Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 3 - Evidence - March 9, 2016
OTTAWA, Wednesday, March 9, 2016
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 6:48 p.m. to study best practices and on- going challenges relating to housing in First Nation and Inuit communities in Nunavut, Nunavik, Nunatsiavut and the Northwest Territories.
Senator Dennis Glen Patterson (Deputy Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Deputy Chair: Good evening.
[Editor's Note: Senator Patterson spoke in a native language.]
I would like to welcome all honourable senators and members of the public watching this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples either here in the room, via CPAC or on the web. I'm Dennis Patterson, a senator from Nunavut. I have the privilege of chairing this committee today in place of Senator Lillian Dyck.
I invite my fellow senators, please, to introduce themselves.
Senator Moore: Good evening. I'm Wilfred Moore from Nova Scotia.
Senator Sibbeston: I'm Nick Sibbeston from the Northwest Territories.
Senator Beyak: Lynn Beyak from Ontario.
Senator Greene Raine: Nancy Greene Raine from British Columbia.
Senator Tannas: Scott Tannas from Alberta.
The Deputy Chair: Our mandate is to examine legislation and matters relating to the Aboriginal peoples of Canada generally. This evening we are continuing our northern housing study with a mandate to study best practices and ongoing challenges relating to housing in First Nation and Inuit communities in Nunavut, Nunavik, Nunatsiavut and the Northwest Territories.
I am pleased we have with us from the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board, Hilda Broomfield Letemplier. We are looking forward to hearing from you. I wonder if you will give us leave, we have one piece of business to attend to and that is the proposed budget for our northern housing study. If members are willing and ready, I would like to see if we can examine this budget and perhaps approve it.
The steering committee has met and gone over this budget and planned travel in this huge region over five days, but we have had to limit the destination to a proposed six communities in Nunavut, Nunavik, Nunatsiavut. We can and will bring in other witnesses from other regions to Ottawa.
The proposed communities have been set out as Iqaluit, Igloolik, Kuujjuaq, Nain, Inukjuak and Sanikiluaq. It will take place over one week.
Colleagues, I would appreciate your views, your examination of this budget and your comments on the budget because we are hoping that we can get it approved in order to begin our work early in the spring, probably as early as April.
Senator Moore: It looks like a fair bit of work went into this. Are we moving across the North or are we always going back? For example, I see hotel accommodation in Iqaluit. Are we going back there every night or are we moving across the North?
The Deputy Chair: With the help of our capable staff, we have carefully studied the logistics and the logistics are everything in the North.
Senator Moore: I'm sure.
The Deputy Chair: It is not possible to do this with scheduled air services. What has been recommended and what seems to work best is to use scheduled services to get to Iqaluit and then from there, because of the difficulties of getting to Nunavik and Nunatsiavut, we will be chartering.
Senator Moore: Chartering airplanes or buses?
The Deputy Chair: Airplanes. As we will learn tonight from our witness, infrastructure is lacking in the North.
Senator Moore: I have heard.
The Deputy Chair: We won't be able to travel anywhere in these regions but by air.
Senator Moore: We will always go back to Iqaluit, is that the idea? There are no accommodations to handle us?
Mark Palmer, Clerk of the Committee: Iqaluit has the best accommodations for us.
Senator Sibbeston: Could you describe generally how the trip will begin and where it will end, and so forth?
The Deputy Chair: I will ask the clerk to outline that for us. Maybe we should have provided you with a map. I know steering looked at a map when we did this.
Mr. Palmer: The basic plan was everyone would go to Iqaluit on the first day, on the Sunday. On the Monday, we would do one trip, probably stay in Nunavik, go to Igloolik and then back to Iqaluit. The second day would be to Inukjuak and Sanikiluaq. The third day would be to Nain and the last day to Kuujjuaq. Every evening we would be ending in Iqaluit. Iqaluit would be the hub.
The Deputy Chair: Are there any other questions or comments?
Senator Moore: Do we have any dates, ideas, have we thought about this? Are we trying to do this before summer break?
The Deputy Chair: Because it is better to travel before summer in the North, we're looking at travel in early May.
Senator Moore: Thank you.
The Deputy Chair: Of course, this budget would be for submission to Internal Economy and their approval. It is still subject to their approval. We would like to get it in so that we can make our submission early and give our staff some opportunity to do the planning.
We budgeted for 12 senators, although we likely won't have a full contingent of 12.
Senator Moore: Iqaluit is the hub, but then we have Nunavut a per diem for there as well. What's that? We're not staying at a hotel there, there are hotels in Iqaluit.
The Deputy Chair: It's the Nunavut per diem rate that applies to Iqaluit, the capital of Nunavut.
Senator Moore: Oh, yes. All right.
The Deputy Chair: I just got a note and a reminder that we may propose travel as early as the week of April 18, if we can get approval for our budget before that time.
Senator Raine: So we will have Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday as well?
Mr. Palmer: We have budgeted to stay until Friday. That would depend on our charter coming back from wherever we are on the Thursday. If we could get a commercial airline back on the Thursday evening, we would do so but we budgeted for Friday just in case we have to stay that extra night.
Senator Raine: Coming from the West, is there any way we could start our tour with the travel from home on the Monday instead of the Sunday?
Mr. Palmer: That will be logistics for steering once we get there.
The Deputy Chair: I think the budget would allow us to have some flexibility.
Senator Raine: I am just wondering, but whatever works.
Senator Moore: Further to Senator Raine's question, is the idea that we would all come to Ottawa and fly out of here together or meet in Iqaluit? What's the thinking?
The Deputy Chair: We would meet in Iqaluit but you would have to leave Ottawa on Sunday to meet in Iqaluit.
Senator Moore: What time do flights leave Ottawa?
The Deputy Chair: Nine o'clock in the morning.
Senator Raine: I would have to leave Saturday morning to get here.
The Deputy Chair: We could revisit that; the budget would allow us some flexibility in that respect. We could do any five-day period.
Mr. Palmer: It doesn't have to start on a Sunday.
Senator Raine: Do you need a motion?
The Deputy Chair: Yes.
Senator Raine: I move that we adopt the budget as set out.
The Deputy Chair: The motion would be, if I may, Senator Greene Raine: That the following budget application as it pertains to our Order of Reference dealing with northern housing for $212,550 for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2017 be approved for submission to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration following a final review by the Senate administration that will be overseen by the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure.
Senator Raine: I so move.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you.
Senator Sibbeston: I second that motion.
The Deputy Chair: Senator Sibbeston second. Discussion? All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Yea.
The Deputy Chair: Carried.
I would like to thank our witness for her indulgence.
Ms. Letemplier from the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board, the floor is yours. Welcome.
Hilda Broomfield Letemplier, Member, National Aboriginal Economic Development Board: Good evening to all committee members and thank you for the invitation to speak with you today. It is a true pleasure and honour for me to be here tonight. It is great to see you again, Senator Patterson.
I am Hilda Broomfield Letemplier, and I am president of Pressure Pipe Steel Fabrication Ltd. in Newfoundland and Labrador, Goose Bay, from the Nunatsiavut government. I'm proud to say that ours is a woman-owned, 100 per cent Aboriginal Inuit-owned company, and I'm a 100 per cent shareholder. We are in the very nontraditional trade of steel fabrication, and we are an industrial and mining supplier. It is a great honour to be here. My husband did his very best to teach me to be a welder, but all I can do is stick the welding rod onto the steel. So that is my expertise with welding.
I am here on behalf of the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board. I'm here from Happy Valley-Goose Bay and very happy to be here in Ottawa. I would also like to acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional territory of the Algonquin and Anishinaabe peoples.
As you may know, the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board is an advisory body made up of First Nations, Inuit and Metis business and community leaders from across Canada. The board provides advice to government on how best to promote indigenous economic development and respond to the unique needs and circumstances of indigenous peoples in Canada.
I am aware that you have begun a study on northern housing and that you are looking into best practices and ongoing challenges in First Nations and Inuit communities. The board would like to offer its perspectives on this topic by presenting the work we have undertaken with regard to northern infrastructure.
In working on the critically important issue of indigenous economic development in the North, we identified infrastructure as a key ingredient for economic and social development. Over the past two years, we undertook a significant amount of work on this topic, which led to our recent report recommendations on northern infrastructure to support economic development.
In 2014 the board commissioned a study on the infrastructure needs of northern Aboriginal communities. The study found that the key types of infrastructure most strongly linked to economic development are transportation, energy and telecommunications.
Although each northern region is unique, many northern indigenous communities face similar infrastructure challenges. In small northern communities, and especially in remote areas with small populations, the critical infrastructure that supports economic development is often deficient or absent.
Because of the lack of efficient transportation systems, costly workarounds must be developed. Port infrastructure is highly limited. In most communities ships must use barges to unload the cargo, a process known as "loitering," which is extremely time-consuming and costly.
Energy is fundamental to the daily operations of every business. For organizations that weigh the costs and benefits of investing in remote communities, the availability and cost of energy is critically important. This means that the shortage of low-cost and environmentally sound energy options proves a significant obstacle for business investment.
Many communities rely on costly local diesel generators to meet their energy needs, and lack a clean, reliable and sustainable energy supply. These communities will find it a challenge to increase their energy capacity to meet growing demands.
Telecommunications infrastructure is critically important for northern economies and communities. Being able to engage in the digital economy to access the Internet at functional speeds and to make use of new efficiencies like e- health and e-learning is of critical importance.
About 50 per cent of communities across the north are dependent on satellite backbone to support basic telecommunications. This means they have limited access to the digital economy and electronic service sectors due to the low speed, low quality and high cost of their systems.
Where does that leave us? We know that northern indigenous communities would benefit from more infrastructure, and we know that investment in infrastructure — particularly transportation, energy and telecommunications — can leverage economic development. However, long-term economic growth also relies on community infrastructure that supports a diversified economy and good quality of life for community members. Businesses across the North struggle to attract and retain employees when there is a shortage of suitable housing.
With this, our next question was what would be the actual dollar impact of greater infrastructure investment in the North. We then commissioned a second study. This one was a business case analysis of eight proposed major resource projects across the North where the cost of needed infrastructure was weighed against forecasted benefits of the projects.
The study found that public investment in northern economic infrastructure that supports major resource development will yield significant economic and fiscal returns. Specifically for every dollar spent on transportation and energy infrastructure, it will yield about $11 in economic benefits and $11 in fiscal benefits.
The study found that employment created by major resource projects in the North can generate $3 for every $1 that governments spend on providing services to people. So public investment in northern economic infrastructure that leads to major resource employment then contributes a significant fiscal premium to governments. We estimate the total fiscal premium, the amount by which governments' revenue exceeds government expenditure, is almost $1.4 billion per proposed northern major resource projects.
Another way to measure this is to look at it per major resource project. If we assumed that a major resource project could generate over 430 jobs annually for northern indigenous people over a 15-year project life and about 260 of those people were previously unemployed, we estimate that the fiscal costs of poverty among northern indigenous residents could be reduced by $50 million over 15 years.
Reducing poverty reduces fiscal costs to all governments. This is important because raising the northern indigenous standard of living to that of other Canadians would take a great deal more tax dollars than simply providing more employment opportunities for northern indigenous Canadians.
In addition to the board's studies last June, we hosted a round table discussion in Whitehorse to consult local knowledge-holders to generate ideas to leverage investment in northern infrastructure. Our studies and consultation with northern leaders provide the groundwork for the board's report, with recommendations on northern infrastructure to support economic development.
Northern Canada is facing many challenges to meet the infrastructure needs of northern Canadians. Just to name a few: Building and maintaining infrastructure is more costly in the North, roughly 150 per cent higher than the rest of Canada. Accessing capital to support infrastructure projects can be challenging because of their inherent risk.
A significant infrastructure deficit puts the North in the position of having to play catch-up. Most funding mechanisms available in the North are overwhelmed by the magnitude of their infrastructure deficits, leaving little room for consideration of strategic infrastructure investments.
Our Recommendations on Northern Infrastructure report identified numerous current opportunities. Three of them include: The debt market is looking for long-term, stable investment opportunities. There is potential for significant payoff from investment in infrastructure in the North, and major resource projects in the North have the potential to generate $3 in government revenue per worker for every $1 that government invests in them.
To support northern infrastructure and economic development, the board recommends that the Government of Canada address three broad areas: coordinate investments in economic development infrastructure, increase infrastructure funding and financing; support northern community capacity by funding research; and comprehensive community planning.
It is the board's opinion that upgrading existing infrastructure and improving economic development infrastructure are prerequisites to affordable and sustainable housing in the North. Indeed, community-level infrastructure and large- scale infrastructure go hand in hand in supporting an investment-ready North.
Northern infrastructure is inadequate to meet the needs of northern Canadians, and it is limiting our ability to realize the great potential of the North. We are at a crossroads and action is needed now.
I welcome your comments and questions.
Before we start that, I wanted to share a couple of things.
Senator Patterson talked about travel and logistics going north. For me, I had to travel three nights and two and a half days to be here. And I'm only coming from Goose Bay.
Let me say a couple of things with regard to transportation. It is a big thing in my heart, because my dad was a guide when he was a young man. He actually walked the land of Labrador with dog teams. He took the doctors and the missionaries up to northern Labrador. So that gave me a real closeness to the northern infrastructure concerns that we have.
Our company, Pressure Pipe Steel Fabrication Limited started in 1991, and our niche market is manufacturing storage containment tanks. With regard to the energy and all the northern communities that are still using diesel in the storage tanks, we fabricated a lot of the tanks that went on the north coast of Labrador. It sort of came full circle from all the things that are happening with regard to infrastructure. And even now, with e-learning and e-health, it would be great to see telecommunications improve. It would save a lot of money, for sure. So I welcome your questions.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you very much. I would like to congratulate the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board for their work on Northern infrastructure. Looking at the membership of the board, I know some of them are from remote communities in Northern Ontario, but really apart from yourself, there are no members of the board who live in the regions that you have studied, so it's really impressive that you have undertaken this work. I would like to ask you about one question before I open the floor to members.
You mentioned the business case that had been studied by the National Economic Development Board alongside the infrastructure study. We have your very comprehensive infrastructure report recommendations on Northern infrastructure to support economic development. Is there another report on the business case that you referred to that we could see, or has that been incorporated in this published report of January 2016?
Ms. Letemplier: I think you're referring to the study we did for eight communities.
The Deputy Chair: You commissioned another study. We have the January 2016 report.
Ms. Letemplier: The other one is on our website.
The Deputy Chair: It's available on the website?
Ms. Letemplier: Yes. I've only been involved with the board for the last year and a half. I walked right into the Northern infrastructure issue, which was perfect timing. The one report was done. We did the other one. Then we did the case study and the roundtable. We just released this one. We do have some plans for the future. I'm sure a question will come up about that.
The Deputy Chair: Okay. These will be very valuable resources to our committee. I think it's a very good, big-picture look at the challenges we'll see when we get on the ground and talk to people who are dealing with building housing.
Ms. Letemplier: Yes, and we on the board would be happy to assist the committee in any way that we can going forward, so don't hesitate to contact us.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you. Senator Sibbeston?
Senator Sibbeston: Thank you. Welcome.
You talk about having had a workshop in Whitehorse. I note that most of your emphasis has been on the general things like economic development, and projects in the North in terms of transportation, energy and communications — those issues that are so important in the North. In your experience with the board, has there been any consideration as to how it can have an impact on housing in the North, either in funding or any other way that you think of?
Ms. Letemplier: I personally think that we're going to be able to have an impact. The political will is there and the mandates are so strong to support Indigenous peoples and their concerns. The problem that we see is that the funding that is there now is being focused, but it's just that the core needs are not being met. It's really hard because when it comes to putting money into infrastructure, there is usually none left because the deficit is so bad.
When we talk about economic development, it's also about the people resources, trying to help the people. We look at the news and we see people in the North who are digging through the dumps to find food. I have heard so many stories about people out there who try to decide whether they should pay their rent or for their telecommunications because they want to be linked with the world. There have been instances where people just pay for their telecommunications and let the rent go. It's really hard when you have to decide, "Am I going to pay my rent, or buy my groceries?" These are very real issues and concerns. I really do feel that we're going to have a good impact and that we can actually make some changes with the work that we're doing with the board and the recommendations that we're making.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you. Senator Enverga.
Senator Enverga: Thank you, chairman. That was a great presentation that you made. It shed some light that will help our study. I would like to ask you about a 2016 report making recommendations for Northern infrastructure to support economic development. It says there that:
. . . the First Nations Fiscal Management Act institutions to ensure access to the First Nations Finance Authority borrowing mechanisms for self-governing Indigenous peoples, to allow them to access financing to support infrastructure investment.
My questions are: What factors have led the economic development board to make the above recommendations? Are there any specifics you can tell us?
Ms. Letemplier: I'm not sure exactly what you are asking.
Senator Enverga: It says that you recommended that Government of Canada work with the First Nations Fiscal Management Act. Why should we work on that?
Ms. Letemplier: The nature of our board is such that we have presentations all the time from the different governments and even INAC itself. It's a big learning curve and a big process, but there are a lot of things that have always been that we want to see change. There are a lot of old ways that things have been done that we found out that are not working, so we don't want to keep doing the same things over. We want to see some changes with regard to making things better. If we keep doing the same things over and over and they are not working, then obviously we need to look at changes. That's one of the things we're working on to try and get rid of a lot of the red tape that was there. There were always old ways that certain things were done that we really need to update.
Senator Enverga: Can you cite some specific examples of those?
Ms. Letemplier: I'm not sure.
The Deputy Chair: I think one thing you are saying is that infrastructure money often leaves out the rural and remote regions, and there should be consideration given to a dedicated northern infrastructure investment fund.
I know I have heard a lot of talk about shortening commute times in the urban centres through improved transit, and we have often seen infrastructure funding go to the urban parts of the country where the votes are and the people live. But your report has shown that there are big returns from investing in remote regions as well. Maybe the way to do that is to establish a dedicated Northern infrastructure investment fund. I think that would be quite a departure from the way things have happened in the past. Would that be an example of doing things differently?
Ms. Letemplier: Yes. The board has been here for almost 30 years. It's okay if I share this. I'm pretty sure this will answer some of your questions. Ministers have never been to the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board. It has never been until this year. We had three ministers meet with us at our last board meeting. If you don't mind, I'll share this with you.
Senator Enverga: Yes.
Ms. Letemplier: The National Aboriginal Economic Development Board calls for increased investment in indigenous economic development. On February 24, NAEDB called for increased investments in indigenous economic development and highlighted this during a meeting with cabinet ministers Carolyn Bennett, Jody Wilson-Raybould and Hunter Tootoo. That was amazing because this is the first time that any minister has come. We were lucky; we had three. The board made a number of observations that will help the federal government to meet its objectives in achieving better outcomes for indigenous economic development and supporting the commitments that they have been mandated to deliver by Prime Minister Trudeau.
Canada has made its relationship with indigenous peoples a priority, and the board believes that this level of priority should also be reflected in the budget. This should include the following: a three-fold increase in federal spending on indigenous economic development, from approximately $278 million to approximately $834 million; increasing funding to Aboriginal financial institutions by $100 million; additional funding of $150 million for the First Nations Fiscal Management Act regime and its institutions; setting up a North-specific infrastructure investment fund, providing the necessary support to address the 2011 National Assessment of First Nations Water and Wastewater Systems that estimates that $4.7 billion worth of investments is needed over the next 10 years to meet current standards and anticipated population growth; reviewing the fiscal relationship with indigenous peoples based on the premise that indigenous governments are equal to other levels of government.
Chief Clarence Louie, chair of the board, said:
The amount of money currently dedicated to Indigenous economic development is inadequate. Our Board has long advocated that funding for economic development should comprise not less than 10% of total spending on Indigenous peoples. . .
That was at our board.
The Board believes that economic development is a foundational element in achieving reconciliation. Progress in economic, business, and community development can be achieved when supported by strong Indigenous led governance structures, sufficient and appropriately targeted financial investments, and innovative policy development in partnership with Indigenous communities.
Later, he said:
It is in the interest of all Canadians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, to ensure that First Nations, Inuit, and Métis are full participants in the economy and are able to make meaningful contributions to Canada's economic prosperity."
That was also by Chief Clarence Louie. He also said that our meeting that day:
. . . represents a historic juncture for a promising partnership committed to bringing transformational change to the relationship between Canada and Indigenous peoples, to address historic wrongs and to make real and lasting improvements to the socio-economic conditions of Indigenous peoples.
That just talks about our board, that we were established in 1990.
Senator Enverga: I think you mentioned a lot of examples there. So thank you.
Ms. Letemplier: It's great. I just want to share these statistics with you from our report after it was released. We reached a total of 12.9 million people, which is fantastic. The people in Canada are being so much more educated now about the issues and the current concerns of indigenous people. There were eight different newspaper articles, for a total of 115 publications, print and Web; 20 national media reports, including CBC, Nation Talk, Times Colonist, CTV News, the Globe and Mail, the Canadian Press, and Metro; and 96 local media reports. The last time I read them all, so this time I'm just going to say across Canada because I think it encompasses all of Canada. There were 894 social media shares of the news articles. I did 9 interviews myself. The first day the report was released, our website traffic increased by 200 hits that one day.
Then, these are the highlights that happened since then. I held a workshop at the 2016 Northern Lights Conference. That's where I met Senator Patterson. I met with the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, Dwight Ball, and the Premier of Yukon, Daryl Pasloski, to discuss the findings of the report. I gave a presentation at the Deputy Minister's Committee on the Arctic on February 23, as well as the Transport Canada Director General Committee on February 25. Media released by the Government of Northwest Territories reported that Premier Bob McLeod welcomed the Northern infrastructure report. News released by the Northwest Territories and Nunavut Chamber of Mines indicated support of the Northern infrastructure report's conclusions. CBC North radio reported that the Mayor of Iqaluit, Madeleine Redfern agrees with the Northern infrastructure report. On CBC radio's The Current, Anna Maria Tremonti reported that the Northern infrastructure report was one of the top three stories of the week. CBC is waiting to interview me again tomorrow about tonight's meeting.
I feel very good and very strong and very confident about the work that the board is doing. I feel that this is exactly what needs to happen so that the infrastructure needs for the North are really going to be seeing the light.
The Deputy Chair: Excellent. Thank you. Very impressive.
Senator Tannas: Thank you very much. It's a privilege to have you here. Your story of your own success is very inspiring. Your chairman, Chief Louie, is also extremely inspiring. As a beginner in the Senate, one of the first places I wound up going was to visit with Chief Louie in Osoyoos. I was able to spend a couple of hours in a very broad- ranging discussion and I came away so impressed. The message that he had and the thing that he was most passionate about was that economic development and employment are the secret to ending this cycle.
In your presentation I understood that you believe in that as well. That, if we make the right investments to create the climate for economic development, jobs will follow, and houses will follow as a result of people wanting to own, maintain, build and invest in houses. We did see a little bit of that in our Southern tour of reserves in Southern Canada, where it was clear that the quality of housing was in absolute symmetry with the employment rate. Your message here certainly rings true with me.
We did visit places where there was not economic opportunity that was apparent. What are your thoughts on places where it doesn't look like you could spend all the money you wanted to and it isn't going to happen, because there are so many things that are either missing or that are a disadvantage? I am talking about remote communities. It is hard to imagine there could be economic development.
What are your thoughts on that? You come from a very remote place and it may be to me and others that Happy Valley Goose Bay isn't a place that is obvious for a successful steel-fabrication business.
We would all benefit from your wisdom on that, because it is an issue that is troubling lots of people about remote communities. We actually had people talk to us and say, "We don't have any economic development opportunities." What do you think about that?
Ms. Letemplier: We're fortunate because, in our area, the Voisey's Bay nickel mine, owned by Vale, is just a flight away from us. Because of the impacts and benefits agreement with our company, when we started in 1991, we fabricated all these storage containment tanks. So we took away our niche market, because we don't get to build them again, because they're going to outlive our lifetime.
So when the mine started, the mine was very supportive of small businesses like ours. We thought we then had to diversify, so we went to all of our suppliers that we bought all of our products from and said to them, "Let's do some supplier agreements now." We signed all the supplier agreements, so now we sell all the products that we used to buy from those companies and sell them to the mine.
It is our big belief in our business to hire and train as many local Aboriginal people as we can. I will tell you that we had horror stories. There are companies that come to the Nunatsiavut or the Northern communities, and they bring labourers from all over Canada. They bring flag people in. So what are they saying to us as Aboriginal people — that they don't hire us, because we don't have a flag person course? Well, give the course and people can do that job.
How do you think it makes us feel when they bring in labourers? We're not good enough to be a labourer?
So we do a lot of training with our companies. I see communities that are not able to have big projects — take those people and fly them and fly them in and out to the projects that have the opportunities to hire and train them.
If you can afford to bring major companies and major resource projects bring labourers from across Canada, surely they can bring them from their own communities or the local areas.
We hired and trained people; Aboriginal people are really good with their hands, so we hired a lot of people. We hired our guys to — it is called HDPE pipe; it is a high-density polyethylene pipe fusion. It is a plastic fusion. I probably could do that, but I don't think I could do proper welding. It is a special machine that you have to take a course on.
So we took our guys, brought them all out with one of our suppliers and brought them to Ontario. They took them to the factory and trained them. Our guys were making $86,000 for six, seven or eight months' work. They made more money than we made ourselves, because we paid them. I still have some of the wives come say, "Boy, do we ever miss my husband making that kind of money." It is a great thing to see.
One of the projects we want to do with the board is a case study. We have a company that came and gave a presentation to the board and they are fantastic. They're running the project exactly the way every major resource project should be run. We're going to do a case study on that particular company and that will be coming out within the next — however long it takes for us to set it up.
And our next big event is the action plan. So we're looking at doing an action plan to see where we go and what we do next.
I wanted to share one more quote with you since we talked about supplier diversity because that's what we had to do in our business in order to survive. Our business is growing. And we hire and train as many people locally as we can. We are always trying to get other companies to do the same thing.
One of the things is for the major resource projects to come and invest in the community, give to the community, teach the community and have all the different governments involved so that the money that's put into the infrastructure can perhaps end up with and belong to the communities. They can take ownership of it from there, and help it grow and teach them how to make money from those investments that are left when the major resource projects leave.
These are specifically my thoughts about diversity, because we had to diversify. We need to improve our existing procurement programs for Aboriginal-owned businesses, and then expand those programs to include other diverse- owned businesses such as those owned by women, persons with disabilities and visible minorities.
The oil and gas industry on the island of Newfoundland — and in Labrador — that is the mandate. There are mandates for all those major companies to support Aboriginal businesses, women in business, people with visible minorities and people with — I said the four of them.
That's something that we also need to work on. Because of the mandate, I can go to any one of those resource projects and try to get them to work with us because of their mandate. I already meet two of their requirements.
Senator Moore: Thank you for coming here and for making the effort to come here.
Ms. Letemplier: Thank you. It is a pleasure.
Senator Moore: I can't complain about flying back and forth to Nova Scotia after hearing you.
In response to the chair's question — or maybe it was Senator Sibbeston — you said that once a dollar was spent on the core, there's not much left for infrastructure. What did you mean by the "core"?
Ms. Letemplier: The core needs.
Senator Moore: "The core needs." What were they?
Ms. Letemplier: The water, sewer and the economic development of the people themselves. If you are going into the dump to try and get food, and you don't have jobs and you have 28 people living in one home, how can you function? There's nowhere to go to be alone. It is hard. How do you feed your family?
Just the core needs of living that are there. All the money is used up to try to survive. There's nothing left after to invest.
Senator Moore: We saw that when we visited some reserves in the South. There were some pretty rugged situations. I never thought it would be that bad. Some of these homes — I felt so bad for the people. They're trying to survive — just trying to survive.
Ms. Letemplier: With the telecommunications, even if money were invested in that infrastructure, you can have your e-health and e-learning. You can't take care of anybody else if you can't take care of yourself first. You have to be able to take care of yourself. How can you provide for your family when it is disheartening?
Senator Moore: When you talked toward the end of your remarks about a case study — there's a business that you are going to try to bring into your fold and study — you also mentioned an action plan. Are you talking about an action plan for the development board for the whole of the North, or are you talking about for a certain pilot project area? What's your thinking there?
Ms. Letemplier: As a board, we are responsible for all of the First Nations, Inuit and Metis of Canada. When I was at the Northern Lights, I had done my presentation. There are mayors who want to be involved — all levels of government and the territorial governments. Everyone is excited about what is going to happen. They all want to be there, and they want to be involved.
We did the round table in Whitehorse and it was fantastic. For me, it was great because when I first got on the board, I was calling everybody I knew, saying, "Oh please, help me. Give me information. Work with me." I have the list of everybody that I had contacted. I didn't get anywhere. I'm like, "Oh, my goodness, this is so important and we have such an opportunity here, and people are just not stepping up to the plate."
Now everybody is there. I had many different major resource projects at Northern Lights, who came and saw me and said that they definitely want to be a part of this. There are people who want to come to the board to do presentations. Like I said, the mayors from the North, like the Mayor of Kuujjuaq came and, imagine, he's coming to me and thinks that I can help him. We have a community. We don't even have a garage; we can't even repair our equipment to help the community. So that kind of infrastructure need. Maybe I'm pretty optimistic, but it is probably a good thing to have somebody with a bit of optimism for a change.
Senator Moore: You can't get disheartened. Everything starts with one. Once you get over that fact, you can do whatever you want. It is interesting that these people are coming to you. To me that speaks of hope and community, a sense of trying to move ahead. I urge you to keep up your good work.
Ms. Letemplier: Thank you. I actually spoke at an International Women's Day event yesterday and that was just fantastic.
It is good because I think I'm a motivator, but I also feel very motivated when I see there's interest and people want to be involved. At first I couldn't get anybody involved, but now everybody wants to be involved. I certainly don't have all the answers, but I will be happy to keep up the good work and keep everybody coming. Everybody has money. If everyone is doing the same thing, why not work together and form a collaborative group and do it together?
Senator Moore: Yes.
Senator Raine: Thank you very much. It is really nice to hear of your experiences and it is very inspirational that you are optimistic. You have obviously been doing your business for quite a while and seen it go up and down and change and adapt and grow. Right now you have been serving the Voisey's Bay nickel mine. You must be aware of all the other projects that are in the planning stage or under way and to see people have to fly from other parts of Canada to work there when there are people who could be trained and could work there from the region, and that is the future, obviously, to get the young people trained and give them those opportunities. Do you feel that the experience you have had with Voisey's Bay is showing the other companies how they should do things?
Ms. Letemplier: I think so, yes. And now Voisey's Bay is looking at going underground. So we're extremely excited about that. There is no doubt that people are definitely looking that way and we can't do everything and be everything for everyone, but it is definitely good for companies to see that we started in 1991, and we were 100 per cent an Aboriginal-owned company. That was before the impacts and benefits agreement was a big deal, right?
We had our tough times with the business. I could write a book on the ups and downs of our business. They say there are bumps in the road, but there were craters in our road and boulders and ice quarries that we had to overcome.
I like to motivate people to start their own businesses because there are so many opportunities. When any major resource project starts anywhere, they have nothing. So potentially any business opportunity you can come up with could be successful.
Senator Raine: In those major projects they obviously build camps for the workers to live in.
Ms. Letemplier: Yes.
Senator Raine: People then come in and out. Are you seeing things in the camp life that is particularly beneficial or hard for people? Are there lessons to be learned in terms of building housing in the communities? In other words, in a camp you are living in a multi-unit facility and then back home you are probably living in your own home but with too many people. Do you see ways you can learn from the housing at the camp sites and in the communities?
Ms. Letemplier: Well, the fly-in and fly-out camps, they're like five-star hotels. They have everything. They have a community room for traditional cooking for the Aboriginal cultures. They have their gym and a meeting room where they play guitars and do their thing and have a lot of fun. They have the best food. They're just fantastic, but that's a camp where you fly in and fly out.
People who work in some of these crowded communities and homes, it is probably like going on vacation for them to go to work because they have all the amenities. If the money was put there for infrastructure, you don't really need a five-star home. You can have a bedroom with just enough room to be able to shut the door, have a bed, and you can manage without anything else. Being able to have a cubicle that you could go in would be something.
Like I said, when you have got 28, 30 people, it is hard. How can you function? Everybody needs to have a little bit of alone time and time to contemplate where they're going or what they're doing. Imagine, if one person gets sick, everybody gets sick. There's no way you can function like that.
Senator Raine: These overcrowded homes are multigenerational as well. It is tough on the older people and the kids.
Ms. Letemplier: It is tough on everybody.
Senator Raine: We are looking specifically at housing, although we understand it also needs the infrastructure of water and roads and telecommunications and power, but if you are going to wave a magic wand and spend the money very wisely, would you look at multifamily dwellings as an option or go to the traditional single family with multi- families in them?
Ms. Letemplier: Anything is an option. It depends on what people can afford. With the case study we're going to do, the company that's coming in, the community said to them not to come in and take all our resources. Don't come in and take all the homes because we don't have enough homes anyway.
This company is doing a good job. That's one of the case studies we're going to do. They build their own places and they invest. So the water and sewer is better in the community. There's a big area where the community can come for marriages or special events or community events. So they're investing in the community. If they're going to hire these people and pay them good money, their lives can get better. They can build their own homes or they can do a multi- home or what have you. There are lots of opportunities.
We want to profile the opportunity that any large resource project can give to the community and then the community can help and grow it themselves after that.
Senator Raine: Most of the projects that are on the planning board and under way, are they near communities or are they attached? Is there always a community nearby?
Ms. Letemplier: A lot of them are in communities. Some of them are outside, like Voisey's Bay or Rankin Inlet or the diamond mine, those are outside. They would just be fly in and fly out.
If they're in a community, they would have a direct and powerful impact on the community. Even since the mine came in we have a new hospital. That was part of the major resource project investing in the community and obviously then there are restaurants and hotels that have really bloomed since then.
Senator Raine: That's great. It is interesting. If you use this case study, then going forward the other companies would do the same thing, I would imagine.
Ms. Letemplier: That's one of the things we're hoping we're going to be able to influence.
The Deputy Chair: I would like to ask about your board's relationship with the federal government. Our committee ultimately seeks to provide thoughtful recommendations to the government. Under our rules, the government is required to make a response to our recommendations within a fixed period of time.
I'm wondering about the recommendations in your report, which would fit our challenges, I'm sure, that we will find in looking at housing in these regions. Did you present this report formally to the federal government? Was it discussed, may I ask, at the meeting that you described with the three federal ministers? Was that after your report had been released?
Ms. Letemplier: Yes, the report had already been released.
We didn't really go into the discussions. We said to the ministers that we want to know how we can help you. They were very humble. It was a fantastic meeting. They just said, "Keep up the good work, and do what you are doing. Keep the reports and recommendations coming." We feel strongly about that, because of the mandates — letters that are out there now — and the political will being there, we truly think we're going to be able to effect some changes.
The Deputy Chair: Yes, the new government has made it very clear, and we all wish them well. I know that developing an improved relationship between indigenous people in Canada and the federal government is a high priority, so I sense part of your optimism is that this will lead to some results.
Which minister is accountable for the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board?
Ms. Letemplier: Carolyn Bennett.
The Deputy Chair: That's the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs.
Thank you. I will move on.
Senator Moore: Earlier, you were talking about some numbers. You mentioned that $4.7 billion would be needed over the next 10 years for infrastructure. I think that's what you said.
The Deputy Chair: I think that was water and wastewater, Senator Moore.
Senator Moore: How was this figure developed? Was this a study done by your board?
Ms. Letemplier: This came from the board.
Senator Moore: When you met with the ministers, did they have these figures in front of them? You talked about the "core" earlier — sewer and water. I take it that's what this water and wastewater is. Did they have this figure in front of them and did you get any sense of commitment? Was this a solid number that they thought they could work with? Where is that? You talk about core stuff — we all need clean, potable water.
Ms. Letemplier: Providing the necessary support to address the 2011 National Assessment of First Nations Water and Wastewater Systems estimates that $4.7-billion worth of investment is needed over the next 10 years to meet current standards anticipated population growth.
That was a 2011 national assessment of First Nations water and wastewater systems. That was where I got this information from.
Senator Moore: When you met, did you get down in the weeds and start discussing some of these individual needs?
Ms. Letemplier: No, we never did, because we were lucky enough to have, I think, 45 minutes.
Senator Moore: Is there a further meeting planned with your board and Minister Bennett?
Ms. Letemplier: Yes, we will definitely be having other meetings. We came up with a recommendation that we thought it would be nice if we could have somebody from her office who would be at all of our meetings going forward.
Senator Moore: So you would have a liaison to come and keep your board in touch with the minister's office?
Ms. Letemplier: Yes.
Senator Moore: I want to know about getting the request before the minister. How do you see that happening? You don't want to go through a liaison; you want to look him in the eye yourself, don't you?
Ms. Letemplier: Yes, I feel confident that we will have a good relationship with the minister going forward.
The Deputy Chair: If I may, before opening it for second round, I was struck by your recommendation about the creation of a new mechanism to allow indigenous people who are not eligible for the First Nations Finance Authority to be able to access capital — an additional financing option for indigenous governments across the North. That's described on page 21 of your report.
Our committee has looked at the First Nations Finance Authority and had several formal and informal meetings with the First Nations Financial Management Board. As I read your report, it says that that mechanism, which we think has been quite successful, is not currently accessible to self-governing First Nations, and Inuit or Metis governments.
Do I understand correctly that your members feel that the First Nations model is a good one but that it doesn't go far enough, as it excludes significant First Nations and indigenous people, including all of the ones who have settled comprehensive claims in the regions that we're going to be studying, beginning with Nunatsiavut, Nunavik, Nunavut and the N.W.T.?
Do I understand that you feel this model works for the First Nations, so it should work for the remaining indigenous people?
Ms. Letemplier: The plan going forward is that we will try to use that as a model.
My strength is not with the First Nations. I came on the board a year and a half ago, and I went right into the northern infrastructure report. That is where most of my work has been involved. I am aware of and I support where I can with what I understand with the First Nations and the Metis, but I'm not the best person to answer questions about the First Nations and the Metis side.
I do my work the same as the rest of the board members, but there are other people on the board who can better address the issues with the First Nations.
Also, since I started with the board, I make sure that the board is aware that the Inuit need to be treated the same as the First Nations or the Metis. In my eyes, we're all considered the same. What is good for one is good for all of us.
The Deputy Chair: Seeing no further questions, we are drawing this meeting to a close, but I would like to say that we are all very impressed with this comprehensive report, which has some very solid recommendations on dealing with an issue that we're going to be faced fully with in our study. As you say, we'll be looking at the core needs, the overcrowding and the maintenance, but I'm sure we'll also be forced, as we were in our study on First Nation's housing on reserves, to look at the infrastructure deficit. This report is extremely valuable in addressing that question, and I can't tell you how timely it is for us and hopefully for the new government as well.
Senator Beyak: I noticed you mentioned that your business had fabricated most of the diesel tanks now in use.
Ms. Letemplier: That's mostly in the Nunatsiavut area.
Senator Beyak: Earlier you talked about clean, reliable energy supplies. There is clean diesel technology, but is that workable there? Is it windmills? Is it solar panels? Who have you been talking with about that and is it feasible?
Ms. Letemplier: We have discussed some of those opportunities going forth, because diesel is the old way. This is what we're hoping to get rid of, right? We have had presentations to the board and we have done some research. Definitely windmills are something we could look at. There are a lot of different options out there.
We're open to whatever we think will be an improvement for a lot of these communities. Whatever can work the best, for sure.
Senator Beyak: How do they bring the diesel in now?
Ms. Letemplier: They bring it in by ship and they pump it into the tanks.
Senator Beyak: Thank you, chair.
The Deputy Chair: With that, I would like to thank you again very much. Through your website I'm sure our committee will have a great fount of knowledge from which to draw as we complete our work.
We wish you well in having your recommendations attended to and implemented, because I think they are going to be very critical to making progress in this area we're focusing on of housing. With that, thank you very much.
Ms. Letemplier: Thank you.
(The committee adjourned.)