such diverse topics as the energy sector, official languages, federalism, and international development. In recent years, Mr. Richards has also written several articles devoted to Aboriginal education, primarily with the C.D. Howe Institute.
In 2009, John Richards co-authored, with Megan Scott, the report Aboriginal Education: Strengthening the Foundations. The report identifies improved educational outcomes as the ". . . most important means of alleviating the poverty and marginalization of Aboriginals in Canadian society. . ."
Professor Richards regards the severity of current high school dropout rates, combined with rapid growth of the Aboriginal populations, to be a matter of crucial significance both for Aboriginal people and for the prosperity of the country as a whole.
[Translation]
But before hearing our witness, let me introduce to you the members of the committee who are here tonight.
[English]
I have on my left Senator Peterson from Saskatchewan. Next to Senator Peterson is Senator Sibbeston from the Northwest Territories. Next to Senator Sibbeston is Senator Dyck, the Deputy Chair of this committee, from Saskatchewan. Next to Senator Dyck is Senator Lovelace Nicholas from New Brunswick.
On my right we have Senator Stewart Olsen from New Brunswick and Senator Patrick Brazeau from the Province of Quebec. Next to Senator Brazeau is Senator Poirier from New Brunswick.
Members of the committee, please help me now to welcome Professor John Richards. Sir, your good reputation precedes you. You have the floor.
[Translation]
John Richards, Professor, Public Policy Program, Simon Fraser University, C.D. Howe Institute: Mr. Chair, I am of English origin; my wife is of French origin and I am part of the tiny minority of those in Vancouver who speak French at home.
[English]
I will revert to English, though I do so with some reluctance.
I want to congratulate all of you for deciding to tackle this subject. There is not a more crucial aspect of Aboriginal policy. There has been a horrendous history of relations between indigenous people and settlers. However, if we spend all our time trying to discuss the grievances and to make reconciliation, we spend no time on the future. The essence of the future is the next generation and their ability to escape poverty and the social dysfunctions that unfortunately characterize too many Canadian Aboriginal people.
To the extent that those of us who are interested in government and public policy can help, I submit that education is the key. You, as part of the governing structure of Canada, have a crucial role to play.
That is my very initial introduction. I realize I do not have 50 minutes as a professor usually has to impart his or her wisdom, so I will speed things up. You have the deck in front of you.
[Translation]
I do not know if the version is both in French and in English.
[Translation]
My version is English only. Slides 3 to 9 contain a very quick survey of the census and education data. Slides 10 and 11 are recommendations from a long report that a graduate student and I wrote last year. Following, is a discussion of two of the crucial recommendations.
I cannot emphasize enough the importance of employment as a route out of poverty. I leave it to you to look at it in more detail. The slides show the average income for North American Indians or First Nations or Metis from the 2001 and 2006 censuses. Senators will note that the average incomes are a fraction of the comparable Canadian average.
On slide 4, I want to emphasize just one set of the data here. The vertical axis is the percent employed; horizontal axis is highest education level. In terms of those without high school — incomplete, K to 12 — whether they be North American Indian or First Nation, Metis or non-Aboriginal, we are talking approximately 40 per cent have employment. The moment that we hit high school, that number jumps by 25 points whether the person is Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal. It is not making you wealthy to have high school, but in many ways it is the entrance to the labour market. Without high school, you are very unlikely to have a stable employment status.
My original province is Saskatchewan. Unfortunately, I wound up in British Columbia, though I should not grumble too much about it; we have shorter winters. In Saskatchewan, my home province, 30 per cent of the school age cohorts are now Aboriginal. It is very similar in Manitoba. In Western Canada, overall, over one in eight is Aboriginal.
I do not want to cast this discussion in terms of what is good for the non-Aboriginal, essentially, but the non- Aboriginal population should be deeply concerned about the success of their Aboriginal cohorts.
Education is in crisis in the Aboriginal community. Slide 6 shows you the fraction of young Aboriginals who do not have high school. It is approximately 60 per cent among those living on a reserve. It is approximately 38 per cent among those off reserve who identify as North American Indian or First Nations. It is approximately 25 per cent among Metis and, for comparison; it is approximately 12 per cent among the non-Aboriginal population.
There has been some progress between those who are over 45 years of age and, those who are under 45 years. However, there has been progress and then there has been some stalling. The figures on pages 7 and 8 illustrate that.
While there has been an improvement, and I leave it to you to go through these three age groups — age 45 and over, 35 to 44 years, and 25 to 34 years— the highest education level among those who identify as First Nation and who are over 45 and on reserve, we are talking 58 per cent without high school. That drops for the younger cohorts but there is no improvement for the 25 to 34-age range relative to the 35 to 44 years group.
That is to be contrasted with the non-Aboriginal population for whom there has been a huge increase inter- generationally in educational levels. For the people in my age group, one-quarter lacked high school education, it is now 10 per cent among the ages of 25 to 34 years, and among Metis, there has been progress. The Metis education progress is far greater than those who identify as Indian or First Nation.
That is my quick survey of census data. Let us move to issues of policy of education which is your primary concern. First, it is very difficult to separate the on-reserve schools from the provincial. Of the on-reserve population, approximately one-third of those who are Aboriginal by identity, about 40 per cent are attending a provincial school at any point in time. There is great mobility back and forth.
If you consider all of the Aboriginal population — the Metis, those who identify as First Nation but live off reserve, and those who are on reserve but who are attending a provincial school — approximately four out of five Aboriginal kids are attending a provincial school.
I turn very quickly to pages 10 and 11. In the lengthy report I did for the policy institute last year, there were six recommendations. I invite you to look at them. I will talk only about recommendations 1 and 3.
The first is the importance of early childhood education, and this is by no means controversial. I am repeating what many others have said. Aboriginal children's education problems begin in the early primary years. Children struggle on, and then you get the high dropout rates in high school.
One small piece of evidence is on slide 12, which demonstrates the distribution of student performance in reading, on-reserve schools in British Columbia, preschool to grade 12. The heavy line in that figure shows those who are reading at grade level. That ignores the preschool children. It starts at between 50 per cent and 60 per cent, declines to about 20 per cent by grade 9, and it picks up a bit not because there really are better results but because you begin to get large numbers of dropouts.
Slide 13 shows dropout rates in the provincial school system, and I emphasize that this is not on-reserve schooling. It is of cohorts entering into grade 8 in the fall of 2002. It shows the retention and dropout among both the non- Aboriginal and the Aboriginal students. Within the period shown, approximately 80 per cent of the non-Aboriginal children graduate on time, and approximately 45 per cent of the Aboriginal students.
I now come to the controversial recommendation, Mr. Chair, that is, the argument that a necessary condition for making significant progress is creation of some form of a First Nation school district. I am not arguing, God forbid, for a return to residential schools. I am not arguing for one form of school district across the country. I am arguing before you that the present system of approximately 500 on-reserve schools with average school populations of 100 students can never achieve the results we want. There must be some provision of the valuable services provided by a school district to a school system. This will be very difficult to introduce.
Legitimately, First Nation leaders have prized their ability to resurrect First Nations as viable, political institutions. They are very careful to guard their prerogatives. It will be a hard lesson or a hard exercise in negotiation to persuade them that it is worthwhile to give up a certain amount of individual band authority to a professional school district.
Some First Nation leaders say this is essentially a question of money. It may be money, but we can talk about this in more detail, slide 14, which discusses how much is spent by provinces in comparable, very small school districts relative to what is provided by INAC to on-reserve schools. I would argue, very roughly, it is comparable in the very small provincial school districts to what Indian Affairs distributes to bands for on-reserve schools per student.
Slide 15 looks at the issue somewhat differently. We should not have any illusions that any one policy, including education policy that I think is so absolutely crucial, will quickly end Aboriginal poverty and transform kids who unfortunately are failing out into highly successful A and B students who are anxious to get on to post-secondary education.
The demand for education can be affected by many things, including cultural mistrust on the part of some Aboriginals that schools may be some exercise in an attempt to destroy Aboriginal culture. There are important, on the supply side — this is me, an economist talking — factors that influence the success of children in school. Obviously, schools are not the only important supply factor in successful schools performing. Family income, family education all matter.
On the supply side of education, schools matter too, and the quality of school the make a difference and we cannot ignore the role of schools and how they are organized, including the existence of school districts.
Slide 16 I leave to you to think about whether I am right. It is a quick summary of the kinds of services that school districts provide to individual schools. They serve as collective bargaining agents to work out conditions of employment for teachers. They provide specialized teachers. They help develop curricula.
For reasons of time, I will not discuss, as I might have if I was allowed my 50 minutes, a piece of research that graduate students and I did with respect to data in British Columbia of approximately 400 schools, except to say our conclusion, and by all means quiz me on this afterwards, was to say, in trying to understand how Aboriginal kids were doing in the provincial British Columbia system, after we adjusted and tried to account for a variety of variables, such as the wealth or poverty of the family of the children, the school district mattered. All other things equal, schools in some districts were consistently performing much better than we would expect, which leads me to emphasize that I think in understanding how Aboriginal children are faring in British Columbia, you cannot discuss this independently of what the successful school districts are doing. The other side of the coin is that some school districts are doing very poorly, and the kids in these schools are performing much less well than we would have expected given parental income and various other aspects of the school.
I leave you with these six recommendations, two of which I briefly introduced. One is the crucial importance of early childhood education; and second, in my opinion, is the absolutely necessary, not sufficient recommendation that we need a school system for First Nation on-reserve schools.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Richards. I am not sure you know, but one of the reasons we have arrived at this study is we have done, in the past, studies on governance, elections, which is basically part of governance, and economic development. The common denominator that kept surfacing was the educational process or the lack of, and so that is how we have arrived at this subject.
You flagged my question in your presentation, the fear of the chiefs and the various leaders in our First Nations relinquishing this responsibility in a manner through school boards or tripartite agreements.
Do you have any suggestions how we could reinforce that the fiduciary responsibility of the federal government for education, whether it be through treaties or whatever, would be maintained? I think that fear will flow through the First Nations communities; the federal government is trying to extricate itself from the process of supplying education and they are trying to walk away from their responsibility.
There are tripartite agreements and memorandums of understanding on education in various provinces. Do you have any reaction to that at all? You flagged it in your openings remarks.
Mr. Richards: I have many responses to it. I spent the last weekend in Quebec City at the annual meeting of the Canadian Economics Association. With colleagues, I organized sessions on Aboriginal education, and we invited the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister of Indian Affairs, Jean-François Tremblay, as one of our guests. I do not think there is much credibility to the chiefs' critique that Indian Affairs will walk away from the funding component of it. I argue that Indian Affairs has already walked away from the question of accountability of performance.
There is, to my knowledge, virtually no information within the Department of Indian Affairs as to the performance of children coming through on-reserve schools. We have a very limited, partial view via snapshots at the census every five years.
There are some arrangements between bands or First Nations on the one hand and provincial governments. Take Alberta where Alberta undertakes so-called PATs, provincial achievement tests, in Grades 3, 6 and 9. There is an agreement that these will be conducted both in provincial schools and in on-reserve schools but the results will be kept confidential. There is some leakage here, but we know very little. In terms of accountability, I do not see Indian Affairs maintaining accountability at this point.
What I perceive as the crux of this problem is persuading chiefs and councils that yielding some of their authority over the running of individual schools on their bands to the equivalent of a First Nations school authority need not have damaging consequences. In fact, it can have beneficial consequences.
Across the country, there are experiments; senators may know better than I do. For example, I was meeting in Quebec City with folks who are intimately involved in the Yorkton Tribal Council, which covers a good chunk of East Central Saskatchewan. There are approximately a dozen on-reserve schools involved there. There is agreement among a number of the involved First Nations about the sharing of certain components of their budget in order that they can hire special teachers to do a few things that would be done in a provincial school system by the school district.
Some analogous experiments have gone from Labrador through to British Columbia. However, they are all partial and do not get at the nub of the problem, which turns around the kinds of services that school districts do. Most teachers teach on reserve are operating on one year contracts. That cannot work forever. There is a lot of idealism among both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal students who do go to work on schools in, say, Northern Manitoba. However, when they are operating on 12-month contracts and unsure whether that contract will be renewed, ultimately, they come back down to Winnipeg or to Saskatoon and they seek employment with more stability. That is a problem.
There has been not enough specialized teaching. There is not enough curriculum development in many instances. These are all activities that a school board can provide. There is no guarantee that it will; there can be failures. I hope I have not been abusing my time.
Senator Sibbeston: Mr. Richards, it is obvious from your recommendations that the direction and the relationship that you advocate for First Nations is with provincial education entities. Is it clear to you because of your study and findings that the best chance of Aboriginal student success is at the provincial level and far removed from Indian Affairs and that situation?
Historically, in the Northwest Territories, we have always had a certain dislike for the federal government because they were far removed from us. Anything they did, we could always do better. If they could build one house with $100,000, we could build two houses. Generally, that is our attitude toward the federal government. I suspect that with regard to their capability, that is the case. Generally, the federal government is far removed from the reality.
In our work in this study, we will be looking at the roles and making recommendations. You almost have to conclude that the only role for the federal government is to provide money and let the First Nations and the provincial entities work together to improve the education system. I appreciate that school authorities are not necessarily provincial, but they are similar to provincial-type education authorities. They need to copy that and their chance of success increases.
Mr. Richards: That is an excellent question. I apologize to Senator St. Germain. He was getting at it and I did not adequately address it at all in the first go around.
I would like there to be informal relations with provincial school systems; yes, very much. On the other hand, we must never ignore the history of unfortunate relations. The residential school problem looms as a cloud over this discussion. I certainly do not want to imply that my recommendations imply an elimination of First Nations ability to control the school system.
As you may know far better than I, it is often difficult for First Nations to agree among one another. You get programs that begin and then, for whatever reasons, one council changes and disagreements arise. There must be, I think, the formation of school districts, but I want them to be school districts which are under —
[Editor's Note: The committee meeting was interrupted by a fire alarm.]
(The committee suspended.)
(The committee continued in camera.)
(The committee resumed in public.)
The Chair: We are back now in open session and we will allow people to come back into the committee room.
Colleagues, you have before you a budget for travel, editing and promotion of the report for our education study. Is it agreed that the budget before you be adopted?
Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Stewart Olsen: I will recuse myself because I sit on the Internal Economy Committee.
The Chair: Do you want to abstain?
Senator Stewart Olsen: Yes.
The Chair: We now have to deal with another issue.
Some of the travel contemplates chartering aircraft. Normally we need to submit a competitive bidding process if the cost of the contract exceeds $25,000. However, I am allowed to ask for an exemption if the committee approves a motion to allow sole sourcing and therefore, I am asking someone to move a motion. We have done this in the past, because to charter airplanes you pretty well have to make arrangements in advance and we searched out the best price. Historically, we have had this approval.
Would someone move a motion that the chair be authorized, pursuant to section 1, chapter 6:01 of the Senate Administrative Rules, to request approval from the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration for acquisition without tender with respect to charter flights for the committee's travel on the education study?
Senator Peterson: I move:
That the chair be authorized, pursuant to section 1, Chapter 6.01 of the Senate Administrative Rules, to request approval from the Standing Committee on Internal Economy Budgets and Administration for acquisition without tender with respect to charter flights for the committee's travel on the education study.
The Chair: Is it agreed? Any discussion?
Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Abstain.
The Chair: All right. Finally, the clerk has asked for, but not yet received confirmation, the price of a chartered flight for the Northern Ontario trip. It may well turn out to be less expensive than flying commercially. In the interests of keeping costs down, I would like to be able to revise the budget to reflect the lower cost.
Would members agree to empower the deputy chair and me, as chair, to authorize revision of the budget application?
Senator Peterson: I do. I move it.
Senator Brazeau: Do you want to read it again?
The Chair: Is it agreed?
Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Abstain.
The Chair: All right. We got through that and we will now continue with our witness.
Professor, I am sure you know where you left off because a man of your academic stature would definitely know where he left off in his response to Senator Sibbeston.
Mr. Richards: Indeed, it was.
The Chair: You scared him away. He may possibly be back, but we can go to a new question.
Mr. Richards: No, I remember what Senator Sibbeston was asking. It was an important question. He was concerned about the nature of tripartite agreements and I would like to pursue that matter.
As we know, politics here are sensitive. First Nation leaders are, to put it mildly, displeased when they must formally agree with provinces. There are many informal agreements but they prefer that there be a negotiation between themselves and the federal government.
The federal government, when it comes among the people whom I respect on this dossier to talk about what they would like to see in the form of new governance institutions, many people are not obsessed about there being a tripartite agreement. What they really want is some genuine content in what will be a school authority and what will be the nature of the governance reform.
Governance is, I think, crucial, as you said at the beginning this evening, senator, but it can be a very amorphous term.
Here are five components that I think need to be addressed if there are to be real agreements and process. There must be some provisions about teacher contracting. The present one-year terms do not work. One of the things school districts do in provincial government systems is to negotiate terms of conditions for teachers, for example, salaries, reviews and evaluation.
Second, hiring and firing is something that a school authority should be empowered to do. A school principal is a crucially important person in the success of a school. I think this is a function that ought to be the responsibility of a First Nations school authority.
Improving curriculum is a service that a school district can perform. Again, I am thinking about Saskatchewan for the benefit of Senators Dyck and Peterson here. If the Yorkton Tribal Council wants to have a better history of Metis and First Nation activities in Saskatchewan, that is the kind of activity the school authority ought to be engaged in trying to do: Teacher contracting, hiring and firing, curriculum, and maybe specialized teaching.
Particularly in a small school necessarily, you cannot have teachers covering all subjects. For example, art is an important subject to get kids going but maybe the school district should hire the art teacher.
When we were so rudely interrupted by the fire alarm, we spoke outside about the role of sports for keeping at-risk kids in high school. Regarding sports programming, you may want specialized teachers who are really good at organizing basketball leagues or hockey leagues among schools. Another obvious subject is budgeting, capital decisions about which schools need to be renovated next, and so on.
To summarize, teacher contracting, hiring, firing, curriculum development, specialized teachers, capital budgeting and, in general, budgeting are functions that are, by and large in a provincial school system, undertaken either by a school district or even by a higher level at the level of the provincial education ministry.
To get back to Senator Sibbeston's question, he was concerned about tripartite agreements. I do not think we should be so concerned about ensuring that the provinces are signing on to these agreements. Ideally, I think the provinces would help provide some advice and be ex officio. What really matters is that the agreements creating some school authority address these five tough components of school management.
The Chair: You are saying that tripartite is not that important. Do you not see the infrastructure that provincial school boards and the provincial system have would be an asset that could feed through to the Aboriginal school board?
Mr. Richards: Indeed, I do, but I would like these boards to grow organically. Those of us who are from Saskatchewan and Alberta are now at ease with the existence of the so-called separate school boards, which owe their history to the Roman Catholics and their settlement in the Prairies, and the so-called public school systems. Originally there were tensions but now these work reasonably well together. Adding a third level of school district, which would be First Nation, it hopefully would, given a bit of time, develop lots of informal relations with these two school systems.
I put it back to you, senators: Do you think this must be a formal tripartite agreement? I am much more concerned about getting some kind of agreement that involves an agreement by the First Nations to these five components of school governance that they will entrust this henceforth to some new school authority. I am concerned that Indian Affairs will transfer the funds for kindergarten to grade 12 education to this authority for these purposes. I am concerned that the agreement be in place and then I would have the provincial component to maybe be an add-on.
If the First Nations folks are happy with the province signing, in general I think provinces would be willing to sign. However, I do not think that is the deal breaker. I think the real deal breaker is making these five conditions meaningful.
Senator Stewart Olsen: I am intrigued with your premise. Who would run these district school areas and who would put them together?
Mr. Richards: That is a good question. You might know the answer better than I.
Senator Stewart Olsen: I doubt it.
Mr. Richards: I do not think one model can work across the country. To begin, there is a minimum size of maybe eight to ten schools so that a school district works reasonably well. If possible, the boundaries ought to contain First Nations with some affinity. Maybe Treaty 4 in Southern Saskatchewan comprises a group with some sufficient affinity such that it could potentially be a school district.
Ideally, there should be direct election to school districts among First Nations members. The school trustees for this First Nations school authority should be directly elected by members of First Nations bands in a similar way to the pattern with the provinces.
Senator Stewart Olsen: You are saying that Indian Affairs would set the areas and then the different bands would elect the trustees.
Mr. Richards: Are you trying to get one model for the country?
Senator Stewart Olsen: I am trying to get a model that might work.
Mr. Richards: There must be enough schools in the district. Two schools are not enough. There must be some cultural affinity among the First Nations involved in the school authority, which makes it easier.
Senator Stewart Olsen: I hear that. I am hiving down to the practicalities.
Mr. Richards: My practical suggestion in the recommendation that I made is that there should be a big pot of money as a financial incentive for these bands to get together. It is not cheap to provide these second level services. One of the incentives that Indian Affairs can provide to encourage First Nations bands to come together is the prospect that there will be stable, longer term and more generous financing if they can do it.
I cannot speak for INAC but I think the department would want to see in whatever school authority we are talking about that it addresses these five issues and perhaps one or two others in a meaningful way.
Senator Stewart Olsen: I like your issues and I like the idea. I am just trying to figure out how we could make it work.
Mr. Richards: It is a big issue. It is almost like the treaty debates. You should not do it overnight. There is some goodwill. It varies across the country between teachers in provincial systems nearby, particular councils where people are interested in education, teachers and Indian Affairs.
If there were the prospect of an agreement in principle, and this was hammered out by appropriate folks with whom there was some mutual trust, then it must be discussed. There will be controversy.
Senator Eaton: I sat in on quite a bit of Senator Keon's study on population health, which looked at a great deal of the isolated Aboriginal and Inuit communities in Canada and the problems that isolation brought in terms of the community population health.
You talk about setting up an infrastructure that incorporates four to six schools in an area with cultural sameness, about teacher contracts, hiring, firing, and specialized curriculum. I agree with all of that. However, how do you transpose those elements to an isolated Aboriginal, Inuit or Metis band somewhere in the North? Do you group them together in some way? The North is so vast. Do you concentrate more on specialized curriculum? Do you have any thoughts about that situation?
Mr. Richards: If I have any expertise, to be honest, it is primarily in thinking about issues in cities and reserves in the South. You are raising issues that must be addressed by your committee. I know northern provincial matters a bit. You can make some progress, but it is difficult. It helps to have some school district-like structures so you can get better teachers by flying them in, maybe. They have a tour for teachers to go from one to four areas on a regular cycle. You can do some experiments with online teaching, although per student it will be much more expensive. The Northland School Division, which has had many isolated problems, is located south of 60o and north of Fort McMurray. They got themselves into difficulty this spring because they did not maintain a sufficiently coherent school district structure for that school district. This is provincial but it has similar problems to the on-reserve schools. The further north you go, the more you see these informal interactions between the provincial and the on-reserve structures.
It is crucial that informally there be good relations with the provincial superintendents and school principles.
I began an hour ago, before we were so rudely interrupted by the fire alarm, to talk about the extent of kids going back and forth between provincial schools and on-reserve schools. There are some good precedents. I was at a conference in January sponsored by the Alberta Education Department, which featured some success stories of on- reserve school administrators working well with provincial folks. They brought half a dozen officials down to Edmonton, ranging from school principals to administrators that work across the systems.
This is not an adequate answer to the issues of population health and high suicide rates.
Senator Eaton: It is a huge problem. Thank you for your honesty. I wondered whether that had come into your thinking.
Mr. Richards: How could one not think about it? I have had good discussions with people in Yukon a bit. They are proud that their results are better than those in Nunavut and in the NWT. They think they have done some things right.
Senator Eaton: Is there a difference in the high school graduation rates between girls and boys?
Mr. Richards: It is huge.
Senator Eaton: It is the same as in the non-Aboriginal population.
Mr. Richards: Yes, and while we are addressing the legacy of the treatment of Aboriginals tonight, that is another big issue that some Senate committee in the future might want to address. That is the increasing gender gap between graduation rates of boys and girls, whether we are talking native or non-native.
Megan Scott, a student who worked with me last year on that big report that you may have glanced at, is doing her master's project exactly on this issue — the role of sport in keeping at-risk boys in school. This applies in spades to helping native boys stay in school — having good sport programming.
Senator Eaton: The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology is doing a report presently on access to post-secondary education. Senator Dyck and I, along with the rest of the committee, have looked at why kids do not get through post-secondary education. A lot of it is gender and mentoring, the things you have mentioned. That is being looked at.
Mr. Richards: Good. For those who are fluent bilingually, Jacques Ménard, a prominent Montreal financial man at BMO, brought together a prestigious committee of business folks, educators and academics last year. They published a very good, thorough report, "Savoir pour pouvoir," which discussed the issue of high dropout rates in particular schools and neighbourhoods in Quebec. I recommend it to committee members to have a look at it.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Thank you for your informed paper. If you had a number of reasons why there is such a high dropout for Aboriginal students compared to non-Aboriginal students, what would be the prime reason for this dropout?
Mr. Richards: History; there is, at this point in Canada, no social problem more severe than a certain alienation between Aboriginal Canadians and non-Aboriginal Canadians. I think we are making, on the part of non-Aboriginals, legitimate attempts at reconciliation, but there remains mistrust — as you probably know better than I.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: I have a few reasons here from when I went to school. A lot of reasons were racism and poverty; parents usually are on social assistance so they cannot provide for their children to keep up with the Joneses. That makes the First Nations person feel inferior — I cannot go to school because I do not have lunch money. That was my experience.
The main problem was racism. I do not know if things are getting any better. I still had to go to school because my daughters were being discriminated against.
I do not think a lot of people know about these problems because it is never in a report. A lot of times, these students cannot make it to school because the parents do not have a vehicle to take them there.
Mr. Richards: Racism exists; there is discrimination. I think it is much less than it used to be, but it is there.
The second point I want to stress is that no one reform will end the history and the poverty. What we are talking here about is whether schools are part of the puzzle of trying to seek redress. My contribution, to the extent you think it is credible, is to say I think schools are crucial. It does not mean they are everything. It does not mean they will eliminate poverty per se. Even if they do, it is an intergenerational thing. I am very sympathetic on this issue. I would not have spent a lot of time thinking about it and working on it if I did not think it was so important.
I put it to those who are First Nation leaders on reserves that surely it is in their interest, as well as that of all Canadians, to make schools as good as they can be, knowing full well that is not the complete answer.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: I agree, but I think that the First Nations should have their own school boards. They should have their own schools. Of course, we have non-natives going to First Nations schools and they do not go through what the First Nations' children go through when they first went into their schools.
I think you have to realize that we have to live together now — go to school together, work together. It does not matter how many reports you do, we have to realize that we have to work together, live together and what not.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Hear, hear.
Mr. Richards: I agree.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: My second question is, besides school authorities, are there any other reforms that could help First Nations' learners?
Mr. Richards: I have talked a lot about how important I think school authorities are. Here is another component. I showed the committee a slide stressing that probably 80 per cent of Aboriginal kids — including First Nation, Metis and Inuit — are in provincial schools. There is clear evidence that when the curriculum is respectful of Aboriginal culture, kids do better in school.
These may be just small things or they may be big things. The Edmonton Catholic school district is renowned in Western Canada as one of the most experimental school districts in trying to engage kids. They have powwows — a small thing maybe, but it helps.
If you are designing the Grade 12 literature curriculum, let us perhaps drop some novel about 19th century England and have a novel about native kids growing up and their problems and how they perceive life in Winnipeg or Edmonton or somewhere else.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: They are smart children so I think they should incorporate native history into the schools, as you said. That was my final question.
[Translation]
Senator Brazeau: I listened carefully to your presentation, and I am going to talk about the recommendations a little later. I would have a comment to make for clarification.
In your presentation, you mentioned that Metis students, by and large, are doing better than First Nations students.
However, it is important to say that, for the most, as far as I know, Metis do not go to specific Metis schools. There are perhaps a few of them across the country, but I do not know of any personally. Also, Metis do not live in reserves and are part of the provincial system. This is an important thing to specify when talking about aboriginals, namely whether they are First Nations or Metis.
[English]
Second, you talked about INAC's lack of accountability. Obviously, I will not defend INAC on this point because I think there is a gap in performance indicators on education. INAC funds First Nations schools and First Nations students. There is little progress to be measured in terms of education.
I am not afraid to talk about that there is also a lack of accountability on the part of some First Nations communities in not tackling or taking on the issue of measuring progress for their students. Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act says that the federal government has jurisdiction for Aboriginal people living on reserve. Education is provincial jurisdiction. For decades we have heard Aboriginal leadership talk about the importance of First Nations control over education.
Having said that, I clearly see to why there is a lack of accountability on both fronts. INAC does not want to impose any performance indicators on First Nations that want control over their own education. If these performance indicators come out, it will create tension between First Nations delivering education and INAC.
I agree with most of your recommendations. However, in reality, we have jurisdictional issues that make it hard to put those recommendations into practice for the betterment of Aboriginal students. These jurisdictional barriers do not mean we cannot make progress. That is why this committee is doing this study. Other committees are studying this issue as well. The issue has been studied to death.
Mr. Richards: Hopefully not death.
Senator Brazeau: Do you agree that to break these jurisdictional barriers, the political will of provincial, federal and First Nations governments must be put aside to come up with a system to benefit Aboriginal students?
[Translation]
Mr. Richards: You talked about three big elements, including Metis student performance, which is the first one. It is something to note. Maybe there is a danger to talk mainly and only about the difficulties in this discussion.
When looking at the performance of Metis, we see considerable progress among those aged 45 and over and those aged 25-34. The number of Metis having a university degree doubled. I therefore conclude that we shouldn't assume that the burdens and the barriers are insurmountable.
One of the reasons why I made this study in British Columbia among more or less all the schools of the province where we find a large number of aboriginal students — I did not have statistics on the exact proportions of Metis and of members of the First Nations — was to note the extent to which some districts are performing very well, partly thanks to outstanding chiefs like Clarence Louis, who has a reputation for advocating school and its importance.
[English]
There is optimism. There are obvious examples where First Nations children, particular schools and the Metis overall are doing well.
INAC's lack of accountability is the second large theme you have addressed. There is lots of blame to go around for the failure to measure the performance of First Nations children. In British Columbia, we probably have the best evidence of any province on the performance of Aboriginal children in the provincial school system. That includes roughly one-half of the First Nations children who live on reserve but attend provincial schools, which is very controversial.
Many among the Aboriginal leadership say we should not collect this information because it exposes their people to ridicule. There is a danger of documenting the weaker performance of First Nations students and being used to disparage native people. There is a crucial exercise involved to say that is not the primary reason to use the information. Administrators must use the information to improve results, which is what we are trying to do.
Recommendation 5 on page 11 is a strong request that First Nations leadership, INAC and provincial governments go about the process of evaluating native children's performance. If we do not know where they are positioned, they will not get better. There is a variety of ways to say that, but it is rather obvious.
The third matter you raised is the jurisdictional imbroglio. I think it would help if senior politicians such as yourself, the Prime Minister —
Senator Brazeau: I am not that senior yet.
Mr. Richards: — provincial premiers, heads of the Métis National Council and heads of other major organizations consistently talked about education. That has not happened.
I have been at too many meetings where we skirt around the problem of Aboriginal education. Some may say I am an old White guy and ask what right I have to talk about this subject. All of us must talk about this issue. As your colleague said, we are living here together. There is no way that my home province of Saskatchewan will be a good, healthy community unless there are dramatic improvements in Aboriginal education outcomes in the next generation.
In many ways, this jurisdictional imbroglio is currently the core of the problem, as you understand better than I do. There is concern among First Nations' leadership about loss of jurisdiction and whether Indian Affairs providing more money for Aboriginal education without structural reform will bring about any real improvements. Will Aboriginal leadership accept evaluation? For that matter, will the school teachers' union accept it? That is another component of the controversy.
What do you think? It is unfair for the witness to ask senators for their opinion. However, I am interested to know your collective thoughts on this as much as for you to learn what I have to say.
Senator Lillian Eva Dyck (Deputy Chair) in the Chair.
The Deputy Chair: We are running short of time. Please continue if you have a short question; otherwise, we will move on.
Senator Brazeau: I will simply respond to the question.
Having participated in many meetings of the national federation, which also included ministers of education from across the country, it boils down to the issue of jurisdiction. First Nations leaders — myself included in the past — talked about the need for education. Premiers, ministers of education and the federal government talk about the importance of Aboriginal education. There are some good examples of best practices. However, I think there is a lack of political will to do what is necessary to ensure we have a better system for our students. Like you, I grapple with this issue to try to move beyond those barriers.
Mr. Richards: My tactical advice to you — and you have a more difficult road to hoe than I because I can retreat behind my tenure — is that we need ad hoc agreements that might be tripartite, that might involve particular bands, perhaps some non-reserve Aboriginal groups and INAC.
My final word is that one of the more interesting precedents in Canada right now is that in British Columbia we have an arrangement whereby each school district is required to enter into an Aboriginal Education Enhancement Agreement with local Aboriginal stakeholders. I am the first to say that some of these agreements are better than others, but in British Columbia we have provided a financial incentive to school districts to get serious.
They get $1,000 per year over and above whatever else they would get per student for every identified Aboriginal student. Part of their requirement to the school district is you, the superintendent in the school district board, must sit down with the relevant Aboriginal stakeholders in your school district territory. That may mean First Nation on- reserve people or a local Metis organization. You then come up with an agreement about where you are now and where you want to be in three or four years.
They talk about attendance levels and foundation skills assessment results, which is the British Columbia form of student assessment, where we are now and where we will be in four years' time. There are a bunch of practical programs that should be introduced in using this $1,000 per year. I suspect that is a useful kind of practical reform that moves us forward.
The Deputy Chair: That does sound like it is grounded in reality.
Senator Poirier: Thank you for your presentation and for all the information you are sharing with us. My question follows on Senator Stewart Olsen's questions.
In New Brunswick, we have the Department of Education. That department transfers funds to the school district or employees. School boards are made up of elected officials who manage the school districts. They have the authority to hire or fire the director, and they also have the authority to manage the budget of the school district.
With respect to your recommendations about the importance of a school district being set up for First Nations and a future education system for them, do you see that Indian and Northern Affairs Canada be the body of people that would be similar to the Department of Education in a province? Alternatively, do you see that the Department of Indian Affairs should transfer the money, as it is being transferred now, to the bands and the band council would become that body? They would hire the school district and that there should be separate members —
Mr. Richards: I am sorry to interrupt you. I was not following you. Would you start again, please?
Senator Poirier: In this structure, how do you see it? Do you see that the Department of Indian Affairs should fund the money directly to a school district, which would be elected employees that are directly under the Department of Indian Affairs? Alternatively, do you feel that the money from the Department of Indian Affairs should be transferred to the band council and that the band council would have the responsibility of hiring and putting in place the school district?
Do you recommend that school board members be elected at large within the council to manage, or do you recommend the band should be the only one managing it?
Mr. Richards: My recommendation — and I am conscious of the fact that I am an old White guy talking about what should be done on a reserve — I would like to see direct election of school board trustees. I would like the relevant First Nations to reach an agreement with the Department of Indian Affairs over what constitutes good management in what will hopefully become a school district. Henceforth, the education component of the budget would be transferred to this new school district; and the authority to spend on the part of the trustees would derive from their being elected by on-reserve First Nation members.
This is difficult. It implies that individual band councils would no longer have the authority to hire, fire and spend within their respective First Nations on that school. You are making a meaningful transfer of funds and authority to an elected school board.
I am sure there are many different models that ought to be thought about here, and we want some successful precedents before we move too far.
Senator Poirier: In all your discussions you have had in building your reports and working on these issues in the past, did you ever get a feeling of what the band councils would think of losing the authority of running their own education system and leaving that authority to other First Nations people within their community? The elected board would be people from their community or from the First Nation. Are they open to that suggestion or idea, or has that been discussed at all?
Mr. Richards: It has been discussed, but it is very controversial. I take the example of the First Nations Education Steering Committee in British Columbia. As you know, there were negotiations involving the Honourable Jim Prentice, when he was Minister of Indian Affairs, culminating in 2006 with federal legislation and provincial legislation. There was a tripartite agreement involving the First Nations Education Steering Committee representing First Nations within British Columbia, the Department of Indian Affairs and the provincial government. There was legislation enacted potentially enabling the creation of school authorities.
To the present, there has been no movement on it. I think the most important reason there has not been movement is the reluctance on the part of First Nations leadership at the band level to yield authority or to get concrete about what would have to be in the school authority if it is to be meaningful. It would sure help if there was a bit more money from Ottawa, from the Department of Indian Affairs. I think that is the dilemma.
Far be it for me as a professor to say what the Department of Indian Affairs is willing to do, but there have been implications from department officials that if there were some credible governance structures in place that addressed one way or the other the points that I have discussed, they would be prepared to fund more generously in order that these secondary services be conducted adequately. This money will not come until there is some kind of agreement, and you know as well as I the political difficulty on this one. You are far better politicians than I am. I had one term as a provincial legislator, and I was roundly defeated in the second election.
The Deputy Chair: A few moments ago, you were talking about the idea that there should be precedents that show some success before we move too far. Should we have something like a pilot project to show something like the agreement in B.C. shows those types of agreements work? In these projects, we are involving First Nations in a wide area where we have performance measurements and so on. In these projects, we have the pieces in place and the theory is that it should work well.
Mr. Richards: Should we have a pilot project? Yes. I think the criteria for pilot projects are that they must be big enough that we have some sense that it is the beginning of something new. Many on-reserve schools are doing very well, but there is a sense of fragility that things may not last.
There is a minimum scale. We need to talk about some experiment that involves at least ten to twelve schools. I think we want some sense that this is addressing these five or six key criteria of good governance and that there has been some measurable buy-in; whether it is by a referendum among First Nation members on these relevant First Nations, I leave that to your judgment.
This could proceed in parallel with your own deliberations, and I think you may be in a good catalyst role, as you travel the country, to knock heads together and see what progress you can make.
The Deputy Chair: On behalf of all the members of the committee, I would like to thank you, Professor Richards, for sharing your insights and wisdom with us this evening. I am sure the committee has gleaned many ideas as we proceed in our study. On that note, I will adjourn the committee.
(The committee adjourned.)