Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 20 - Evidence - April 11, 2017
OTTAWA, Tuesday, April 11, 2017
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 9:03 a.m. to study the new relationship between Canada and First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples.
Senator Lillian Eva Dyck (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good morning. I would like to welcome all honourable senators and members of the public who are watching this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples either here in the room or listening via the Web.
I would like to acknowledge for the sake of reconciliation that we are meeting on the traditional unceded lands of Algonquin peoples.
My name is Lillian Dyck from Saskatchewan and I have the privilege of chairing this committee. Before we begin, I would like senators to introduce themselves, beginning on my left.
Senator Christmas: Senator Dan Christmas from Nova Scotia.
Senator Sinclair: Senator Murray Sinclair, Manitoba.
Senator Pate: Kim Pate from Ontario.
Senator Enverga: Tobias Enverga, senator from Ontario.
Senator Hartling: Nancy Hartling from New Brunswick.
Senator Tannas: Scott Tannas from Alberta.
Senator Doyle: Norman Doyle, Newfoundland.
The Chair: Thank you, and welcome, Senator Doyle as a new addition to our committee. We have one additional senator just coming into the room now. Good morning, Senator Oh.
Today we continue our study on what a new relationship between the government and First Nations, Metis and Inuit peoples of Canada could look like. We are pleased to welcome Six Nations Polytechnic to speak about education.
Please welcome our witnesses this morning: Rebecca Jamieson, who will be our first speaker, the President of Six Nations Polytechnic; and Mr. Rongo Wetere, Consultant and Special International Advisor. He will be our second speaker.
Witnesses, after your presentations, we will open the floor to questions from the senators. Please begin, Ms. Jamieson.
Rebecca Jamieson, President, Six Nations Polytechnic: Thank you very much. We're very honoured to be here. I want to extend regrets from Chief Ava Hill and Chief Isadore Day from Six Nations. They had previous commitments and could not be with us physically. I know they are here in support with us.
We previously submitted a brief to the Senate. Today we have another document that we are tabling with the Senate, and my remarks will speak to both documents combined.
With regard to the renewed relationship with indigenous people, we're here to speak about how that can be achieved through an innovative approach to education based on indigenous education.
Six Nations has a long history and tradition of working in partnership. We have set down those treaty relationships sometimes known as wampum belts. The best known often is called the two row or the Deyohate Guswenta, which means the two paths of two peoples who continue to live in mutual respect and mutual beneficial sustainability.
Because of our collective experience we're now in a process of recovery, revitalization and restoration of our ways of knowing and living and being. We're honouring the truth and we're reconciling for the future, and education is one of those ways we can do that.
SNP, or Six Nations Polytechnic, is a unique post-secondary organization. We're acknowledged by the community, government and institutions of higher learning as a centre of excellence for indigenous knowledge. We were established in 1993. We were created by and in a community of people with a history that predates the formation of the United States and of Canada, a community with a wealth of indigenous knowledge and sustainable world view. We exist in the heart of Canada's most populous First Nation community comprised of six distinct Haudenosaunee nations and languages: the Mohawk, Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida, Seneca and Tuscarora nations.
We hold a special obligation to the Six Nations to be the formal post-secondary institute to ensure that our knowledge and languages do not disappear from the face of the earth. No other institution of higher learning has this responsibility. We take this responsibility seriously and went through the arduous process of achieving ministerial consent to offer the first ever stand-alone degree in Ogwehoweh languages in the country. This year we will see our first graduates from that degree convocate in June 2017.
We have built a strong foundation and reputation in the post-secondary landscape for mobilizing indigenous ways of knowing and living through our mutual beneficial relationships with our post-secondary partners. As you know, in Canada there exists an enormous gap and a growing gap in indigenous and non-indigenous education, participation and graduation rates that can no longer be ignored. We are extremely concerned about this gap. We are proposing a blueprint today that we think will help to address the gaping issue.
Closing the gap in post-secondary education with indigenous education within five years is now an achievable goal in Ontario. What is needed is adequately resourced, indigenous-based education offered in learning environments that directly support the recovery, revitalization and restoration of indigenous dignity.
What is needed is indigenous-based education that will no longer contribute to the marginalization of indigenous learners. What is needed is indigenous-based education that removes the blocks to entry to education. It's time to maximize the strategies that work. We know that students are highly successful when they learn in a relevant indigenous environment. This, coupled with adequately resourced success focused re-engagement strategies for adult learners and education that will prevent disengagement of the younger learners, will close that gap. It's time for indigenous peoples to reclaim education for their purposes through the first indigenous university in Ontario.
Our people tend to occupy a marginalized place in society. Due to a history of injustice we have lower incomes than non-Aboriginal families and higher incidence of suicide. We are more likely to be incarcerated and have life expectancies that are much shorter than those of non-Aboriginal Ontarians. Evidence clearly shows that post- secondary education can help to close those wellness gaps that exist in our society.
What is the scope of the education attainment gap that we're looking to address? In the year 2000, the auditor general's report predicted that it would take 20 years to close that gap in indigenous attainment. In 2011, 11 years later, that gap has now grown not to the year 2020 but now we're looking to the year 2050, and that is quite disheartening.
Why is that gap happening? Even today, 150 years since Confederation, an intimidating path to the nation's colleges and universities has left thousands of indigenous peoples with no education qualifications at a rate proportionately far higher than non-indigenous people.
What obstacles are on that path? High population growth within the communities and the imposition of a 20-year cap on funding has meant fewer students being funded in post-secondary since 1996. Based on a $300 million cap on spending per year, with rising costs combined with inflation reaching 6.5 per cent annually, the average drop in students being funded was approximately 2,700 per year. This equates to a decline of 54,000 students over a 20-year capped period.
Participation in post-secondary education, or PSE, has been increasing for non-indigenous students over the past 20 years, but it has not kept pace for the indigenous population. While there has been attainment in both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations in post-secondary education, the attainment gap is only widening, with a 15 per cent point difference in the gap from 1996 to 2011.
The PSE funding cap has effectively stagnated and limited First Nations post-secondary education success. In our indigenous institutions in Ontario we know that our rates of graduation and success are significantly higher than mainstream, ranging from 75 to 95 per cent success rates. Yet our factors in terms of funding are not equally supported.
The second major obstacle that we face is being able to participate with a chance of success when the elementary and secondary education experience is failing the majority of indigenous students. In my community of Six Nations every year we send about 100 students out to high school. We count ourselves fortunate if after four years 30 of those students graduate. This is Six Nations in southern Ontario.
What happens when this trend continues? We have a growing population of adults without secondary school and the skills to be able to continue their education and maintain successful and sustainable employment. There are many examples of this. For example, the annual report of the Saskatchewan Indian Institute of Technologies in 2012-13 cites that 1,563 students applied for entry. Some 612 of those students, or less than half, were accepted and 248 of those students, or 36 per cent, graduated. That is a dismal rate of participation and success.
We also have a number of young adults being accepted into post-secondary institutions on the basis of inflated secondary school results, only to be recycled through entry program after entry program. A review of various reports that have been cited as well as results from Algonquin College show that students are struggling to graduate due to being inadequately prepared for post-secondary studies.
In analyzing all of this data the question that begs to be answered is: How will doing the same thing year after year, improve outcomes? Dr. Maxwell's report from January 2010 states:
High school graduates clearly without level 3 literacy reflect the indifferent standards from high schools on and off reserves across Canada.
The Ontario Native Literacy Coalition, the only native literacy coalition in Ontario with 23 providers, confirms the high numbers of high school graduates that seek their assistance to enable them to be successful in post-secondary education. As initially stated, what is needed is indigenous education that will offer learning environments which directly support the recovery, revitalization and restoration of indigenous dignity; that will no longer contribute to the marginalization of indigenous learners; and that will remove the blocks to entry. It's time to maximize the strategies that work.
As I said, we know that students are highly successful when they study in a relevant indigenous learning environment. This, coupled with adequate resources, focused re-engagement for adult learners and avoiding the disengagement of younger learners, will close the gap quickly. It's time for indigenous peoples to reclaim education through the first indigenous university in Ontario.
The establishment of this university should be welcomed with open pathways as we will refer students to career programs not duplicated by the university sector. Blocks to post-secondary enrolment will be eliminated by the provision of vital skill enhancement made available to succeed in post-secondary education. Indigenous students can access and will excel in Ontario's post-secondary system if provided adequate support.
Six Nations Polytechnic, as the first indigenous university in Ontario, will require financial support to substantially increase graduation rates with courses that emphasize skill enhancement. These courses, delivered in communities, cost much less, can accelerate post-secondary success and dramatically lift graduation rates, helping students succeed as well as making the best use of taxpayers' dollars. To achieve this we have the ingredients. We just need to activate them and combine them in innovative ways.
For example, in Ontario, the OSAP transformation currently underway has very good potential. This is a far- reaching and enlightened change and shift in policy with the expanded education grant. Tuition-free post-secondary access for adults from low-income families who would not normally attend mainstream colleges and universities represent thousands of potential indigenous students across Ontario. If the education grant and student assistance through OSAP can be extended to the re-engagement strategy with adult learners proposed through the first indigenous university in Ontario, the first critical step in closing the gap will have been taken. Pathways to continued education will be open, our partners will benefit, and in the end society will benefit overall.
The real economic benefits that flow from an inclusive indigenous approach to lift participation rates have been highlighted many times by Canadian economists. The problem and the solution are not dissimilar to closing the gaps in New Zealand between the Maori and the non-Maori. Their impact on Maori participation rates represents a blueprint of what is now achievable in Ontario with the largest indigenous population in Canada.
The introduction of the Maori university also became a catalyst to inspire the mainstream institutions to lift their performance and provide staircasing for Maori students to access graduate and post-graduate degree provisions not duplicated with the Maori university course provision.
At Six Nations Polytechnic we have the capacity and the vision to become the first indigenous university in Ontario, if approved. We can successfully umbrella post-secondary provision with our consortium members and partners. We can offer a wide range of quality accredited programs in communities across Ontario, thus boosting post-secondary provision for all indigenous peoples in Ontario.
An indigenous university in Ontario with maintenance of the highest standards of accountability to students is an absolute priority to achieving successful graduation rates better than the mainstream. The key to this happening is the unanimous support by both the federal and provincial governments to officially establish Six Nations Polytechnic as the indigenous university in Ontario, providing access to post-secondary tuition for thousands of low-income indigenous learners. We will close the gaps in education participation and success in less than five years.
Findings by the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research showed that after one year 44 per cent of the students gained new employment and increased salaries amounting to over $400 million per year. It does not take long at this growth rate to effect major change. Many Canadian economists have shown huge projection gains if the educational gaps between indigenous and non-indigenous can be closed within 10 years. One estimate puts us at over $400 billion gained by the Canadian economy.
We ask the support of Prime Minister Trudeau along with Premier Kathleen Wynne for Six Nations Polytechnic to be established as the first indigenous university in Ontario in 2017. Small incremental steps and further delay and denial of opportunity to the fastest growing population in Ontario and Canada will not achieve closing the gaps.
A cost-efficient university operating on economies of scale and providing much needed accredited programs delivered on campus and in communities is a long overdue solution for indigenous people that is beneficial to both Ontario and the Canadian economy.
We seek the support of the Senate in our endeavours and our proposals and welcome your comments and questions.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Jamieson. Mr. Wetere, if you would like to do your presentation, you have the floor.
Rongo H. Wetere, Consultant and Special International Advisor, Six Nations Polytechnic: Thank you very much. I'm privileged to be here. I've had the opportunity to look at the CVs of all of the members sitting around the table. I can see that you have the talent to help move Canada in the right direction.
We in New Zealand got rid of our Senate almost 100 years ago to save money. I'm really pleased that you have retained your Senate. I was listening to a comment by former Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer a couple of days ago when he said that one of the problems with New Zealand is that we don't have a Constitution like Canada and that our executive of parliament operates virtually as a dictatorship.
If we look back over the years, and I think of the years of Muldoon, we had a dictator and nobody could argue. He was the law. It's great you have a Senate that can articulate options for the government to consider.
I'm delighted to be here today. I'm basically here to support Rebecca and Six Nations Polytechnic which, from my perception in looking at their operation, is more than suitable to establish the first major mainstream funded indigenous university in Canada. It's long overdue. We established in New Zealand our first indigenous university with mainstream funding 22 years ago. I have a report here from Venezuela. They started their indigenous university in 2001. Canada is a long way behind in terms of addressing the needs and providing options for indigenous students.
The gap that has gone on for the last two decades has been primarily caused by the colleges and universities of Canada that have provided appalling graduation results, particularly for First Nations. Why would you continue to fund? I can understand why the federal government would not want to be increasing the funding for First Nations education when the colleges and universities of Canada fail every four out of every five students. In the last 20 years, it is amazing that federal funds of $5 billion have been wasted on failing students.
In many ways I have to say that Canada is a far more generous country than New Zealand will ever be. They spend a lot of money on failure. They ignore the potential that is sitting there within indigenous institutions across Canada that can provide pass rates far superior to mainstream.
I don't think there is any indigenous institution in Canada that would get a graduation rate as low as 15 per cent. With the pressure that was hinted at this morning, I've tried to incorporate much of the thinking that you can read at your leisure, but imagine that generously funded Algonquin College enroling 56 students and failing 55. How can you run an educational institution like that?
When I started 35 years ago in New Zealand, to give you some background, I like many First Nations people left high school with no educational qualifications whatsoever. Within our community of Te Awamutu in New Zealand we had the Waikeria institution down the road which had locked up a thousand Maoris. I was concerned about that and thought we really better do something, so I started up a training program to try to keep people out of jail, to stop the march into incarceration.
I started with six students and eventually ended up with a university and 65,000 students. That sounds like a big step, but one interesting point about providing education as a means to stop people being locked up and as a means to get people into work was that I negotiated with a judge who would come to Te Awamutu every week, or every time the court sat. He would look at me; I would put my finger up; and, instead of sending the young student to jail, he would say, "Send him down to training.''
The effect of that was the wardens at the particular institution threatened to go on strike because they thought their jobs were at risk. When you look at the horrific cost of incarceration and the devastating effects it has on the people that you incarcerate, it's creating problem after problem that should be better dealt with in education. Education is the answer.
I read the report of Professor Miller when he made a comparison of New Zealand education and said that it wasn't a very good complementary mix with Canada because the Maoris were 15 per cent of the population and First Nations were only 5 per cent. I'm here to tell you that I firmly believe there's no difference between what happened in New Zealand and what can happen in Canada. Given the opportunity to aspire and lift their performance people can graduate, as long as they get the assistance necessary so they can graduate. I think that the colleges and universities and government policies in this country have been primarily responsible for the huge gap that currently exists.
If in fact parity existed today, Senator Dyck, you would have had your 80,000 extra graduates in 2006. Today you would have had an extra 120,000 graduates for a total of 200,000 graduates. It would have changed the face of Canada. Instead, you have 420,000 people today with no educational qualifications whatsoever. That's a huge part of the indigenous population. It is far higher than for non-indigenous.
I spent years arguing the case for an indigenous institution. I debated with over a dozen ministers of education in New Zealand. They don't stay around long enough to understand what their roles and responsibilities are. I had debates with many prime ministers because the whole idea of having an indigenous Maori university wasn't on the radar whatsoever.
Despite that I found out in the 1980s what happened with a local university that made $6 million for failing students. I couldn't believe that institutions could enrol students, take the funds, and in less than three months' time get a whole heap of money for nothing but failed students who are disillusioned, having put their hopes, aspirations and efforts into post-secondary education. If institutions take the time and effort to understand and see things through indigenous eyes, and put the effort in, they will graduate.
In arguing with the Government of New Zealand I signed up to an 80 per cent graduation rate. I said that our institution would graduate 80 per cent of the people who come through the door. When I went back to tell my staff they just about hanged me. They asked, "How can we graduate 80 per cent when you're asking us to remove all blocks to entry?'' I said, "We have to do it because I made that commitment with the government; I signed up.'' Overnight we came to enrol 10 per cent more unfunded students. That gave us a bit of leeway for all those with special mental health needs, et cetera. You know the rule.
We managed to achieve an 80 per cent graduation. The difference is huge between an 80 per cent graduation and a 15 to 20 per cent graduation, which is what's been happening across Canada. If we had parity in education and employment opportunities, and I believe it's achievable, it would put $15 billion more in salaries into indigenous hands, and that would make one hell of a difference.
What you have in front of you is a timeline of how that can be achieved in Ontario. There are plenty of countries around the world that are far less resourced and far less wealthy than Canada that provide free education. I think of Cuba, and their literacy rate in the high 90s is double the Canadian rate. It seems to me that 'literacy' is a taboo word in Canada. They don't want to know about literacy, but that is the basic reason why indigenous students are failing. Unless you address that issue, they won't be able to graduate.
It was the same in New Zealand. What we did was we had good pre-entry programs for everyone involved in our university to make sure they could pass. Then we would refer them to other institutions where they could be lawyers and accountants. We had a very good working relationship.
These are exciting times. I was interested in the comments of Professor Miller when he talked about the change that the Senate was looking for: how we can improve relationships and how we can move to reconciliation. He talked about treaty settlements and I was amazed when he said that the Waitangi Tribunal was an extremely costly process. That tribunal in New Zealand is the most cheapskate process you would ever find in the world because New Zealand's way of fixing treaty claims is two cents on the dollar. They have settled 80 per cent of the claims in New Zealand already for two cents on the dollar. That is less than half the rate that has been paid in compensation to the residential schools. That's the New Zealand treaty settlement process. The only way they can get rid of it is that Maoris have had the opportunity to feel more comfortable because they have jobs and income. I'm not saying all the problems have been solved but they have a different perspective.
I went to a meeting last week with the leading indigenous female state employee in Canada. I thought to myself what has happened in New Zealand. A Maori has been in charge of the New Zealand Defence Force. A Maori has been Governor General. We have Maoris in many positions as we haven't had to put up with residential schools. We've focused on education, particularly since we established our three Maori universities 20 years ago that have provided over 300,000 graduates. That's what's made the difference. I'm certain that's what can happen here in Canada.
Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Wetere. The floor is now open for senators for the first round of questioning.
Senator Patterson: It's great to see you, Mr. Wetere. I'm familiar with your work.
You focused on literacy, the gap there and the importance of preparing students for success in post-secondary. That's our challenge in Canada.
Could you describe what it is that you've done differently to make a welcoming climate for indigenous students to adapt to a different learning style? What's the key to your success?
Mr. Wetere: As someone who has never established a university and has never been inside a university, I sort of had to do the farmer approach in New Zealand and ask what was logical. I knew from my school days that a lot of people sitting next to me going right through high school couldn't read or write. That was amazing. I know that unless you fix those basic skill sets you're not going to get a graduate. In terms of trying to address that situation, I don't think you will improve things unless you address them.
In order to address them you need to deliver the programs within communities where the people are. Poor literacy is endemic within families. If the parents have difficulties, the children will have difficulties. I don't subscribe to the fact that you think you can start an early child care centre and you're going to fix the problems. Unless you address the total problem, the parents and the family, it's very difficult to achieve change. In an indigenous environment you need to go into communities. That's basically the difference.
The European model is the big building on the hill; everybody goes there. If you want to make an impact within communities, you have to go to communities. You need to have indigenous people who have empathy with the clientele that can encourage them to move forward and graduate.
In establishing our institution we eliminated failure. There's no such thing as failure. They're there to achieve or have yet to achieve. The total focus has to be on graduation, getting through, getting the qualifications and getting the jobs.
I don't necessarily want to be too critical of the Canadian system. Amazingly enough, Aboriginal apprenticeship in trades is said to be about 50 per cent ahead of non-Aboriginal. I can't quite believe those stats but that's what they say. The stats today are also saying that graduation from high school for Aboriginals is the same as for non-Aboriginals. I still can't believe those stats, but that's what they are saying.
One of the reasons it's so necessary to get into a post-secondary university like Rebecca is proposing is that the wide difference is actually in university graduations. I think you're only going to be able to address that by starting off with an indigenous university. I'm sorry if I took too long.
Senator Patterson: In recent years in Canada there has been recognition that education was underfunded and that the federal government should pay attention to trying to do a better job. Our committee did a study on that subject. There was a panel established. There was even a commitment from the last federal government to put more money into education.
It seemed to me it foundered on the question of governance. There was a proposal to establish kind of a school board model. The minister would have some ultimate authority over the spending of that money. First Nations leadership said there had to be Indian control over Indian education and rejected the established model.
Could you share the New Zealand experience on this governance issue and Maori control or involvement? Are there lessons there for Canada?
Mr. Wetere: I'll be a bit careful here. If in fact the wishes of the First Nations could be agreed to, I'd go along with that because they can't make as bad a job of the situation as what currently exists.
In New Zealand universities have wide-ranging ability in terms of curriculum, academic accreditation and funding opportunities. The funds involved in post-secondary education particularly at the university level are huge. One needs to have responsibility to the Minister of Finance. I have no difficulty in operating as a mainstream university following the rules that all the other universities follow. You don't need control of the funding stream to get the results we're talking about here.
Funding an indigenous university on the same basis as other mainstream universities to my way of thinking is all that is required. That's virtually the application of Six Nations. You don't have to go and get that whole chunk of money and hand it over without some control. I don't think any responsible government would want to do that, particularly with taxpayers looking over their shoulder.
Senator Enverga: Thank you for the presentations. I understand that education is very important too. It's one of the foundations of a successful and prosperous community. We believe that.
It says here in the booklet that Canadian universities and colleges have declined thousands of indigenous students for failing entrance requirements in past years.
Do you have perhaps some statistics comparing the non-indigenous students who were not allowed to go to university? Do you have anything like that, any comparison at all?
Mr. Wetere: No, I haven't had a chance to investigate that. If you have blocks to entry, they are blocks to entry whether you're indigenous or otherwise. I would see that applying equally. They are probably within non-indigenous people in Canada as well. It's not just confined to indigenous, but the blocks to entry have been horrific in their effort to keep indigenous people down where they are at, lacking education.
Even the Ontario government's briefings for funding for the next year talk about only qualified people as having access to that funding. That's what makes me really mad because in doing that they're eliminating a whole heap of people who have poor literacy skills, instead of fixing the problem as a credible institution and pointing the way to graduation. It's not difficult to address the problem if you've really concentrated on what is necessary to do that.
Senator Enverga: I have a follow-up question. That's one of the reasons you want to create an indigenous university, I presume, because a lot of the indigenous students were not accepted.
Can you let us know, please, what the difference will be between an indigenous university and a regular university? Will there be more cultural studies, more language studies, or perhaps resource management? What kinds of programs will be offered? Will there be a difference between an indigenous university and a regular university?
Mr. Wetere: First, you have to make sure that foundation learnings are fixed up pronto so they can graduate in whatever subject they choose to enrol in.
Second, you have to make them feel good about themselves. You have to make them feel they have an institution they can trust that will support them to graduate. You have to improve the accessibility and not have high fees that stop them from participating.
I talk about removing all blocks to entry. In New Zealand now they're thinking of removing the blocks, removing university entrance as a criterion for students. Why? It is because it is just another impediment for students getting access to university studies.
I brought free education into New Zealand in 2000. The government would fund 75 per cent of the cost of tuition, and you would have to raise a student loan for the other 25 per cent. If we were ultra-efficient in manning our institution on 65 per cent of the cost of tuition, we would make a 10 per cent profit.
The institution we established in New Zealand has provided free courses now for 17 years. I worked out the other day that we've saved our students about $1.2 billion in student fees. We've lifted the graduation rate from our institution of over 300,000.
I know it sounds hard to believe, but I think the level of intelligence of Maori in New Zealand and indigenous people in Canada is no different, given the opportunities, the pathways, the accessibility, and the removal of obstacles. That is the secret to achieving results.
Ms. Jamieson: I will add to that. I'll give you some examples of what's happening at Six Nations Polytechnic right now.
It's true that foundational studies are key. For the last 20 years we've offered the first year of a general arts degree to students. Then those students, working with our university partners, continue their degree studies. We've had over 300 students graduate through that program. They have completed law degrees and medical degrees; you name it. They have gone into all the different fields of study and have been successful.
They needed to have a year of skill enhancement and a year of identity development. From there they were able to go on. We have every intention of continuing to work in partnership with other institutions when the students are ready. The students will make their choice. They do now. When they do they're highly successful.
Interestingly enough, they come back and they become leaders in the community. If you look at the institutions at Six Nations, they are led by students who have graduated through that program.
We're capped at only so many. That's our issue. We need to be able to expand that opportunity.
Senator Enverga: I have one short question. Would the indigenous university you are proposing be an open university? Will it accept non-indigenous students?
Ms. Jamieson: The strategic objectives of Six Nations Polytechnic are, first, to ensure that our indigenous peoples have the skills they need to participate in the social economy and maintain their identity while they're doing it. Second, we want to build understanding across cultures and across people.
Yes, it is an open learning environment, absolutely. We feel we have a role in creating that partnership of balance for the future where reconciliation will truly take place. We currently run programs that are open to all learners. I'm pleased to say that we have learners of many different backgrounds with us.
Senator Sinclair: Let's talk a bit about numbers, if you don't mind. I was interested in the Closing the Gaps document that you provided to us. The number of indigenous students who have moved from the bachelor degree programs into post-graduate programs seems to be increasing, at least in raw numbers. Whether or not they are in terms of percentages over the past several years is another question.
Are you saying that? Are you experiencing students from your program going into post-graduate programs, whether it is a different degree such as a law degree or a medical degree, another institution or a master's program somewhere?
Ms. Jamieson: We are seeing that. It's very encouraging. We find that once students have the opportunity to get that undergraduate degree done, they see a place and role for them in the community and society. They will definitely take the post-graduate work provided they can find financial assistance. The First Nation funding is capped and limited, but the enhanced education grant now will help with that.
We find that once our students get going they definitely will pursue their master's and their Ph.Ds if they are so inclined. We have many going that way.
Senator Sinclair: For a while the department of indigenous affairs stopped funding those graduate programs. They recently indicated that they would provide some leeway when it comes to post-graduate students but not very much.
What's your experience in terms of the need for post-graduate students versus available funds for post-graduate students?
Ms. Jamieson: There's a huge gap there. The standard demographic of our learners is that they have families and they have roles in communities. They can't afford to go off to school ad infinitum. They're working and fulfilling their community responsibility at the same time. If there are no funds for the First Nation, this puts stress on the family and students. Some are very successful in getting research assistance and those kinds of things, but it's very much a struggle.
We need these future leaders to run our institutions and to lead our communities. At Six Nations we encourage them as much as we can, but I know for a fact that with Six Nations funding through the PSSSP there are over 400 students denied funding every year because of a lack of funding.
Senator Sinclair: In your document you refer to there being nine Aboriginal Institutes Consortium associations in Ontario. I assume a more careful reading than I've been able to give the document will point out what those institutions are, but are there other institutions across the country that are forming a national consortium of some kind?
Ms. Jamieson: There are several associations. In Ontario we have what's called the Aboriginal Institutes Consortium. Collectively, we serve the geographic area of Ontario from the north to the south, east and west. We work to support each other as an association.
There's the National Association of Indigenous Institutes of Higher Learning. We work in cooperation with them as well in terms of pursuing accreditation, programming and support for each other.
Then there's the international network, the World Indigenous Nations Higher Education Consortium, WINHEC, through which we are applying for accreditation this year. Three of the institutes in Ontario already have accreditation with WINHEC. We are hosting WINHEC's annual general meeting this year at Six Nations because we are going through accreditation with them. This is the only international indigenous accreditation process that exists for us to go through.
We are pursuing that and after we are hosting the World Indigenous Peoples Conference on Education this summer. We expect to build that network too.
Senator Sinclair: Would this put your institution on the same level as universities in the country in terms of accreditation?
Ms. Jamieson: In terms of accreditation, yes. The scope of our programming will be deeper because we need to do the re-engagement strategy with adults. That isn't happening at the scope that it needs to happen with universities that exist right now.
Senator Sinclair: What are the additional steps you need to follow in order to be accredited as a university?
Ms. Jamieson: I had an interesting discussion with ministry officials recently. We have put in the written request. We have waited patiently. When I followed up, I was told there were steps to be taken. I asked what were those steps and was advised the best thing to do would be to apply to the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. If they accept us then the ministry would consider looking at us seriously. We're prepared to do that; we'll do that. It's not a clear pathway.
Senator Sinclair: They want you to apply to a non-indigenous association to be accredited as an indigenous university.
Ms. Jamieson: Yes.
Senator Sinclair: All right, I'll get my head around that someday.
Are you familiar with the experience of First Nations University of Canada?
Ms. Jamieson: Yes, I am.
Senator Sinclair: Could you talk about what lessons you think might be learned from that experience? If you want, for the benefit of our colleagues, perhaps you could give a bit of an explanation about what happened to it.
Ms. Jamieson: My understanding of the history of what's now known as the First Nations University of Canada is that it was established under the umbrella of a mainstream university. The logic was that the indigenous university had to have a senate and the governance structure in place. It was considered most expedient to make it a subsidiary of a mainstream institution.
There were issues around academic freedom and academic integrity. We had the indigenous academics leaving. There were all kinds of issues that caused a lot of problems at the time. I was working with the funding agency at Six Nations that funded students at that institution. The campus was in turmoil.
The funding was revoked at one point and has since been restored. The university is gradually separating, becoming more operationally independent, and has better integrity in that way. It has taken almost 20 years for it to get to this point, so it's a pathway we don't want to take. We don't want to start as a subsidiary of something we know isn't going to be a good fit.
We need to have the integrity of our academic freedom governed by the people who are concerned about the type of education we need to offer. We have an academic council in place. Interestingly enough, in my conversation with the ministry I was told that we either need to have a senate or an academic council comprised of full-time faculty. I had to say, "Excuse me, if we don't have funding to hire full-time faculty, how is that possible?'' Let's find a way to make this happen. We're working on it but we need support.
Senator Sinclair: Thank you.
Senator Tannas: Mr. Wetere, thank you for your passionate insight into New Zealand and how it applies in Canada.
I have some questions for Ms. Jamieson. Maybe I missed this or maybe it's a dumb question. What is the graduation rate at Six Nations Polytechnic as it exists right now as a percentage of those that enter?
We've heard 15 per cent is the woeful number and result that's coming from non-indigenous institutions. What's your early experience?
Ms. Jamieson: Our experience is at the mid- 80 per cent range.
Senator Tannas: What about other national institutions including the one you just spoke about, the First Nations University of Canada?
Ms. Jamieson: I'm sorry but I don't know the stats of the First Nations University of Canada. I'm more familiar with the institutes in Ontario, all of which have similar graduation rates as ours.
Senator Tannas: It's bearing out what Mr. Wetere said is the experience in New Zealand.
Ms. Jamieson: Yes, absolutely.
Senator Tannas: I think Senator Patterson asked but I wanted to get your thoughts on the record with respect to the delivery of and governance mechanism around elementary and high school education.
At one point we had an initiative to have local indigenous school boards formed. That would be the governance and oversight for those that are delivering K to 12 education. I was new at the time, but for lots of reasons I understand and don't understand the whole thing foundered.
From your point of view are local indigenous school boards the right mechanism? Maybe there were problems with the proposal as it is. That's what I'm used to. That's what most Canadians see as that structure. Does it make sense for indigenous communities in your view?
Ms. Jamieson: We have our own ways of working together. As long as the method of working together is consistent with our traditional ways of doing business that respect the autonomy of the communities and the responsibility of communities, certainly collaborative structures will work.
In the particular example you're talking about there were lots of other layers of uncertainty and distrust around funding and the unknown outcome of adopting an outside structure.
We have our own systems of working together. If given the opportunity, I know they will succeed.
Senator Tannas: Thank you.
Senator Doyle: I was reading your document Closing the Gaps. If you wish to turn to it, at page 16 the second bullet says that Ontario made Aboriginal education a key priority and the goal was closing the educational gap by 2016.
What level of success did Ontario achieve in closing that educational gap? That was mentioned back 12 years ago in 2005. What level of success did they achieve? Did they achieve their goal at all?
Ms. Jamieson: I'm not aware of any report that speaks to that specifically. I know a review was done of the policy framework in Ontario, and the K to 12 policy structure. To summarize, I would say the conclusion is there's still much work to be done.
Senator Doyle: You speak of post-secondary education as being very important to bring indigenous people to a level of success that matches non-indigenous people. You're saying it can be done in a 10-year period.
What kind of widespread federal financial support is needed specifically to tackle that kind of goal to make it actually happen?
Mr. Wetere: Perhaps I could deal with that. If you talk about the University of Saskatchewan, I think their major funding from the provincial and federal was about $10 million a year. Tertiary funding goes up and down. At the present moment it's predicted in Canada that post-secondary enrolment is going to decline between now and 2031, so more funds should be available to address the outstanding needs that are there. It's one of the reasons why the Ontario government has made 150,000 extra free-funded places available next year, which will provide a tremendous opportunity to address the needs of indigenous people.
By comparison with the University of Saskatchewan with a $10 million budget, you cannot do much with a $10 million budget if you're going to have an effect of making real change. My budget in New Zealand was over $200 million, and so you can make change. The cost of the solution needs to be looked on in those terms. You're not going to do it in bits and pieces.
In reality, as I said earlier, if the funds already expended had been spent on graduating students instead of on failing them, you would have achieved that objective. As part of the dictatorial approach in New Zealand, if the graduation rates in any institution fall below 50 per cent they're going to lose their funding.
Ontario has made some changes. The focus has to be on students. There was quite a lot of discussion on the colleges and universities having to be accountable. Indigenous institutions know what being accountable is. They try hard to make sure that their students succeed. There is the difference. You have to know what is needed to get students to graduate.
I'm sorry I didn't answer the question earlier about courses. You need to have courses relevant to the job market. At our institution in New Zealand we had 118 accredited courses that the government was duty bound to fund. I don't necessarily go along with discrimination of any sort. Our institution, like Rebecca has said, needs to be open for those who want to come. At the peak of our operation 52 per cent of our students in New Zealand were non-indigenous. That creates a competitive environment for people to grow and endeavour to succeed. That is the real value of an indigenous institution.
You can also very easily address the language revitalization that is back in communities by working with people who can talk, who know the language. We did a lot of that in New Zealand.
Ms. Jamieson: If I could just follow up on a comment, you were asking about federal funding. I serve on the national task team on post-secondary. We're looking at ways to change the funding arrangements for First Nations education. It's a joint process with Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada and the AFN.
One area we're looking at is Post-Secondary Student Support Program funding, commonly referred to as the PSSSP. It's a program that funds students at the post-secondary level. We are currently looking at how we can adjust existing guidelines, but we know that the funding is insufficient.
I can speak to the experience at Six Nations. When I was working in that particular office our annual budget was $7.5 million. I did the analysis and compared it to what the rates should be if we were giving Canada Student Loans rates and able to fund all of our students. Our budget should have been $18 million. That gives you an indication.
I know that's a big chunk in terms of an increase that needs to be looked at for the PSSSP, but there's a cost recovery and a 10-year to 15-year horizon.
Senator Sinclair: What is PSSSP?
Ms. Jamieson: The Post-Secondary Student Support Program. It's an upfront investment with recovery on the horizon. There's a current contribution as well from the federal government through Canada Student Loans to the transformed OSAP in Ontario, which is being favourably looked at by communities.
Senator Christmas: First, Ms. Jamieson, congratulations on your upcoming first graduates from your stand alone degree program.
Ms. Jamieson: Thank you.
Senator Christmas: Could I ask what degree that is?
Ms. Jamieson: Students get a bachelor of arts in Ogwehoweh languages in either Mohawk or Cayuga.
Senator Christmas: How many students are expected to graduate?
Ms. Jamieson: Eighteen.
Senator Christmas: Congratulations.
Ms. Jamieson: I must say for the public record: Cayuga is a language that is on the verge of extinction. This is the only place, in not just the country but in the universe, where students can get a degree in that language.
Senator Christmas: What is their level of familiarity with the language once they graduate?
Ms. Jamieson: This isn't a degree that creates fluency. We work with our community agencies on our language revitalization strategies. We have students in that degree program. Some are quite fluent because they've come through the adult immersion or our immersion K to 12 school and then have come to the degree program. We have some who are very fluent and conduct ceremonies and so on. We have some new learners. That's a bit of a challenge. We welcome them all, because we know we need to get them on that pathway and keep them there.
Senator Christmas: I really loved the way you described your process of recovery, revitalization and restoration. That is a beautiful goal or objective for what you're doing.
Another interesting feature that caught my attention was your focus on pre-entry programming. I think you called it foundational studies. You mentioned that one year was skill enhancement and then you mentioned it was identity development.
Can you describe what the value is of developing and maintaining an indigenous identity in educational programming?
Ms. Jamieson: A critical piece of a person's being is knowing who they are. Families in our communities are still struggling with the trauma of the residential school. We had our own residential school on our territory, the Mohawk Institute, commonly referred to as the "Mush Hole.'' There's not one family that hasn't been touched by that. We have students in our school affected by that. I have staff members who didn't even know that their parents had gone to the residential school because it was such an experience of shame and it was hidden.
Now we find students come to us and first of all they learn their history. They begin to understand their families. They begin to understand their life experience. Then they find what's good in the teachings that can support them moving forward. Once they find that place, they are off.
Senator Christmas: Is it fair to say that once you revitalize one's understanding of identity, culture and language that their view of themselves changes dramatically?
Ms. Jamieson: It absolutely does. They understand their view of themselves, their view of their place in life, their roles and their responsibilities, and they take it up, yes.
Senator Christmas: I know you understand this, but for the benefit of others many non-indigenous universities, polytechnics and colleges fail to provide the part of education of reinforcing one's identity. Your institution has obviously been successful in re-establishing that.
Ms. Jamieson: Absolutely.
Senator Christmas: What would you tell other educators who want to follow what you've done? How would you persuade them to focus a great part of their academic teaching on language, culture and history?
Ms. Jamieson: We talk about creating a campus of reconciliation where people of all backgrounds will come to appreciate who they are. It doesn't matter what language they have or what culture they come from. They need to know what gifts they have been given. From there they can then work in collaboration in positive relationships with others. We've had to do that with our instructors, our non-indigenous instructors. I must say we have been very successful with that. They don't want to go back to the mainstream institutions now that they teach with us, and that's fine with us too. We encourage that. I call it informally the United Nations campus of reconciliation.
Senator Hartling: I'm enjoying the positivity of both of your presentations. I studied some years ago with some indigenous people at university and saw how difficult it was for them to be in that environment because they weren't supported in their culture, they were very homesick and things like that.
I'm looking more at the logistics. I'd like to know the number of men and women, the ratios and ages. Are supports like child care, transportation, mentorship, scholarships and things like that included in the plans? Do they exist now?
Could you paint me a picture of what exists now?
Ms. Jamieson: What exists now is year-to-year funding that we apply for grants on an annual basis. We can't always provide systemic supports. We don't have child care. We would love to have child care. We have a student profile that's a mixture of male and female, especially in the language program because there are men and women responsibilities with the language. We see that's pretty evenly split in terms of that particular program.
Our biggest challenge is that we don't have predictable funding or those kinds of things. We never know what we can count on. We use one shuttle to bring students to the mainstream campus and back to us when they go out for their lab classes. We need to put all those things in place to support our students.
Just last week in an interview I was asked what cultural services we provide on campus. I said, "The campus is the cultural service; it is the place.''
Senator Hartling: What about ages? What's the age range?
Ms. Jamieson: The majority of our students are in their late 20s but that has shifted. We're now getting more and more coming right out of high school wanting to come to us first and then going on.
Senator Hartling: What about single parents?
Ms. Jamieson: We have many single parents, yes.
Senator Hartling: Thank you.
Senator Pate: Thank you to both our witnesses for being here. It has been very enriching. Thank you also for the times that I've had the opportunity to visit both of your settings at the Facutoni campus in New Zealand and at Six Nations where you were incredibly welcoming.
In terms of how to make options more broadly available have you looked at distance education? I met with some students in Thunder Bay the week before last. We talked about if they could stay in the community and how to provide support.
I'm wondering if you've looked at some of those options and what kinds of recommendations, if any, would you make to support more indigenous students from certainly northern and more remote communities.
Ms. Jamieson: I'll start with our base community at Six Nations. We recently opened our second campus in the city of Brantford because our IT infrastructure can't handle distance delivery and it can't handle accessing our digital archive at the Indigenous Knowledge Centre. We've had to go to a city, which is fine, because we also have many people living in urban situations. We went there so we could have the IT highway, if you will, to offer distance learning, as well as blended learning, which is a combination of both coming on campus and desktop learning.
As to extending it more broadly, there are the other indigenous institutions in Ontario and other community agencies that we are currently working with to offer distance delivery to northern communities.
Starting next month, we're offering professional development courses for front-line workers in Aboriginal mental health and addictions. This is a particular initiative of the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. The plan is to offer training to 180 front-line workers over the next year, strictly using distance education with one sort of gathering at the end. That was only because of budget. We'd have loved to have had it happen more often. Our indigenous institutes in the North have offered to be those host campuses.
We're working in collaboration where we can to make things work, yes.
Senator Pate: I'm also interested in whether you have done any research on impact. Mr. Wetere, I think you alluded to it when you mentioned mental health and the criminal justice component.
Has there been any monitoring of changes? I know it's hard to draw a complete causal link, but has there been any research in terms of changes in the numbers of people requiring mental health hospitalization, the numbers engaging in education who might have been at risk of marginalization or criminalization, or those who were already marginalized and at risk of criminalization?
Mr. Wetere: You're opening up a big subject area because our small villages are probably the best farming places in New Zealand. Under the Public Works Act the government took 20,000 hectares. The first 10,000 of beautiful land was turned into a mental health institution, and the other 10,000 hectares were turned into a prison farm.
I checked to see what was happening at Waikeria institute because the warders wanted to go on strike because they were losing clientele. They're down to 80 per cent now. Two other institutions have closed down and they have built new ones.
The incarceration rate of indigenous people here is 30 per cent higher than in New Zealand. Those are big numbers. In terms of mental health, they closed the institution down. We got the contract to demolish it. The students helped build our first campus from recycled material from the institution or mental health hospital that closed down.
There are other people more knowledgeable than I am if you want to talk mental health. Certainly health should be a vital part of an indigenous university curriculum. Perhaps I didn't answer the question earlier as to what an indigenous university has in terms of courses.
Technology is huge today. A lot of available jobs are in ICT. They are some of the best-paying jobs. We have to lift the salary levels of indigenous people, so an indigenous institution should be focused on IT because the people who graduate can have their salaries doubled. Interestingly, we just did a survey in New Zealand to show that a Maori in ICT gets double the salary of an average Maori. You need to focus on key subjects and do them well to make a difference.
I feel a bit inadequate giving that answer.
Ms. Jamieson: If I could follow up on Mr. Wetere's comment on IT programming, I wanted to share that SNP is starting this fall what we call our science, technology, engineering and mathematics or STEM academy. It will begin with grade 9 and we're working with a college partner. Students will come out of that program with an Ontario Secondary School Diploma and a two-year college diploma. It has been done in the United States. It has been done in Australia. We're working with a private industry partner to develop the program and launch it this fall.
This is part of what I mentioned earlier about preventing the disengagement of learners. These will be learners who will be within the university campus, if we can use that term, come the fall. They will be supported for success. They will be able to take their language courses; local community knowledge teachings will be done; and they will be supported in STEM areas as well. This is one of our strategies for success that we will be conducting.
The Chair: One question that is just begging to be asked. You mentioned high incarceration rates both in New Zealand and in Canada. I am wondering if you have any specific programs at SNP or in New Zealand to address the literacy rates in prisons.
You have a captive audience. Typically people who are imprisoned have very low education rates. This could be a way of getting them out of that cycle of coming in and out of prisons by increasing their educational attainment levels.
Are there any such programs through SNP or in New Zealand?
Mr. Wetere: We developed a highly successful program in New Zealand to address that issue. We've also developed a program like that for Canada which can go right across Canada. Its focus is on indigenous students but it's applicable to everyone including new migrants and Canadians.
From a practical point of view, the advances in technology today should reduce the cost of education, but it doesn't seem to have done that. In terms of distance education, I had a deal with IBM back in 2000—2001 where we put 4,000 desktop computers into homes around New Zealand. They were all monitored and linked up for self-addressed learning. We achieved an 85 per cent graduation rate at levels 1, 2 and 3 computing.
When I look at the Algonquin results of 27 per cent over nine years, I wonder what the heck. Our people have demonstrated the ability to handle computers. When the computer age started we found that they were spending too much time on the computers. We had to block off the Internet and say, "You have to learn the basics of computing and learn it well.'' A lot of our people have done that.
There's a proposal right now that the corrections department is considering in terms of providing courses. In Brazil, they shorten the sentences of every prisoner that graduates from the literacy course because they know it is key to stopping them from going back in again. It's simple. Some of the simple things that can make a difference continually seem to be ignored.
Ms. Jamieson: Currently at SNP we do not have literacy outreach to the prisons. I checked with Michelle Davis, who is in charge of the Ontario Native Literacy Coalition. We currently do not have access to that and SNP is not funded for that. We certainly would consider that as part of the re-engagement, absolutely.
Senator Pate: I have a supplementary question.
I don't know if either of you are aware that there was free post-secondary education in our federal prisons up until 1992, at which time it was a policy decision to remove all free post-secondary education for prisoners. For women, in particular, and indigenous groups we saw higher rates of not just literacy but higher rates of engagement and continuation in post-secondary education.
Six Nations has been leading in using some mechanisms to invite people to come back into the community to finish off their sentences. It strikes me that linking that to the post-secondary opportunities would assist more in reducing numbers than putting more education into the prisons per se. Many opportunities that are not utilized to bring people out of the prisons.
Has there been any examination of the possibility of combining other sections of the legislation? I would say sections 80, 81 and 84 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act would allow those opportunities. I'd be interested in your thoughts on it.
Ms. Jamieson: I'm not aware of any specific discussions around that, but that's not to say we wouldn't be open to it and willing to work on it as long as the community is open to it, yes.
Mr. Wetere: In New Zealand, we have a lot of the inmate population going to campuses we had established all over the country. That's what made a huge difference. I opened up campuses where there were high gang elements. It developed from a philosophy of taking the education to where the people are. Unless you can get into those communities, you won't get change.
In terms of economics, the economies of scale, if you have programs that reach right across the country, you can eliminate the costs and improve results, control and accountability mechanisms.
Stan Beardy approached me a few years ago and said, "I want you to help us to establish three indigenous universities in Ontario.'' I said, "Oh, that would be easy with Stephen Harper. It's going to be difficult enough to get one institution, let alone talk about three. Why would you want to pay three administrations when you're looking at cost efficiencies?''
An institution can use facilities that already exist. You don't want to waste money on buildings. The focus has to be on people. Our institution in New Zealand didn't build buildings. We went out into communities. I actually leased over 300 places in New Zealand under attractive terms, but you had to reach out into the communities.
That's why we became the biggest institution in New Zealand. Imagine an institution with only 1,000 students suddenly getting up to the numbers that you read about in this report. If you make education accessible to the people who need it, you're going to achieve change quickly. I'd like to support Rebecca in doing that.
The Chair: We'll now go to second round. We have about 25 minutes left and four questioners, so that's five minutes each.
Senator Patterson: You've highlighted in both your presentations the serious literacy defects and how literacy is a big factor in our jails. It's a barrier to progress on post-secondary education.
I'd like to ask for a little more detail. Mr. Wetere, you've worked on this literacy issue. Could the literacy program that you talked about having developed work for Canadian indigenous peoples? Is it cost effective? What are the key elements in the success you've had with literacy?
Mr. Wetere: One of the reasons I came to Canada was at the request of First Nations to have an impact on poor literacy levels that existed across Canada. With our charitable trust in New Zealand, which I established way back in 1986, there was no point in going to Canada unless we could fund a research program to develop a program particularly for Canada and for the indigenous people.
We approached Senator Joyce Fairbairn, as the leader of literacy for the Senate. We brought our TV cameras into the Senate. The best method of illiteracy eradication is one to one. You can do that using technology. That's what we did. You can provide this program in houses. You can educate the whole household, including the parents and the children. In Joyce's office was a big placard that said, "Literacy starts in the home.'' I thought wow, this senator has got it right.
By using technology we've been able to provide the program right across Canada and right up into Nunavut where we ran a test. If you're to prepare people for the job market ahead, you have to fix up the literacy skills and the essential skills for employment or for future study. That includes digital literacy. It's vitally important that all of those are included within a program.
We've developed that program. I thought we could do it for $7 million, which was what it cost us in New Zealand to do it. Canada is such a big place that it ended up our institution in New Zealand spent double that in providing the program.
You can have the best program in the world, but unless somebody is prepared to fund it nothing happens. Way back in 1991 we developed a fast learning language course, which I developed out of the Baroque method of learning in Bulgaria where they use relaxation, music and fun. I incorporated that into a three-year program of work. I developed this program. It worked well, but in New Zealand we couldn't get any funding for it. It sat on the shelf for seven years.
When we brought it out, it took off like a rocket. We probably put 100,000 people through that course. The total public service in New Zealand were involved in that course because they wanted to learn the Maori language. Soon after that they were no longer talking about Maori as a dying language. It became the second official language in New Zealand.
In terms of literacy and its cost effectiveness, if you can deliver into homes people don't have to go anywhere. You just switch on the telly for an hour a day, five days a week. The program is designed to roll 12 years into one. It doesn't matter at what level of literacy they come in at. They can either do the program in six months, or if they come in and can't read, they can do it in 12 months.
The last course is computer literacy. Our experience in computer literacy is that you get a graduation rate close to 100 per cent. It's all monitored online. I haven't seen anything in Canada that could match it for cost efficiency.
As you can read in the report, it was interesting when the literacy secretariat proposed the government set aside $5 billion to start to address literacy in Canada that they disappeared. There is a solution and it does work. Unless you put it in place, you aren't going to dramatically lift those graduation rates.
My wife ran the program in New Zealand. Maybe she should be doing the talking. She's handing me these notes and I'm not describing it well.
Senator Sinclair: It's a common experience.
Mr. Wetere: I have notes all over the place. I'm obviously making a real muck-up of this.
I would not be so confident in what an indigenous university could do if it didn't have a program like this one that could address the issues that are causing failure right now. That's why I'm confident that Rebecca's work will make a huge change not only in Ontario, which has the largest indigenous population in Canada, but I think it is a blueprint of what can happen right across Canada. That's what we need.
I talked to Vince at Blue Quills in Alberta and he said, "I get about 300 students a year and have produced 2,300 graduates.'' Mainstream doesn't get anywhere close to what those indigenous institutions that haven't had any capital funding are doing. They're doing it out of the generosity of their hearts.
I know when we set up our institution in New Zealand nobody got paid for anything. Our staff are all voluntary. That's what you have to do to establish what we have finally established in New Zealand.
Senator Sinclair: I'm cognizant of the time, chair, and I want to express my thanks to the two of you for being here and being so patient with us.
I want to close by picking up on a remark you made, Ms. Jamieson, about the impact of residential schools on the students whom you have met over the years at the institute.
Could you base your answer on the experience you've had being a member of the community and knowing the people in the community? Correct me, but I think just over 25,000 people are members of Six Nations.
Ms. Jamieson: Yes.
Senator Sinclair: A number of them would have been survivors of the "Mush Hole'' residential school?
Ms. Jamieson: Yes.
Senator Sinclair: Could you comment upon one of the things that Senator Beyak, a senator in our institution, remarked upon? She asserted that a number of people had a good experience at residential school.
In your lifetime, have you met anyone who had a good experience at the "Mush Hole''?
Ms. Jamieson: I have not, no. I've had people say, "I learned things there,'' but in my personal experience I know that in our community from the time I was in elementary school until the time I finished high school not one person spoke our language, ever, in school. It was never spoken publicly. It wasn't until I started to work in education that we started to say the speeches publicly. That was many years later.
That's just one example of the kind of impact it has had on us. Is it a good thing that we spoke English well? Maybe somebody thinks so. It's not a bad thing, but the sad part is the number of years that language and everything that went with it was driven underground. That is not a good thing.
We definitely are in a period of recovery. Many of us have a lot of the accoutrements of modern society but still are lacking that knowledge that the language carries. We're continuing to rediscover that. I have had faculties say to me after they've taken language courses, "Now I know what was missing.'' That's the kind of recovery that has to happen on a personal level.
I know that when my husband's aunties left residential school they didn't want to have anything to do with the community because they were convinced by then that the community and the people were inferior and that they needed to go somewhere else where they could pass as not being part of it. Is that a good thing? No, it is not a good thing.
I can't honestly say that I know anyone who had a good experience there or any of the survivors that had, no.
Senator Christmas: Mr. Wetere, I'm trying to put some pieces together. Hopefully I'm not too far off base. When you mentioned that a university in New Zealand was receiving $200 million of public funding, was that the Maori university?
Mr. Wetere: Yes. It was $200 million a year.
Senator Christmas: Did I hear you correctly that students attended tuition-free?
Mr. Wetere: Yes.
Senator Christmas: I assume $200 million in New Zealand was a significant public investment of dollars. In your bio you mentioned the economic impact of the university upon New Zealand's economy.
If indigenous universities in Canada were adequately funded, if they went to a tuition-free model, can you envision indigenous universities in Canada having a similar kind of economic impact on Canada's economy?
Mr. Wetere: Yes. We have three indigenous universities in New Zealand. The other two were focused on Maori and doing things totally the Maori way. They were charging fees because they were all educated in mainstream universities. I had never seen the inside of a university. We set up the rules to suit ourselves, which seemed applicable to the situation.
As a result, their enrolments were 2,000 to maybe 3,000 a year, whereas we were climbing at the rate of 15,000 a year. At our peak we had 80,000 students, both full and part time. That caused consternation because the government in New Zealand was duty bound to fund programs that are accredited. That's why you can achieve huge change.
I'm reasonably confident. We got university status in 1994. We were granted the same status as a university in 1994, but we received no funding. I'm talking about what the New Zealand government is like. They gave us the status, all of the rights of a mainstream university, but no funding.
So I had to take them to court. I organized a protest at parliament and had to take the government to court. I had to fundraise to pay for the legal fees.
We didn't get mainstream funding until 2000. I was planning on 2000. With the method of funding of institutions in New Zealand and knowing what the gaps were not only with Maori but non-Maori, I thought we would be the biggest institution in four years. Sure enough, that's exactly what happened.
There's a huge unmet need in Ontario for indigenous people to participate at that level. Any who don't meet pre- entry requirements should be very quickly brought up to scratch so they can make progress. Once you have people making progress, they get really enthusiastic.
Our students in New Zealand didn't want to stop. They would work all night, all day and on the weekends. That's focus on education. That's what can make a huge difference.
Senator Christmas: Can I ask you to comment on the economic impact?
Mr. Wetere: The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research did a scan on us. When we were at 40,000 students they said we had made a $3 billion impact on the GDP of New Zealand. We doubled those numbers, and nobody would believe it. Our institution is in a little village of 10,000 people and our main campus in New Zealand. With technology today you can have your institution anywhere and run it. You don't have to be in a high-cost place on the hill.
It is the value of technology in reaching people and providing the best and excellent student resources to accelerate the learning process. It's what Rebecca can do. It's what we did and it will make a difference.
The Chair: Ms. Jamieson, do you have a response?
Ms. Jamieson: No.
Senator Enverga: I have just a quick question. It was mentioned in the booklet that indigenous education was moving in the wrong direction in Ontario.
How about the other provinces? Are they in the same direction? Do you have any comparisons with other provinces? Are they better?
Mr. Wetere: When I say it's moving in the wrong direction it is in terms of us needing huge progress and we haven't got it. The gap between indigenous and non-indigenous is widening. Non-indigenous people are not standing still. What is necessary to meet the employment needs in Canada is ever-changing. Unless you keep up with it, it's going to be difficult. Therein lies the challenge. When you have 420,000 indigenous adults in Canada who have no post- secondary education, you can see the gaps are there and the poverty and conditions that exist.
Look at the poverty and the conditions that exist. I got mad in New Zealand when Maori incarceration rates were high. At 15 per cent of the population, they made up 50 per cent of the incarceration rate. That disgusted me, and that's why I knew I had to do something. I suddenly realized that if you're going to do the job, you have to go further and have an impact on using education and getting people into jobs. We celebrated every time someone graduated with an apprenticeship. They got their degree. They got employment. They had lifted their salary earnings. There has to be a whole focus on that.
Senator Enverga: How about Quebec and British Columbia? Are they any better as provinces in treating their indigenous people?
Mr. Wetere: I haven't studied Quebec too much. I'm told that half the people are francophone and half are anglophone. We have discussed with some of the providers there, and they have said their post-secondary graduation rates are abysmal.
There is a case for converting the program that we've developed to a francophone version. We have someone behind us who is doing a doctorate in that study and hopefully that could happen.
The Chair: That's the end of second round. We have a couple of minutes left, so I'm going to ask one question.
With regard to the demographics of the indigenous population in Canada, at least 50 per cent of the population is aged 25 and under. I don't know what the situation is like in New Zealand. I suspect it's similar.
Given that age distribution, what impact does that have on the push for increasing the educational outcomes of indigenous people?
Ms. Jamieson: From our perspective, with the need for the Six Nations University as we're proposing it that demographic is quite compelling. If we continue to do what we're doing, we're going to continue to create individuals and families who are going to be in cycles of dependency and despair. We need to circumvent that cycle. We need to disrupt that cycle and keep them engaged so that they will continue on a path of well-being to be able to participate and contribute.
It's quite frightening when you think that these young people are going on a pathway of disillusionment unless we do something significantly different.
The Chair: Professor Wetere, do you have anything to add?
Mr. Wetere: In New Zealand we took people from high school and gave our aging population the opportunity to improve their native language skills. We had a two-year diploma for understanding our history, our tradition and our culture in New Zealand. Our enrolment was across the board. That's what education should be. Everybody is involved with a focus.
I was invited to go to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, quite a few years ago. I happened to come across a place that made graduation gowns. I was astounded by the fact that they made the graduation gowns for Cambridge and Oxford universities. I thought hell's teeth, if they go all the way to Malaysia to get their gowns, I'm going to get our gowns made there.
So I had 1,000 gowns made in Kuala Lumpur. I asked our arts department in New Zealand to send over designs for the bachelors, doctorates, certificates and diplomas. They put all the Maori designs on them. Quite often in New Zealand, in one day we would have to use those gowns three times for 3,000 students graduating. The thirst for knowledge is unbelievable. If you suddenly release it, you will be astounded at the response you get.
The Chair: We've come to the end of our session. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank our witnesses this morning, Ms. Jamieson and Professor Wetere.
It sounds like we have some very good programming coming in Ontario and we have received wisdom from the experience in New Zealand this morning.
With that, we'll adjourn the meeting.
(The committee adjourned.)