Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 6 - Minutes of Proceedings - May 28, 2014
OTTAWA, Wednesday, May 28, 2014
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 6:52 p.m. to study the challenges relating to First Nations infrastructure on reserves.
Senator Dennis Glen Patterson (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good evening. Welcome to all honourable senators and members of the public who are watching this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples either here in this room or via CPAC or the Web.
I am Dennis Patterson from Nunavut. Our mandate in this committee is to examine legislation and matters relating to the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada generally. This evening we are hearing testimony on a specific order of reference authorizing us to examine and report on the challenges and potential solutions relating to infrastructure on reserves, including housing, community infrastructure and innovative opportunities for financing and more effective collaborative strategies.
Today we will hear from the Siksika Housing Administration of Siksika First Nation, which is located in southern Alberta and has a population of 7,000 members. Approximately 4,000 live on reserve and slightly under 3,000 live off reserve.
Before proceeding to our witness from Siksika, I would like to go around the table and ask the members of the committee to introduce themselves, please.
Senator Moore: Good evening. Wilfred Moore from Nova Scotia.
Senator Sibbeston: I am Nick Sibbeston from the Northwest Territories.
Senator Watt: Charlie Watt from Nunavik.
Senator Tannas: Scott Tannas from High River, Alberta.
Senator Wallace: John Wallace from New Brunswick.
Senator Beyak: Lynn Beyak from Ontario.
Senator Runciman: Bob Runciman, Ontario, Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes.
Senator Ngo: Thanh Hai Ngo from Ontario.
Senator Meredith: Senator Don Meredith from Ontario.
The Chair: Members of the committee, I know you will help me welcome our witness from Siksika Housing Administration, Stewart Breaker, Service Area Manager.
Mr. Breaker, I understand you have a presentation. We look forward to that and undoubtedly senators will have questions. Please proceed.
Stewart Breaker, Service Area Manager, Siksika Housing Administration: I was born and raised on the Siksika Nation. I have been the housing manager since 2007. Before that, I worked in the power industry for TransAlta and for ENMAX within the City of Calgary limits.
When I started working for the tribe, they wanted a fluent Blackfoot speaker to assist with the elders, plus I had a background in construction. When I started working for them, I tried to make sense of all the projects and the financial situation they were in based on the National Housing Act of 1996. Over a course of 20 some odd years, some triumphs and some negative issues have come out of that act.
As you can see, the First Nation is roughly 50 miles long. On average, it is about 5 miles long; in some places it is a little longer. Thank God the reservation is only a third of what it used to be, but within that reservation there are 18 communities. As you said, there is a population of 7,000.
I think the majority of the people live on reserve because of the education and the number of children that are going to school. Some people live off reserve, but the main reason is probably economic because there is more work in the city of Calgary. We are getting a huge influx of those under the age of 30 now, so our waiting list is over 450 now.
I will speak now about the flood of June 2014, which will have an impact on us as well.
Presently, we have 929 units; 441 band-owned units. What I mean by "band owned" is that they were built with band resources. As I told some of the people I was talking to here before we started, that was from the 1910 surrender. From the National Housing Act, we accumulated 466 rental units.
We have 36 projects and 4 of them have been paid off. There are 39 on-reserve housing units — I will get further into that later — 29 band rental units which are also band resourced; and, again, the flood-damaged units. There are 80 of them. They are called "reds."
The Government of Alberta had a marking system. "Red" meant anything that was flooded over the electrical outlet in the basement; "black" meant anything that reached the subfloor. We have 46 that are called "black." They are the ones that will be torn down and replaced. Currently, we have 25 under construction. That is in the Section 95 program, but that has been going on since 2010.
I will give you some brief history about the nation. Initially we were part of Treaty 7, signed in 1877. We were given lands east of the Rocky Mountains to the Bassano Dam, roughly 180,000 acres. We were also given Timber Limit "C" which is under the land claims process. That was to provide us our housing.
In 1962, the nation formed an REA that brought us electricity. In 1966, they started building units with full basements that introduced forced air. In 1969, we had indoor plumbing; in the seventies, the Section 10 program started. I think for most First Nations, this was the only option they had. That was based on a loan program. My father had one of those units and is still living in there today.
In 1972, they formed the Blackfoot Housing Society as a non-profit society so they could borrow using the CMHC program. At that time there were only 14 units. That was based on a formula that was presented to INAC at the time. That worked for three years and then they no longer wanted to do the additional 60 houses, so they stopped that.
Going back to Section 10, the Home Ownership Program, that was pretty well successful. They paid their mortgages and everything was going good until there was a clause in the agreement where a quarter section was supposed to be part of that and then the council decided that they could not do that, the CPs. Initially, the elders of that time, whoever signed the treaty, wanted communal land. They didn't want to expropriate the land like the other tribes, which is still the practice today, so they paid out those mortgages. That upset some of the homeowners of the day, like my father. They turned that into band units. It is kind of confusing, but I will try to explain it as best as I can.
In 1983, they introduced the on-reserve program with Ministerial Loan Guarantees, MLGs. In 1985, the society utilized the Section 95 program. It was only meant for social housing. Because that was the only program available, those who were employed started to move into those units, which caused more problems later on. For example, there were external natural forces. They started having problems with flooding from the Bow River. That started in 2005. There have been traditional stories about flooding from that river as far back as 1928 and also in 1948, but not to the extent of last year.
In 2009, the nation utilized, for the first time for housing, the Siksika Community Trust from the land claim of 2001. That was from the Bassano settlement. In 2009, the Canada Economic Action Plan really helped, but we were only able to do 1 per cent of the older units that were built from the sixties. Finally, there was the June 21, 2013 flood where 200 homes were affected, resulting in about 800 becoming homeless.
Are there any questions before I move into the challenges?
The Chair: Did you want to talk about the challenges that you are facing? I would recommend that we hold the questions until then.
Mr. Breaker: Okay.
I want to go back to the Castle Mountain timber limits. I did not have enough time to prepare this brief. There was a bit of miscommunication between our leadership and myself in trying to get the information from land claims because it is still under negotiation. This is basically general information.
The idea back in 1910 was to utilize the addendum, Timber Limit "C", for the housing to replace the teepees and to combat TB and whooping cough. They wanted to build log homes but had issues trying to get the logs from Castle Mountain, which is about 60 miles west of Calgary, because members of the nation had to have permit systems to leave the reservation. You could only leave for 72 hours, so they had a harder time trying to follow the logs. After 72 hours, the permit ran out so they had to go and get it reissued from the RCMP. It was difficult to do that because they had to identify who was who and also the landowners would not allow the nation members to go to the river because they owned the land. A lot of the logs were taken by the settlers.
I am estimating, but only about 20 log homes were built around 1922. That could have really helped eliminate some of the shortfalls we had. We are still trying to negotiate with Parks Canada and the province and Canada on Castle Mountain. That is one thing on our wish list.
In the sixties, homes were built with our funding as best we could, but there were no building codes. There were no inspections, so some of these units are still in our inventory. We are trying to outsource them as best we can by utilizing SAIT, the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology, for skills development in carpentry and plumbing. The initial homes at that time were not constructed properly. That caused the nation to have more overcrowding and all the usual maladies of First Nations just like back home.
I apologize because you wanted to reference some of the information from the RCAP and from the sociology studies done for First Nations and Aboriginals in Canada and across North America, but about 52 per cent require major repairs. It is still like that. We are trying as best as we can to try to improve that situation.
A lot of times there is insufficient revenue from band capital. We have expensed a lot from the 1980s, when we had oil and gas. We estimate that we have used around $200 million for the gaps from infrastructure, housing, social and health developments. Utilities and shelter allowance have always been an issue for us. General capacity development for nation members is another area of concern.
We have tried to do planning, but it is always based on funding. We are planning on a crisis management process. That is what I have experienced in my work for the tribe. Looking around the other First Nations in Alberta, that is usually the problem. You get funding on a quarterly basis, so it is difficult to construct in the winter. By the time you get all your funding, it is winter.
Changes in the government social development have also impacted the operations, especially on social assistance. Initially, Section 95 was utilized for social housing, but, again, there's a discrepancy on reserve and off reserve for rents. We feel it's kind of discriminatory. I think something needs to be done, but I'll get to that a little later.
There's minimum resale value on homes that are on First Nations' land. They have indicated that it is zero value, based on the new market-based housing initiative. I don't know how they expect us to utilize that program when they have that. That's AANDC's position. We'll have to try to figure out a way to provide some value to these units so people can borrow for that market-based housing.
You can plan all you want, but if the Public Works department is not funded properly for the infrastructure, then there's no point; you're wasting your time and dollars. Dollars can be clawed back if you don't have that infrastructure.
They used to have good planning with service lots, but funding is always an issue. The First Nations have noticed that trying to get mortgages for these projects is getting a lot more difficult, based on security, because of the position that most First Nations are in, using Section 95. Currently, we have a $17 million deficit for these projects. It used to be $26 million when I got in there in 2007. We've made some progress, but it's awfully tough to reapply. The only option we have is Section 95. We've stopped utilizing it because we're getting into a deficit with a replacement reserve in the operating agreements. In fact, we had to utilize the community trust to supplement that. That's in the audit management letter. I don't know how the other First Nations are doing it, but we're pretty close to being in a financial situation here. I think we have our head above water so far.
Regarding Ministerial Loan Guarantees, we're trying to move away from them as much as we can, but when each renewal comes up, we're back into them again. I guess that's the way it was designed through the National Housing Act.
There are other problems in relation to law enforcement. The RCMP cannot lay charges for vandalism or arson because of the jurisdictional issue. We have a provincial court and a provincial judge, but the charges are federal, so a lot of the charges are thrown out. We can't get restitution. We have about 40 units that are boarded up due to arson and vandalism. We have to utilize our own sources to get those at least to a point where we can overcome the insurance deductible. A lot of times we can't afford it, so those homes sit there for two years. Meanwhile, you're losing rent revenue and paying insurance for a unit that nobody is living in.
We have some strategies that we're trying to utilize, but if law enforcement is not there, then you're spinning your wheels.
Population growth is causing us some concern. I'm working with my younger brother. He's the CEO for the Siksika Family Services. We've tried to do some creative things. We applied for some provincial funding for affordable housing. We received $6.1 million. We started SORAH, Siksika Off-Reserve Affordable Housing, two and a half years ago. We have 40 doors or four apartment blocks in the city of Calgary. We'd like to capitalize on that if we want to proceed down the affordable housing path because changes are coming in social development. By 2017, the social development regime will be downsizing their assistance to anybody under age 30. That's why the push is on for capacity development. But if there are no jobs on reserve, then they have to move off reserve. That's why we're preparing as best we can. Believe it or not, the flood might be our saviour to address the housing shortfall that we have.
Subsidies have been a problem for us since 1994. I tried to give you the information as best I could, but it was kind of short notice. I got notice on Thursday when I was in Hawaii, so I tried to get the staff to get the information for you for pre-1997. There's pre-1997 and post-1997. So there are different formulas for the operating agreements. It's very confusing, but we try to keep up with it as best we can.
The income verification forms that are required for rent geared toward income are difficult to get from family services, even though we have a close relationship with them. It's a lot of work, and caseworkers have to be very vigilant to get this information for us.
Freedom of information is a problem for us. Again, it's a jurisdictional issue between the province and the federal level, even with the service areas.
The maintenance plan for all the infrastructure is a huge problem. We have roughly 500 kilometres of roads and those have been failing us. It is the same with the buildings, water and waste water facilities. The recent flood was where our water plants are located, down by the river. The engineers of the 1970s and 1980s didn't think there would ever be a flood. That's what we're trying to contend with. If we need to move them up the hill, we have to move the communities. That's all there is to it. I believe we have five communities that are in the river bottom.
Finally, when they introduced the National Housing Act, there was lack of consultation. I did research on some of the elders that used to be on the housing. Some were in leadership, but they didn't know too much about Section 95. All they knew is that they could borrow, kind of like Section 10, and there would be no problem. But they didn't see how they got the formulas for the income verifications and the shelter allowance. All of those have been pushed to the side, so every year that's a deficit to the tribe to keep that afloat. I think it's all based on inadequate community planning. I've based my presentation on this. Basically, those are a few of the solutions.
It's only housing. You need to hear from social development, education, health and the Justice Department. I don't know if this committee will do that. With the short amount of time that I had, I tried to let the clerk know that I didn't have time to do any footnotes and that I wanted to do a proper briefing to include the other service areas in this presentation. I apologize for that.
One of the solutions is to "rebase" the federal transfer agreement. It's only based on a 2 per cent annual adjustment. I get different numbers and dates. We're saying it's around 2000, but I think it goes back to 1996. I'd like to renegotiate the shelter allowance funding formula for on-reserve social assistance clients. From 1996, the government will not consider equitable market-based rent. It's discriminatory. On reserve, it's $300; off reserve, I believe it's $1,100.
The Siksika Nation can create our own lending institute to provide loans and mortgages. I think we will have to experiment with market-based loans. There is no Ministerial Loan Guarantee with it, so there's some relief there. I, for one, will not sign off on any more allocations from CMHC other than RRAP, the Residential Rehabilitation Adaptation Program; HASI, for the handicapped; and the training that they provide. We may consider partnership with Habitat For Humanity on an equity program. That's what we're trying to do with social development.
We didn't know if we should mention this, but we're also delving into having partnership with the Siksika Children's Services, where we're offering group homes. We've offered one under the Henry Three Suns group home initiative. We want to see how that's going to help out, one, to get our children back; and, two, to address the overcrowding that children have on our nation. There is overcrowding, and I can't address that with the low amount of houses that we have.
Also, I mentioned SORAH. That might be another alternative for us if we can access capital monies for construction periods starting from April until October and not on a quarterly basis, because it does not work.
Other than that, ladies and gentlemen, that's all I have.
The Chair: I'd like to thank you very much, Mr. Breaker, for putting this together on short notice. I think you've given us a tremendous amount of information about the amazing history of the Siksika Nation and the challenges that you faced. I also appreciate your giving some thought to solutions.
Senator Tannas lives in your area, generally, so maybe we'll offer him the first opportunity for questions.
Senator Tannas: Thank you, Mr. Breaker.
You mentioned roads. When I need to go either to Brooks or to Medicine Hat, I go to Milo and then I cut through One Gun Trail. Isn't that what it's called?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Tannas: It goes right through the reserve, so I know your reserve. I was interested to hear you mention the boarded-up houses. As you come into Cluny, a number of them in that community seem to be boarded up and have been for some time.
I wanted to ask a couple of questions and get your thoughts and observations. You mentioned the treaty right for housing and that that is an outlook held by lots of Siksika members. Can you tell me how that plays out with the rents? You have roughly a thousand houses. How many of those would you say are paying rent?
Mr. Breaker: Currently, about 30 per cent are paying rent; another 30 per cent are in wage garnishee. Those are the employed. It's kind of like pulling teeth.
I was pretty surprised when I first got there that the nation did pay rent. I think there's a low percentage in Alberta — I don't know about Saskatchewan and Manitoba and B.C. They know they have to pay rent. Castle Mountain and the treaty right to housing was the connection. Leaderships in the past have stated that if we would have had the resources back then, we wouldn't have had to worry about housing. However, it's still on the table. We have mortgages that we have to pay.
The nation has always been good, from the treaty. They've always had the responsibility that was under Crowfoot and Chief Old Sun, to pay your dues as per treaties.
Senator Tannas: It would be about 60 per cent?
Mr. Breaker: I would say so, yes.
Senator Tannas: Fair enough.
You may not know this, but what do you think the employment rate would be for people on reserve, approximately?
Mr. Breaker: The employment rate — again, our data isn't very good — is roughly 60 per cent. That's one thing I forgot to add: We do not have a database. We've tried and tried. I think the most successful one we have is Health Canada's, the health department, because they're funded.
We're finally getting a mapping system, believe it or not. We've been using a paint — what do you call it? That was back in the 1970s.
Senator Tannas: My other question was around CPs. You mentioned this was a conscious decision of the community, of the leadership, to say we're not going to go that route.
The Chair: That is Certificate of possession.
Senator Tannas: Right. There is the replication of individual home ownership and the right to that, which then allows for market-based housing because you have something to sell; you actually have some right to some property.
Given a healthy chunk of people who are working and earning a wage and may want to build their own place, do you get any sense that there is a potential for that to be revisited in your communities any time soon?
Mr. Breaker: I would say the sooner the better for home ownership because that is how I moved to the reserve. I mortgaged mine. I built mine, just like my family. Again, we farm in my family. We have farmed since the twenties.
Going back to the issue about owning land, when I said that about our traditional leaders, the land wasn't to be owned; it was to be used, that is, shared. That is part of the reason for treaties, namely to share resources.
I think the concept of allotting, just for the house, would be okay as long as there are no defaults on mortgages. You will see some defaults — that is just the way it is — or marriage breakups, or whatever social issues that will come up, but I think the majority are ready for home ownership. I think that is the plan, but, again, we need funding to do this properly. We are planning in seclusion sometimes.
By the way, I used to work in High River.
Senator Tannas: We will catch up after.
Senator Watt: I have a supplementary to the question that was raised. In your presentation you indicated that "the minimal resale value can be," and with respect to nation members owning houses that, "There is little desire for nation members to purchase their own houses." That is what is in the written text that you provided to us. Could you explain if that is the case? When you were just being questioned, you indicated the sooner the better and that there seems to be a chance of moving in that direction. I want to have clarification on the fact that you said in your brief that there is very little interest from the members to own their own houses. Why is that?
Mr. Breaker: There is a split, I guess. The older members hold that treaty right to housing. Those under age 40 want to have something to own rather than just having handouts. The environment is changing.
Senator Watt: Do you think it will change in due time?
Mr. Breaker: I would say so, as long as there is proper planning. You can't expect a community to change by bits and pieces, with handouts and with training here or there but no end product. Why are they being trained? If there are no jobs, if there is no economic development on the First Nation, you are asking for failure.
Senator Watt: But you also stated, "if there is a substantial amount of capital available." Depending on that, where would that money come from? Would it be from the private trust fund that you have which is connected to the 1910 surrender issue?
Mr. Breaker: Yes; that is one. There are a couple of land claims on the books. We are banking on that market-based housing initiative. It is ready to go; the policy is done. I believe we need a referendum for that land tenure. It was per lot. I believe that is how we will do it.
Senator Watt: Depending on the location and the actual cost of a unit, mortgaging can be difficult to deal with. On top of that, you have to think of the insurance and the municipal taxes that you have to pay. I am a little worried about whether there are enough revenues being generated within that community to be able to handle it and carry it forward. I guess that is one of your concerns?
Mr. Breaker: Yes. I am very concerned because, again, it boils down to planning; that is, financially, can we utilize that fund?
Senator Watt: What about the mixture of funds, that is, private funds and using that as a way to leverage the funds from the government?
Mr. Breaker: We did that with SORAH.
Senator Watt: What happened?
Mr. Breaker: We got approved. We gave a down payment, I believe it was 15 per cent, from our treasury department, and we got approved for $4.5 million.
Senator Watt: And it worked well?
Mr. Breaker: It worked, yes.
Senator Watt: What happens when that expires?
Mr. Breaker: Again, we are in the planning stage. My younger brother is the CEO and I am the vice-chair. We will apply again to municipal affairs because I think they will see it as a success story. That is an option for us.
Senator Watt: You said municipal affairs?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Watt: You are talking about provincial municipal affairs?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Watt: So you are already dealing with the municipality, the provincial government, then?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Watt: There you are. Thank you.
Senator Meredith: Mr. Breaker, I have listened to your presentation, and on page 4 you talked about the nation's socio-economic conditions and education levels lower than the national level average; an average income lower than the national average; higher social assistance dependency; high unemployment rate; high crime and vandalism; and limited resources and infrastructure in place due to the nation's remote location.
What is life like now for these individuals and for the over 2,600 young people who are living on this reserve that are under 17? Describe for us what life is like for them.
Mr. Breaker: I guess it depends on each community. It depends on their support system, but the ones that cause us problems are the ones that do not really have much to do or they are dropouts. Again, there is the lack of training dollars for these young people to get some kind of trade. They could leave the reservation, but it is difficult for them. Where will they live when social development only gives so much? A lot of them will try to get jobs in the city. They will carpool. With the employment and training, we tried busing them. That was about four years ago. That worked for a little while, but there were social pressures for the parents to stay home because either they were single parents or young couples.
It is difficult, especially if they have not had the life-skill background. They go right from high school and graduate. Then they are in a situation where they are young parents. They are in an overcrowded situation, living with their parents in a basement. I have some houses where there are 16 in a unit.
Senator Watt: Sixteen?
Senator Meredith: There are 16 individuals living in one house?
Mr. Breaker: In a 1,100-square-foot house, yes. The national occupancy rate is eight. That is the norm that it is based on.
Again, I apologize. I should have made reference to some of these numbers for you. I can do that. I'll fix it up.
It is a difficult situation for them. Addiction is rampant. Again, I don't have Health Canada stats. I know they fund them for addictions. There was an initiative from the federal government, Gathering Strength. I don't know what it all entails. I tried to access funding for it to expand some of these units so they won't be so overcrowded. We have done our best to extend some of these houses, but, again, there are still social issues.
Senator Meredith: With 16 individuals living in one house?
Mr. Breaker: There would be sometimes four couples and their children.
Senator Meredith: For this time that we are living in here in Canada, for the 21st century, it is unconscionable that we should have these kinds of conditions, but they do exist. You are doing the best you can with the little resources that you do have.
You talked about 800 that are homeless currently. Who is housing those after the 2013 flood?
Mr. Breaker: We have three emergency relief shelters housed by ATCO. The province of Alberta paid for that. That was from the $83 million; you must have read about that. Near the administration, there are close to 100. There are some in Crowfoot, by the Crowfoot School that Senator Tannas was talking about, that road, and there is another one, the Poor Eagle site, where there are 60. There are some still in hotels, but there are not that many. I would say there are maybe 12 families. I believe there are two living in the city of Calgary.
Senator Meredith: Is the province paying for that housing?
Mr. Breaker: Yes. I don't know, but I imagine AANDC will be paying back the province.
Senator Meredith: You talked about Section 95 and the rentals. You mentioned something with respect to off reserve it is 1100; on reserve is 300; you've got 600 there and 600 a month here. What is your strategy to see this change so that you can have more rental income on reserve? Have chief and council discussed a strategy that would work with Aboriginal Affairs to see this particular policy changed so that you can get out of this crisis that you're in?
Mr. Breaker: We have put it in our policies, but it's how strong your leadership is. Previous senior managers have tried to increase the rent, but I think it's out of necessity now. Previous audits, management letters have indicated that. I guess we will know by September if our rent increase requests will be a reality. It will be in increments.
We have a debt recovery strategy. AANDC or CMHC don't really care how you do it, just do it. They don't really provide strategy. They just say, "You need to increase the rent." Yes, but you got us into this situation. You should have explained this to us back in 1996, when we signed the Ministerial Loan Guarantees, that this could be the result if you don't increase these rents.
You also have the shelter allowance. We are also trying to limit the socially assisted clients from moving in because of the variances caused by the formulas that haven't been renegotiated since 1996.
Senator Meredith: That creates another problem. Where do they go?
Mr. Breaker: Back into the overcrowded houses.
The flood might help us because we have to replace some of these units. I believe it is close to 174 units. That might provide some relief. The province has offered us the Slave Lake trailers from the Slave Lake fire. AANDC has given us some funding to buy those units. However, that causes another problem: We don't want trailers. They are high maintenance. It took me three years to get rid of the trailers. They are very high maintenance and utility-wise they don't conform to building codes because we have our own Siksika building code. We developed one through section 9 of the National Building Code. We try to follow it as best we can, but if we have to take those units, well, we have no choice.
Senator Meredith: Mr. Breaker, talk to me about the resources that you do have. You talked about partnerships, a group home, because you want to get your children back. Obviously, and I am assuming, they have moved into the city or somehow the province has stepped in and these children are taken out of the community and you want to provide for them to get back on to the reserve.
Talk to me about the resources that you do have, that you could attract; for example, Canadian firms that could come to your reserve and work with you in a P3 scenario to create economic development so you can have the capital that you need to build further homes and take care of your infrastructure.
Mr. Breaker: These are just initial discussions that my brother and I are batting around. It was just by accident that we offered children services one of the units. One of the clients, as part of the agreement with Alberta child welfare, had to have a home in order to get the children back. She didn't qualify.
One thing we've done, we've had basic home maintenance training and we do it ourselves through CMHC. We have 450 that have taken it. She didn't know about it. She was living in the city. We got her into that unit, into one of the rental units, and it just so happened that child welfare on reserve had this program under the late Henry Three Suns, who was the past CEO for the Siksika family services. That is working out well.
We're just waiting on the next phase on the child welfare and what direction they will go in, because the push is for Aboriginal children to go back to their reserves.
I would like to see more of that. I would like to provide them with homes. They can't because they're a non-profit. We're trying to figure out a way to joint venture with some entity, whether it is construction companies or whoever. ATCO is one. They've talked to us before.
Again, it has to be leadership that approves this. We can design it any way we can, but at the end of the day it has to be the shareholders, who are the chief and council, that will approve it. But there is an option.
We have so many young couples who are trying to start out, but they are also running into this problem. Where will they get the collateral, as I was talking about? It is difficult for them. There is no economic development on our reservation. How will they pay the mortgages? There is one option, sweat equity, or we could work with child welfare on the placement of children.
The Chair: In that connection, Mr. Breaker, you were explaining that there is a problem with social assistance programs. There are different rents and different sources of income available to you for income support people on and off reserve, and you think it is a discriminatory regime. Could you just outline that again and how you would recommend that it should be operating, please?
Mr. Breaker: With that issue, I believe the underlying problem is the addition of utilities. In the legislation under social development, the original formula did not have utilities. It was before my time that they put that in there.
The Chair: This is which legislation, please?
Mr. Breaker: The social development in Alberta.
The Chair: Provincial legislation?
Mr. Breaker: Yes. I don't really know the history of when feds offloaded to the province on social development. You will have to research that, but I know we did a formula based on just the rent, not the utilities. This must have been enforced probably in 2000 sometime. Looking at the original formula, it didn't have it. Somewhere in there, that is where the gap started. We have been trying to stay above water with the rent, but we can't do it. Now they're imposing the utilities. I don't know how that will work. I think there needs to be another discussion with the province and the feds.
I know it is a roundabout answer.
The Chair: No, that's helpful.
Senator Moore: Thank you, Mr. Breaker, for being here. I want to go back to the beginning.
In Treaty 7, 1877, you were given parcels of 350,000 acres of land within the Blackfoot Confederacy, plus Timber Limit "C," totaling another 26 square miles. Is it 26 square miles, the 350,000 acres plus the timber lot, or are those two separate parcels?
Mr. Breaker: The reserve, the picture of it, is only a third of what it was.
Senator Moore: Yes; I want to get to that.
Mr. Breaker: The 26 square miles is not part of that. That was just an addendum after the treaty, after 1877.
Senator Moore: What you see on this map that you handed out is one third of the 350,000 acres that you initially got, right?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Moore: What happened to the other two thirds, and how did you end up on flood lands?
Mr. Breaker: Do you see the CPR line with the dotted line? That was only supposed to be temporary.
Senator Moore: The railway, yes.
Mr. Breaker: That is not the original line. There is a line higher than that, but that was how they got the feds and CPR to split the reservation. It used to be further up. In the original surveys, it is north of that. It is about equal size. The southern part was the 1910 illegal surrender.
Senator Moore: So one third was to the north of this map that you have handed out, but that was cut off by the railway.
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Moore: But you don't need the whole thing for the railway anyway. That is what they did?
Mr. Breaker: Yes, and the settlers came.
Senator Moore: And the southern one third was, you consider, an illegal settlement?
Mr. Breaker: Yes. That is what is in land claims now.
Senator Moore: And that has been there since when?
Mr. Breaker: Since 1877.
Senator Moore: You have been trying to settle this since 1877?
Mr. Breaker: It was sold in 1910, the southern part.
Senator Moore: Sold?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Moore: To whom?
Mr. Breaker: To Canada, I guess, to the settlers.
Senator Moore: How does that happen?
Mr. Breaker: Illegally. They utilized children. You have to remember that an X is the signature. All they had to do was put their hand on the pen. That is how they signed most of these treaties. It is an X, or it is supposed to be.
Senator Moore: Yes. I understand that, Mr. Breaker.
So the one third that you are left with, the middle one third, if I could call it that, is the flood land part?
Mr. Breaker: Yes. If you look on the far right, at the edge, that is Bassano Dam. That was the lowest point.
Senator Moore: And you say that you think you have to move from there.
So in 1910 you got this timber limit. You said here — and I didn't understand this — that the government imposed a permit system to nation members leaving the reservation for 72 hours. What is that? Who imposed that? What do you mean they could only leave for 72 hours?
Mr. Breaker: There was an act by Scott — what was his name? He was the Indian Affairs minister back then. They couldn't leave reservations. You had to get a permit. I believe that was stopped in 1948, that you had to get a permit to leave the reservation.
Senator Moore: How far were the reservation lands from this Castle Mountain, where we want to access timber?
Mr. Breaker: From Calgary, which is 45 minutes west of this reserve, go another 45 minutes to Banff. That is where Castle Mountain is.
Senator Moore: So the men who wanted to harvest logs had to get out there and back in 72 hours?
Mr. Breaker: They couldn't do it. It is impossible.
Senator Moore: It is impossible. How can that possibly be documented? It is impossible. That is inhuman. I don't understand this.
Mr. Breaker: It is all in the land claim documents. You will have to be patient with us until we get those confirmed and into the dockets.
Senator Moore: From 1910 and 1877, you are still trying to get things settled? Do you meet regularly? How do you do this? What's the process?
Mr. Breaker: Well, there's a land claims process that has been going on since — we filed in 1960 for three major ones: the Bassano, Castle and the Acreage Discrepancy. There are other smaller ones as well, about 8 of them. Altogether, there are about 11, I believe. Those have been going on since 1960. We have one that settled, and that was the Bassano settlement.
I was talking to you folks at supper. Hopefully there might be another process to share resources or something. We have to find another solution.
Senator Moore: I wanted to follow up on the question from Senator Tannas. You have a little over 900 units and 60 per cent are rental. Are they all at $600 each per month?
Mr. Breaker: No. I think it's $430 for the social assisted clients and $307 for the employed. Those are the ones we want to raise the rent for, up to $600, but that will be gradual. I believe we have it over three years.
Senator Moore: You're currently bringing in at least $2 million per year from rentals?
Senator Watt: From the social welfare or from —
Senator Moore: I'm looking at the numbers here and multiplying it out. You mentioned the community trust and having to use some of it. Is oil and gas development the source of that trust?
Mr. Breaker: No. That was the Bassano settlement land claim.
Senator Moore: What other sources of revenue does the Siksika Nation have?
Mr. Breaker: We've expended it on those gaps I was telling you about.
Senator Moore: So there are no resources within your lands that are —
Mr. Breaker: We have agriculture leases, which probably comprise — I don't have the figures, but I'm pretty sure it's close to 10 per cent of the total revenue. We have cattle, but, again, oil and gas has dried up. We have some capped wells. There are some formations further down, but they don't want to go there yet, unless these land claim settlements don't come soon.
Senator Moore: You said earlier that addiction is rampant. I believe those were your words. Tell us about that. What's being done or what can be done? Are there any situations that involve suicide, people depressed with their lot in life, the social side of this?
Mr. Breaker: I'm not an expert on the stats on that. Again, I'm imploring the Senate to get those answers from the health department.
What I can say is that we've gone to hell and back with the residential schools. I went through it. I went through difficult times, even though I left the reserve in 1974 and came back in 2007. The ones who remained, they all went through alcoholism, marriage breakups, you name it. But it's no different than non-Native. I worked outside, too. I tried to keep up with my colleagues in the trade that I was in.
The children end up suffering. It's sad, especially at my end. I have to deal with the social issues, the overcrowding, the calls and unnecessary issues. It's there, and it makes my job difficult. I'm at that age where I'm not as cold-hearted as I was when I first started. Everything was "no, no, no." Now it's, "Okay, let's see what we can do."
Senator Moore: It sounds like you're doing a lot more than housing, Mr. Breaker.
Mr. Breaker: I'm a marriage counsellor, you name it, addictions counsellor. I do the best I can.
One of the reasons I came back to the reservation is part of the cultural repatriation; I take care of one of the medicine pipe bundles. I never knew I'd be doing that, but my wife and I are the caretakers.
Senator Moore: Wonderful. Thank you.
Senator Meredith: I have a brief supplementary question on the land claims agreement. What's causing this protracted time of settlement? What are the challenges around that?
Mr. Breaker: The challenge is getting a decision from the federal negotiator.
The Chair: Is that for a specific claim, Mr. Breaker?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
The Chair: So it's in that specific claims basket?
Mr. Breaker: Yes. I believe there's one at the $150 million mark. Anything over that, it's a lot more difficult now to settle those claims. The ones below $150 million are a little easier, but again, we're dealing with Alberta and also the federal negotiators. You would have to speak to the land claims commission on those matters.
Senator Wallace: Mr. Breaker, you've graphically described the issues you're dealing with. We've heard a lot of those from other presenters before us.
To come at this from a different level, there are definite issues that have to be resolved, serious, long-standing issues. With our committee, at the end of the day, we will want to make recommendations to meaningfully move forward some progress for First Nations housing.
You've described some of the issues you have with particular federal government programs that relate to housing and some of the difficulties you've had with that. There's always the issue of funding; it seems there's never enough funding.
At the end of it, to try to bring this together in some meaningful way, how does the Siksika First Nation group deal with the federal government to bring forward the concerns you have with programs? Do you do that? Does Siksika do that on behalf of that First Nations group? Do you work collectively with a larger group, such as the AFN?
To me, it seems like a starting point. There are all of these individual issues. It seems as if some programs, if not all of them, will have to be changed in some minor and fundamental way at the end of it, but how does that happen on your end? How is your input provided into that? How has it been? How do you convey your concerns, and what kind of responses do you get to those concerns?
Mr. Breaker: Easy, senator. I think sometimes the only action you'll get is when you're in crisis mode. Before this flood, the only interaction we usually have has always been reports. They call them five-year reports. But it's pretty vague. It doesn't really provide any planning. It's just: What did you do with the FTA money?
In housing we get $1.3 million a year. Well, three quarters of it goes to the shelter allowance. On the rest of it there's not much to report, other than we did a little repair here, based on your definition of health and safety.
Who defines health and safety? Is it us or is it AANDC? They don't come out to these homes that have 16 in a unit.
We have to go back to the drawing board and find exactly what are the needs and assessments. I think they did some assessments prior to 1996, but those are kind of forgotten — building codes, that kind of stuff, infrastructure and waste water. It always comes back to crisis management. I guess it boils down to: Let's plan properly.
You always hear the horror stories about other First Nations. They get the attention and some are doing okay, but we still need the planning. We need professional planners.
I'm not an architect, but most of us use common sense. Some of us take property management, but it's difficult to property manage if you have a leadership above you that are afraid to make decisions, like increase the rent, to say no. It's all about how you plan and implement.
There's too much planning and not enough implementation. That's what I see. We have thousands of pages of planning. I'm sick of planning. It's not realistic. That's in AANDC. Now they're starting to realize, because of the negative audit of CMHC, that there is something wrong. The director, Dan Gaspé, he's coming out to inspect some of the units. I wrote a letter for the chief, so hopefully he comes out. I don't know to show him some of these houses. These are the houses that we've been mortgaging for the last 20 years. I want to give them out as part of the home ownership. Would you live in one of them?
There's no O&M. If you don't have rent coming in, there's no replacement reserve. You have to use band resources to supplement that.
Then you have what you were talking about: Do I really want to be a homeowner of this unit? No, I don't want to be. Who will take care of it? Thank God we have some of this training, like basic home maintenance. I've sent my staff to present these. It's an incredible initiative for First Nations. I think we're one of the only ones that have more than 450 who have taken it.
I hope that answers your question.
Senator Wallace: That's probably about as well as you can do with it tonight. Thank you.
Senator Runciman: I may be misreading this, but in your handout, you mention that under the Siksika dwellings there are 25 CMHC Section 95 units still under construction, since 2010. Can you elaborate on that? Have 25 houses been under construction for four years?
Mr. Breaker: Yes. Let me go back.
We applied for them in 2009. I think it's 15 per cent down. That's how Section 95 works. You apply. They call them 310s. There is income verification. We tried to split them between SA clients and employed, but at that time we were given a pretty negative audit from Meyers Norris Penny, so the decision was to stop accepting any more allocations from CMHC. If you remember, I told you about funding only coming in phases. In the Section 95 program, if you understand it, there are seven phases of construction. You don't get the funding; you need your band capital to start it. That doesn't come until probably September, so you're behind four months.
You have to buy power. You'll buy it, yes, but it will take you a year for them to start putting in the power lines. Once you get the excavating done and the concrete, that's phase 1. You have to do all of them at the same time, get the CMHC inspector to come out, and they'll sign off on it and send it to CMHC. It will take four to six weeks to get the next funding for the next phase, which is the shell. That keeps going.
What has been happening from 1994 was the nation was applying for the project so they can pay the last phase, because they've been running into cost overruns because of what I was talking about, vandalism, arson and all these other costs to finish the project. You're already behind in collecting rent. Cost of insurance for construction is three times the regular mortgage insurance. When the council of the day applied it didn't realize this is what could happen.
Now you have project 35. You're having a hard time trying to finish the last phase. You're trying to utilize the first part of project 36 to pay for the last phase. You don't have any more. You have 37; they're pushing you to accept it. I said, "No, I'm not taking anymore because we have to do a financial recovery plan." That's what the leadership wants. Treasury Board wants it.
So here you are, middle of winter, and you're only on phase 2. You have the shell up. You have vandalism and arson occurring, so how are you going to get all these units done at the same time? That's why it has taken four years.
The Chair: They weren't charged because it's federal jurisdiction?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Runciman: That's the other question I had. I have a hard time understanding that particular issue. What you're saying is it's essentially a lawless community, unless there's Aboriginal policing. I don't understand the jurisdictional issue. If someone is committing a crime, the RCMP has the responsibility to police the reserve. I don't understand why you're suggesting there's a hands-off approach to issues like vandalism and arson. That's mind-boggling.
Mr. Breaker: Yes, there's no follow-up.
Senator Runciman: Are you complaining? There's a police complaints commission. The RCMP has a police complaints commission. Why isn't your reserve leadership complaining to the complaints board?
Mr. Breaker: We did. In 2003, when I was on council — I was the only one on the commission — they took away the policing from us because of an audit that they failed. So we tried to get that back. One of the things we wanted was an independent appeal — but they wouldn't go for it — to address the abuse committed by the constable, because it is a training ground across the tracks.
Since the time I've been there, we've had roughly a dozen arson and about 16 vandalism cases. There's only one time when the culprits were apprehended. We tried to get restitution with some minors. There were 20 of them.
Senator Runciman: I don't know why anyone would want to live there, in fear of your life, I would think.
Mr. Breaker: It's difficult. You have those subdivisions. It's awfully tough for clients to accept them, because now you have gangs. I didn't even mention the gangs.
Senator Watt: When you say "gangs," you're talking about gangs being developed inside or coming in from the outside to inside?
Mr. Breaker: Usually from the outside coming in.
Senator Watt: That's a big one.
Mr. Breaker: It's not as bad as some of the other First Nations. These are junior gangs. But still, they cause problems. They just burnt our transfer site three weeks ago for the second time in three years. No charges. So where do we dump our garbage? We only have one garbage truck.
That's the other issue: infrastructure. My cousin, Keon Doore, has his issues, because he has limited resources to maintain equipment. This winter was pretty harsh. Volker Stevin, who was working on the flooded sites — they call them new temporary neighbourhoods — assisted us with the road clearing. It has been difficult.
Senator Meredith: Mr. Breaker, did I hear you say that the RCMP doesn't investigate when there's criminal activity on your reserve?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Senator Meredith: They do not? When you call them, they don't come?
Mr. Breaker: No, only if there's drinking or alcohol involved, impaired driving — they will go out of their way — or speeding. That's about the only thing. That's the only input.
A few years ago there was a constable who was very good. I believe he was Asian. He was excellent. But after he left, it all went downhill. There's not much input from them, so we're kind of on our own. We have a construction site that has been broken into six times in four years.
The only time they caught somebody was when Clark Builders were there as part of the flood recovery. Their units got spray-painted. Then there were some charges. So it's kind of discriminatory. We managed to get the culprit. But again, it affects our premium.
That's the other thing I didn't talk about. The premium now for insurance has risen 40 per cent since I got there. It's at $30,000 now, deductible. How will you pay the deductible? Through band resources. That's why those houses are boarded up. It just eats at us. It's difficult.
Senator Watt: We're getting a lot of information that makes us wonder what is really going on. At times it's hard to take, when you hear things like that, especially coming from a person like him, the way he's spelling it out as he does. We do appreciate that.
You mentioned earlier on that you are negotiating. One of the possible avenues to take into consideration — your people, yourself and your leaders, I guess — is to try to get a meaningful table set between the provincial and federal governments, if you are already involved in negotiations.
What can this committee do, when we make recommendations in the field of negotiations? Can we make some point in the area that they might be able to resolve this crisis that you're going through? The only way you'd be able to find a solution to get to the bottom of it, once and for all, is to get the provincial government involved in tripartite negotiations. Would that be acceptable to your people?
Mr. Breaker: Yes, for me, but maybe not for the leaders.
Senator Watt: Would it be possible for you to take that back to your people and say: Would you mind if the senators who are reviewing and examining this, what's happening to us — and put some weight on the federal government, and also on the provincial government, to get it done, with a timetable?
Mr. Breaker: For sure.
Senator Watt: If you sit down and try to negotiate without a timetable, you will get nowhere; you will negotiate forever. So you have to have some kind of timetable, no matter what you're dealing with. The hydro is involved. I think you've been chipped out on that one. You should get some benefit out of that. You're being affected by the flood and things of that nature.
You have good cases that you can bring forward, if the will is there. I think the committee can try to help as much as possible in this field to try to reactivate the federal and provincial government in this area. Maybe that's what we should be looking at. That's what I went through on the Quebec side, as you know. If you're worried about falling under provincial jurisdiction, you can always negotiate the safeguards. Let's take advantage of it, because they have the structure in place; they have the know-how, the money, the infrastructure, the capital. Work with them. Use them.
The Chair: Thank you for that advice, Senator Watt.
Did you want to respond, Mr. Breaker?
Mr. Breaker: Yes. Under late Premier Klein, we had an MOU. So it's not new. But again, with the changing leadership, they didn't follow up. It's both sides. They had education and policing. Housing was on there, land claims. Land claims was the spearheading agenda; that was the main agenda, with Castle Mountain again. Klein was instrumental in trying to get those MOUs, especially policing. Once he left, it went back to something that we'll just have to deal with. So I agree with you, yes.
Senator Beyak: Thank you very much, Mr. Breaker, for your candour and insight. It's very refreshing and I've learned a lot tonight.
I wonder if you could tell me something. I live in northwestern Ontario, beautiful land of the lakes, near Kenora, Dryden. Thunder Bay is the city and Winnipeg. I'm noticing a huge out-migration of the young people.
You talked about the generation gap and that the younger people want home ownership; the older ones are happy with the band ownership. Are you noticing that on your reserve? Perhaps what we've been doing for the last hundred years, maybe it's time for all of us to rethink where we want the housing, if we need to talk to the young people more. Do you have thoughts on that?
Mr. Breaker: There is the traditional thought process of the elders. We don't really have much time. I can't explain to you the Blackfoot world view, the indigenous world view, which is that family is a circle. In these parts they call it Turtle Island, but for us it's not Turtle Island; it's based on the buffalo. The concept of keeping children together with you right from womb to tomb, it's changing. It's been changing since probably the 1990s.
Education helps. You can't go wrong. Younger people realize that the opportunities are out there. As administrators, we try to capitalize on any initiative that comes our way through social media or the Internet. We apply no matter if it is fruitless; it doesn't matter as long as you apply. You make the attempt because these are the children that you are trying, to me, to get off reserve. The opportunity is there.
I have two sons. They know that they have to leave. I tell them my story. I was pretty lucky. I used athletics and that's how I got out, but the majority are in both worlds. I think they try to satisfy their parents and grandparents by saying, "Okay, I will stay here and take care of you because there are gaps, even for the elders, health-wise." You hear about it. All the benefits and treaty rights are being diminished. I think the parents and grandparents are beginning to realize that there is more opportunity for their children and grandchildren than being here.
I look at some of my nephews and the social problems they are involved with. One of you spoke of the child welfare system. It is proven. I just graduated in November from university, so I did lots of stats about the child welfare system. It is a breeding ground for the Aboriginal penal system, the number that are incarcerated, and it's so true.
When the correspondence comes in per month, and I usually get about 50, a lot of the young people in that correspondence are desperate because they cannot get help off reserve. They will receive roughly $800 per month, but the rent is $1,100, so they have to live communally. Hopefully they don't get into conflict. I try to help them out. They will find their way to the city. It is 45 minutes away, but with the price of gas now, it is difficult. That trend is changing.
We are kind of fortunate we are close to Calgary, but I can't say it for other First Nations that are in communities where they don't have economic — it is difficult.
Yes, we need to plan. The ones that are in remote areas, I have met with some of them in conferences. They ask questions: "How do you do this? How do you do that? Should we get into section 95?" I say, "Yes, but be careful because you could end up being third party." There are some in Alberta that have gone under and are still under third party.
I think the only path we have is home ownership. We have to. I hope that answers your question.
Senator Beyak: Thank you very much.
The Chair: Mr. Breaker, we have covered a lot of ground here tonight, and I know the committee is very grateful to you. To wrap up, I have two things I would like to touch on.
I think Siksika is noted for having developed a home maintenance program and you mentioned it. Is it ongoing? Is it working well? Is it something you would recommend to other First Nations as a way of taking care of homes? Your reserve is especially spread out. Could you give us a bit more information about that, please?
Mr. Breaker: Yes.
Again, I want to thank CMHC. They are not all doom and gloom. Their training programs are top notch. We have utilized as much as we can from them, and one of them is that basic home maintenance. I believe we are one of the only First Nations in Alberta that had training in that. Four of us provide our own training to our nation members.
We had to go up north to Big Stone, I believe. That was the test. I didn't go but my nephew and one of the junior administrators went. They had an open band meeting. If you have ever been to an open band meeting, it is like a forum. All they were supposed to do was present about the science of buildings, what makes them hot and cold, the windows, just the basic stuff, but they spent half a day doing all that. The issue is about housing. It is way out of scope with what this program was supposed to be about, but they had to get it out.
I think that if this committee is going out, you need to listen to those communities. Let them express. That is part of consultation, accommodation, the anger. I'm used to it. If you need to go out, listen to them. It's part of the healing process for them.
It's amazing that it was the women that really picked up on the basic home maintenance. The majority are women that have taken it. They do their own maintenance checks on caulking and they can tell now if the contractor didn't do it right. They can tell if they used the wrong caulking. Nailing patterns and codes are other things they can pick up on. Some of them have read the National Building Code. That is how successful they can get. Once those young people get houses, they will know what to do, not just the traditional "give me a house and I will keep calling housing." Those have stopped.
We have stopped fixing broken windows. That's the thing. That's part of vandalism. We even have a policy that states that in there. I get a lot of flak from our leadership. That's why when you drive through our reservation you will see a lot of boarded up windows, because we are not paying anymore. We are giving that responsibility to the homeowners — home occupants, I should say.
I hope that answers your question, sir.
The Chair: Very good. I am glad to hear that positive news.
Finally, then, you talked a lot about the needs in planning and training. The First Nations Market Housing Fund that we have heard about in this committee has a Capacity Development Program which is available, we were told, to support training to help eligible communities develop market-based housing capacity. Have you considered accessing this program? If not, why not?
Mr. Breaker: Yes, we have since 2011. We have four project managers, three property managers, and one who is getting her social worker's degree. That is in housing. I don't know why the other service areas didn't capitalize on it, as the funding was there. I think it is just a case of commitment. You have to have staff committed to the cause.
I have very good staff. I took a lot of time to allow them to get trained. The only thing we are lacking is that database. You can get database clerks and all the equipment, but it's the software because it is ever-changing. You need to get the other service areas to buy in so that you have only one database. Right now, health has the majority of the information because of the water act. I guess the mandate of the environmental health officers is to provide quality water. We are utilizing that. That fund has been very helpful.
The Chair: In closing, I would like to thank you again on behalf of the committee for your candor, broad knowledge of the history and scope of the challenges, and your advice on solutions. We will pay attention to your advice about getting on the ground, hearing from people and doing in-houses. We were in the Atlantic region last week doing so, and we have plans to look at other regions in Canada.
I would like to mention to committee members that we received a bill for study from the Senate today. Senator Wallace is the sponsor of the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation bill. We'll set aside our housing study to look at it next week.
Senator Moore: Where did the parks bill go?
The Chair: It was referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, but don't ask me why.
Thank you very much, colleagues.
Any closing comments, Mr. Breaker?
Mr. Breaker: I request that you send communiqués to me because the last one didn't get to me. I think the first one was issued in January. Otherwise, we would have had proper documentation for you. I work pretty closely with the other senior managers, and something like this is pretty big. I apologize; that is the best material I could come up with in a short time.
The Chair: You have done very well on short notice, and we are grateful. I will ask our acting clerk to speak to you about improving our communications in the future.
Mr. Breaker: Sure. She has my email.
(The committee adjourned.)