THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, April 18, 2024
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met with videoconference this day at 9 a.m. [ET] to examine and report on issues relating to agriculture and forestry generally.
Senator Robert Black (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us. I would like to begin by welcoming members of the committee, our witnesses today, as well as those watching on the World Wide Web. My name is Rob Black, I am a senator from Ontario, and I chair this committee.
Before we hear from our witnesses, I want to take the opportunity to have senators around the table introduce themselves, starting with the deputy chair.
Senator Simons: I’m Senator Paula Simons. I come from Alberta from Treaty 6 territory.
Senator McNair: Good morning. Welcome. I’m John McNair. I’m from the province of New Brunswick.
Senator Burey: Good morning. Sharon Burey, a senator for Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Petitclerc: Good morning and thank you for joining us. Chantal Petitclerc from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Cotter: Good morning. My name is Brent Cotter. I’m a senator for Saskatchewan.
Senator Robinson: Hello. I’m Mary Robinson, a senator representing Prince Edward Island.
Senator Jaffer: Good morning. My name is Mobina Jaffer. I’m from British Columbia. Welcome.
The Chair: Today the committee is continuing its study on the topic of the growing issue of wildfires in Canada and the consequential effects that wildfires have on forestry and agriculture industries.
Today, we welcome, from Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, Wayne Walsh, Director General, Northern Strategic Policy Branch; and Joshua Rose, Director, Northern Governance and Partnerships. From Indigenous Services Canada, we welcome Paula Hadden-Jokiel, Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations Sector; James Moxon, Director General, Operations Branch, via video conference; and Rory O’Connor, Director General, Regional Infrastructure Delivery Branch. Thank you for being here today, in person and online.
We’ll begin with witnesses from Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, followed by Indigenous Services Canada. Each department has five minutes for your presentations. I’ll signal your time is running out by raising one hand. That means you have about a minute left. When you see two hands, it’s time to start wrapping up quickly.
Wayne Walsh, Director General, Northern Strategic Policy Branch, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada: Thank you. I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are meeting today on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe peoples.
My colleague Joshua Rose and I welcome this opportunity to discuss CIRNAC’s roles and responsibilities in relation to emergency management, particularly as it relates to wildfires.
Most emergencies in Canada are local in nature and are managed by municipalities and communities or at the provincial or territorial level. As such, emergency management is a shared responsibility between federal, provincial and territorial governments and their partners, including Indigenous governments.
Responses to these emergencies are predicated around four interdependent parts: prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. Effective emergency management is built upon ensuring that there is a strong, seamless relationship with emergency management partners, including Indigenous people and municipalities.
CIRNAC works closely with Indigenous Services Canada and other departments, including Public Safety, to deliver on the mandated responsibilities related to the implementation of Indigenous rights, negotiations and implementation of treaties, and other agreements to advance self-determination and reconciliation. CIRNAC also has mandated responsibilities for ensuring that policies, directives and programs, when applied across Canada’s North, are guided by the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework, permanent bilateral mechanisms, modern treaties and self-government agreements, and Canada’s collaborative modern treaty policy.
When it comes to emergency management, CIRNAC’s role is to facilitate the sharing of information with territorial and Indigenous governments, Northern communities and national Indigenous organizations. The department also plays a role in areas of prevention, mitigation and preparedness through the delivery of climate change proposals, including the Northern REACHE Program, climate change preparedness in the North and the First Nation Adapt program.
CIRNAC recognizes that Indigenous climate leadership must be the cornerstone of Canada’s domestic response to climate change, and that is why Canada has invested $29.6 million for Canada to work with First Nations, Inuit and Métis to advance the Indigenous climate leadership agenda and distinction-based strategy, ensuring that Indigenous people have the resources and authorities necessary to advance self-determination and climate action.
Since 2016, we have supported over 1,000 community-led projects for initiatives such as risk and vulnerability assessments, flood mapping, adaptation, monitoring impacts of climate change and transitioning to clean and renewable sources of energy, with investments of more than $6.7 million in 40 projects to support wildlife and emergency preparedness. Through this work, we are supporting hundreds of Indigenous and Northern communities that are disproportionately exposed to the effects of climate change and these amplified extreme weather events.
Canada’s 2023 wildfire season was the most destructive ever recorded. It resulted in widespread evacuation, loss of personal property and businesses, and damage to critical infrastructure. This was particularly true in the Northwest Territories. Indigenous governance landscapes in the N.W.T. are varied, complex and distinct from territorial and municipal government structures. The territory includes all three Indigenous distinctions, comprised of 26 First Nations, 6 Inuit communities and 11 Métis communities.
In addition, there are standalone as well as combined modern treaty self-government agreements in the territory, which introduce complexity in the governance system. The Tlicho government, Deline, Sahtu Secretariat Incorporated, Gwich’in Tribal Council and Inuvialuit Regional Corporation all have modern treaty and or self-government agreements with Canada.
This governance complexity, combined with the intensity of the wildfires, leaves gaps for Indigenous partners. Existing programming models related to emergency management, administered by Public Safety and the territorial governments, did not include Indigenous governments at the community level.
We’ll leave it at that.
The Chair: Do you want to just —
Mr. Walsh: Yes. We had to find some stopgap measures for the gaps that we found in 2023. We can get into more details during the questions about what we found, what happens and what the next steps need to be. I’ll leave it at that.
The Chair: Thank you.
Paula Hadden-Jokiel, Assistant Deputy Minister, Indigenous Services Canada: Good morning, honourable senators. I would like to acknowledge that we are gathered today on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe people. I would like to acknowledge and thank them for their guardianship of this land since time immemorial.
Thank you for inviting ISC, Indigenous Services Canada, back to your committee to talk about the growing issues of wildfires in Canada and the impacts these wildfires have on Indigenous communities. I’m joined today from Vancouver by James Moxon. James is the Director General of Sector Operations, which includes primary responsibility for the Emergency Management Assistance Program. In person, I’m joined by Rory O’Connor, the Director General of the Regional Infrastructure Delivery Branch, which has a lot of cross-work with our emergency program.
As I said, our sector is responsible for the Emergency Management Assistance Program as well as the infrastructure programs. The EMAP program provides mitigation and preparedness programming and reimburses communities for response and recovery activities following emergencies, including wildfires, to help them recover in a timely and resilient way. At ISC, we are committed to implementing an all-hazards approach to emergency management by working with various departments and through our various programs so we can protect communities, especially First Nations communities that are very vulnerable to climate change due to their remote and coastal locations and their reliance on the natural ecosystems.
First Nations are on the front lines of wildfire events. On average, First Nations face 52 wildfire emergencies every year. Last year, there were 161 fires that threatened their safety, and 90 First Nation communities were evacuated. Nearly 80% of First Nations are considered at risk to wildfires due to their location. Unfortunately, this year’s fire season forecast is very concerning. As well, drought in some parts of the country and early rising temperatures have communities preparing for another difficult season.
What are we doing to support First Nations? We are still supporting communities that were evacuated in 2023. We can share some of those examples, but one is Little Red River Cree Nation in northwest Alberta near the Northwest Territories border. There are 5,000 people living on reserve, and 2,700 of those were evacuated to a neighbouring community. The disaster resulted in the loss of 108 structures, with all 595 band-owned buildings suffering damage from smoke, heat and prolonged power outages. As of last week, there were still 869 community members displaced. As of last fiscal, the community received over $260 million from the EMAP to support response and recovery initiatives. Currently, the nation and its leaders are actively still managing the crisis, addressing the widespread stress and trauma among community members and staff, and coordinating the care of numerous evacuees across various locations and steering recovery and mitigation efforts.
I just wanted to illustrate that although we’re looking forward, we are also still providing support to communities that are still going through crisis and evacuations.
For this upcoming season, some of the things that we’re doing based on lessons learned: Supporting the pre-positioning of critical equipment in high-risk areas, such as air purifiers — you may remember the huge impacts of the smoke that affected communities; gathering surge capacity both internally in our department as well as supporting communities around surge capacity; supporting our partners such as the First Nations’ Emergency Services Society; and delivering incident command training to support key operations. We’re also providing a number of prevention activities that are funded through our FireSmart work.
The reality is wildfire response and prevention is expensive, hard and ongoing work. As our Minister Hajdu announced on April 10 this year to help ensure First Nations have the capacity to prepare and respond, the recent budget invested over $160 million to better help communities face wildfires and other emergencies. This includes $57.2 million over five years to support First Nations communities in a number of activities.
Our preparation activities include active outreach to communities to ensure that they have the prevention supports that they need. One of these important capacities is local emergency capacities. We have an interesting project in Alberta we would like to talk about if we have time. Currently, we have 248 emergency management coordinators in place across the country.
We know there is more to do. We need to work quicker in the face of unprecedented climate change. We know we need to pivot to more prevention and adaptation measures while at the same time committing to ongoing commitments to response and recovery.
I’ll leave it there. Thank you, chair.
The Chair: Thank you very much to our witnesses.
We’ll proceed now with questions from senators. Colleagues, I remind you that you have five minutes for the question and answer, so I ask that your questions and answers be concise. We’ll move from round to round as necessary and needed so we won’t hinder anybody’s ability to answer questions. I’m going to turn to our deputy chair for our first question.
Senator Simons: Thank you very much, Ms. Hadden-Jokiel. I wanted to start right in with Little Red River Cree Nation and the community of Fox Lake. I want to thank you for acknowledging the challenges they have had. I had the chance to meet with Chief Sewepagaham last week.
For those of you who don’t know the whole story, the community is on the shore of the Peace River. There is no bridge. They had to evacuate, the chief says 4,000; you say closer to 3,000, but it’s a lot of people that they had to get across the river on two barges and people’s personal boats and canoes. They didn’t get any help from anyone else in that time of crisis when the Paskwa Fire went through a year ago next month.
They now have a crisis because they were hoping to get the rebuilding materials they needed, the modular homes and the construction materials, over ice bridges this winter, but BC Hydro released warm brackish water from the Bennett Dam and flooded out the ice bridges four different times. According to the chief, he got about 7% to 10% of the supplies he had hoped to get over the river this winter.
Now Transport Canada, who never said boo about the band’s barges, has said that the barges haven’t been properly inspected and certified, and no one who works for the federal government, no one from ISC and no one from the RCMP is allowed to take the barges this summer into the community, which makes the only way you can get in by small plane or, I suppose, helicopter.
I think this outlines the challenges that Indigenous communities, especially in the North, face. It’s great that ISC provided them with millions of dollars for rebuilding, but they literally can’t rebuild because they can’t get the supplies into the community. The fire, by the way, is still burning all this time underground, so it could pop up again at any point.
What can we do for Fox Lake? As a microcosm, it’s just one example, but I think it speaks for a lot of communities that have similar challenges.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Thank you, chair, for the question.
It is one of the more complex cases, senator, absolutely — that’s why I wanted to outline it — with just the duration, the scope and the complexity of water access both in summer and winter. I’m glad you raised the issue of winter roads and ice bridges. That is a really important pipeline to support communities with refuelling as well as with construction materials. It is very disappointing that we haven’t been able to get as much construction material up there as possible. That community in particular has a really unique and innovative approach to home building. They have a First Nation-owned entity that supports that, so there are really great opportunities there.
In terms of their primary challenges right now, I know our local senior official, the regional director general, or RDG, for Alberta region, is talking very regularly with the chief, and we do have plans to facilitate a dialogue. It’s in Alberta. There is jurisdiction. The water challenges are coming from BC Hydro. It’s a very challenging discussion. But yes, their ice bridge, which is a primary pipeline for their supplies, was cut off due to flooding which was due to releases of water. There are a number of dialogues that have to happen.
As I tried to outline, that community is still in crisis-and-response mode. Many community members are still outside. There are many ongoing challenges to support the evacuees but also to commit to the rebuilding effort moving forward. ISC will be there supporting the chief. Where we can help facilitate those dialogues with other federal partners and provincial partners, we will definitely be there to support.
The Chair: Before we move on to Senator McNair, I do want to acknowledge, Mr. Moxon, that we know it’s an early time out there. Thank you for joining us so early in the morning.
Senator McNair: Thank you to the witnesses for being here today and I guess for the work that you’re doing to prepare for 2024 and the work you’re still doing on 2023.
We started with probably the most difficult case scenario, the description of the Alberta situation, but I understand your department is responsible for evacuating Indigenous communities throughout all the North region. I’m curious to know how it is working on the ground with your partners at this time. Particularly with respect to communication, is the communication or the channels working well? I’m thinking about challenges last time with real-time updates and transmitting information quickly. I’m wondering particularly about those communities like the Alberta example that are more remote and with only one path in or out. How are you managing that, and are there improvements being made to what was current practice or past practice?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Senator, can we clarify if you are talking about communities in the territories North or northern provinces?
Senator McNair: Northern provinces.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Northern provinces. It’s my net. We’re good. Thank you for the question.
In terms of communication, that was probably the number one area of feedback that we got from First Nations around lessons learned. These situations, particularly wildfires, unfold very quickly. Winds change. Things evolve very quickly. Communication and having First Nations leadership directly engaged in those conversations are really important.
We have been trying in every region of the country to ensure those discussions are multilateral in nature. We’re moving toward formal multilateral agreements with First Nations leadership and provinces. But for the conversations and the communication flow, we are really working to have First Nations directly at the table with the other provincial partners and the other agencies that provide the forecasts. We invite First Nations to provide traditional knowledge at those discussions around what they know about the local area and the traditional land and the patterns and the trends. The number one thing is to make sure First Nations are directly engaged in those conversations and to include all of the other provincial and federal partners as well.
Senator McNair: Mr. Walsh, the territories would have the same response, essentially?
Mr. Walsh: Yes.
Senator Cotter: Thanks very much for joining us here, remotely and early. The conversations and the challenges that you describe are significant, and I think we all appreciate the work that you and your colleagues are doing.
The issue that we are studying, though, is the growing issue of wildfires in Canada and their consequential effects on forestry and agriculture. Perhaps this is a question for the Indigenous Services folks since it’s a bit more on the ground. My question wants to zero in on the degree to which these wildfires have affected Indigenous businesses in the field of agriculture and forestry. Do you have data on that? Do you have accounts of loss of productive forestry that First Nations had been contemplating using for those kinds of purposes? Can you connect it to what I would call our mandate, which is focusing on agriculture and forestry?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Thank you for the question, senator.
Unfortunately, our program is really limited to supporting primarily the infrastructure losses on community, but it wouldn’t be supporting businesses. They would be applying for support through other programs and services or through insurance programs. Our program is really focused on the core infrastructure support for individuals and the bands and communities. We don’t have any reliable data. Certainly, there are anecdotes, but we don’t have any reliable data around the impacts on agricultural pursuits.
Senator Cotter: Who in the federal government would know the relationship between wildfires and agricultural losses? Will that reside in Agriculture, or will it reside in — I don’t know — Industry?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: My best guess would be with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in terms of assessing the impacts.
Senator Cotter: Could I ask a second question that is really contrary to my first observation? The relationship on many of these files is both federal and provincial. Many kinds of traditional jurisdictions reside with the provinces, some with the federal government. In addressing the challenges that you have — maybe this is a question for you, Mr. Walsh — what is the quality of the relationship between federal and provincial governments in responding to these crises and rebuilding communities and the like?
Mr. Walsh: The relationship aspect is fundamental. These are shared jurisdictions or shared responsibilities, and the response has to be shared. When I say relationships, I’m not even talking just about between our department and the territorial governments or the municipal governments. We need to also foster those relationships with Public Safety and within the federal family as well. I’m sure you will be hearing more responses from other departments in that area. It goes back to Paula’s point about communication being the key. That was one of the lessons we learned from last year.
To go back to your first question about the impact on agriculture, I’ll look at it from a Northern context. Industrial agriculture is quite small in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon, but the G.N.W.T. has indicated there have been some impacts. The South Slave region, for example, was severely affected. Some farmland does exist in the South Slave. You can think about the direct impact of wildfires, but then other things like fire retardants have impacted farmland and harvesting in the region, and, of course, there are the supply-chain disruptions which undermine food security. A really fundamental issue — it’s not agriculture-based, but it does speak to food security in Indigenous communities — is traditional harvesting. The impacts on the environment obviously also have massive impacts on the traditions.
Senator Cotter: Our mandate is not just the industrial side of the equation, so that’s a useful point. Thank you very much.
That question of trying to understand the quantum impact would not actually reside in your department? It would be again in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada or with the Northwest Territories folks?
Mr. Walsh: That’s right.
Senator Cotter: Thank you.
Senator Burey: Thank you so much for being here and for enlightening us on this very important issue with which we are grappling and will continue to grapple.
I was interested, Mr. Walsh, to hear that you were going to elaborate on the gaps and the things that you learned from the past season. We talked about communication being one of the lessons, but could you go further? That’s the first question.
Yesterday, I was reading a CBC story on a Winnipeg firefighter who took his own life. They were talking about his 17 years of service. Friends have spoken of his struggle with the PTSD from situations he faced. This is my second pointed question. What kind of integration are you having in terms of mental health and other supports for the firefighter workforce, particularly in Indigenous communities where you rely a lot on a volunteer workforce?
The initial question overall is about the gaps, the learnings and then, specifically, how you are integrating better mental health supports for the workforce.
Mr. Walsh: I’ll go first on the gaps. The gaps are specific to what we found in the Northwest Territories.
There are two major programs at the federal government. One is with Public Safety Canada, and it is the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements, or DFAA. What happens there is the province or territory declares a state of emergency, and then that program kicks in. That funding goes directly to provincial and territorial governments. It doesn’t go to Indigenous or First Nations reserves. The second program is administered by ISC, and that’s the Emergency Management Assistance Program. It includes eligibility for First Nations on reserve as well as the Yukon First Nations. The challenge and the gap that we have discovered in Northwest Territories is that we only have two reserves. The rest of the communities are not reserves, but they are Indigenous. They didn’t qualify for the EMAP funding, and they didn’t qualify for the Public Safety funding because that went through the G.N.W.T. Our department stepped in.
Then, with the evacuation of the larger centres, a lot of these communities brought their members back to their own area rather than having them go south. The Tlicho government and the Délı̨nę Got’ine government brought the people who were evacuated out of the larger centres back home, but that obviously has a cost. We were able to secure $15 million to reimburse those communities, but it highlighted that the gap exists, and we need to figure that out.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Thank you for the question, senator.
I would say that health and cultural supports are part of the wraparound services that are consistently provided, particularly to evacuees. We work closely with our First Nations and Inuit health branch within the department to ensure that there are mental health and physical health supports for evacuees in the short term and over the long term. I would say that, given these long periods of stress and trauma, there is a significant demand for ongoing mental health supports as well.
I’m not as familiar with the supports provided directly to the firefighter workforce, but we can certainly loop back with our colleagues at Public Safety Canada. ISC doesn’t manage the professional firefighter workforce. Certainly at the community level they would try to have an immediate response, but in terms of the professional wildfire fighting workforce, we would have to loop back with our colleagues at Public Safety.
Thank you for the question.
The Chair: We do have a commitment from Public Safety to follow up with some of the information we have asked for.
Senator Jaffer: Thank you to all of you for being here, especially you, Mr. Moxon. It’s so early in the morning. That’s a dilemma for all of us living in the West or in the North in that it’s always Ottawa time, so thank you.
I think my questions are for you, Ms. Hadden-Jokiel. If not, then they are for Mr. Walsh. Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada’s First Nation Adapt program supports First Nations communities in responding to the impacts of climate change with the focus on wildfires, among other priorities. What types of support did the program offer to Indigenous communities affected by wildfires in 2023?
Mr. Walsh: That’s a really good question. I think the program provided indirect support but nothing during the emergency. We can come back, and I’ll follow up on that.
Senator Jaffer: Where were the gaps? You can follow up if you don’t know that. What more could have been done to support Indigenous communities? There is always more to do, so I’m not trying to be critical, but what were the gaps?
Mr. Walsh: From our department’s perspective, the major gap was that gap in authorities that some communities then missed out on. We need to address that.
Senator Jaffer: I ask this question because where I live in B.C., we were very much affected by wildfires. We somehow felt that there wasn’t the support. What happened was from day to day. I would imagine in Indigenous communities, it’s even worse. How did you get people to know that you were there helping them? How are you supporting them?
Mr. Walsh: It’s a real challenge because it goes back to the fact that it’s a shared jurisdiction and a shared responsibility, right? Therefore, the first responses — the first decision points — are local, whether it’s municipal or territorial or provincial governments. That’s the first angle. From there, we get into the relationship issues and the conversations when the federal government is implicated and brings in other departments like Public Safety or ISC — ourselves — for example. That’s the ongoing challenge. We have to respect those authorities and responsibilities and go where we’re being asked to go.
Senator Jaffer: Sorry, I’m not meaning to stop you. How better could the federal government have helped in this situation? It was a huge fire, and lots of people were affected. In the end, we looked to the federal government for help.
Mr. Walsh: I don’t know if I want to speculate on that.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: I can add to that. I think that one of the important lessons learned is that it’s really important to have the communications and partnerships established in advance of the crisis, shifting toward planning. As devastating as the wildfire season was, every Canadian was touched by it. Every Canadian knew somebody that was in an imminent threat or they had smoke over their community. Every Canadian had an appreciation for how devastating it was. The good side of it was that it amped up people’s investment in engaging in the conversation about how to move forward. I would say it has helped bring people to the table around planning and coordination perhaps in a way that wasn’t as active in some communities.
Senator Petitclerc: I have a bit of a pointy or targeted question for you, madam, and I realize you may not have the answer. When I was researching and getting ready for this very interesting study, I was made aware that persons with disability — as you can see, I’m a wheelchair user — are very much disproportionately impacted by extreme events like fire. I can’t find it right now but, on a government website, there was just a small paragraph stating that there is some adaptive or adaptation initiative, especially when it comes to vulnerability in times of evacuation and relocation. That is my question: What does that look like, especially when it comes to Indigenous communities? I also know from a different study that there are persons with disabilities living in different communities in the North, and they are also disproportionately impacted at many levels. It’s a bit of a difficult question, I realize, but I’m interested to know. Do we prepare for that? I did read a small paragraph, but it was so vague that I don’t know what it looks like.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Thank you for the question.
I’ll start, senator, by indicating that vulnerable residents are always a concern and a key part of the planning process. One illustrative example is related to flood preparation. We’re doing a precautionary evacuation in a community now that’s at risk of flood. The residents with vulnerabilities are the first to evacuate in a planned way. We know where they’re going. We know that where they’re going will have the health supports they need. For instance, if they’re a dialysis patient, we make sure they’re going to a centre that will have ready access to that.
James, is there anything you would like to add in terms of vulnerability assessments?
James Moxon, Director General, Operations Branch, Indigenous Services Canada: Thank you, Paula.
I would add that one of the things that is funded under the preparedness and mitigation funding streams is supports to First Nations communities to prepare emergency plans that include evacuation plans and include running tabletop exercises. As part of those emergency management plans, communities will certainly look at their vulnerable populations. They will look at their populations within their communities that, as you noted, senator, are more disproportionately impacted by events and how, during evacuations, those people can be supported. As well, during the response, the Emergency Management Assistance Program will provide whatever supports are required to First Nations to support that evacuation for their population and vulnerable members. Planning is done at the front end that is supported through the program and then also during the response and, I would also say, during the recovery and repatriation. Whatever supports are required to assist those people in the community with whatever needs they have are supported under the Emergency Management Assistance Program.
Senator Petitclerc: Thank you. This is helpful.
Senator Robinson: I wanted to build on Senator Jaffer’s question. I certainly appreciate the shared jurisdiction dilemma. In agriculture, we’ve seen a lot of casualties because of shared jurisdiction, predominantly in communication and assuring people that help is coming. We saw it in the Fraser Valley with that lag in time from when the province triggered, until the feds responded, until funding came — that black hole of what’s coming, where is our help, what can we anticipate? You’ve spoken in recognition of that gap in communication, having to bring all these jurisdictions together to have that conversation.
To build on your comment, Ms. Hadden-Jokiel, it is important to have communication and planning in place beforehand, I think is your point. What are you all doing in anticipation of the next need to have better communication? Is there a strategy in place to bring those jurisdictions together to deliver information more in real time as to what people can expect and what they can bank on?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Thank you for the question, senator.
Those are very active conversations right now. The tables are always expanding and contracting, based upon the particular needs and the threats, but it starts early in terms of making sure the right people are at the table and having the plan in place. There is also the forecasting — before the actual season takes hold, and we’re in that active phase right now — making sure that First Nations are fully informed of what we know in terms of the risks that might be imminent.
What we have learned to do better is to be more proactive in the outreach around those communications — pulling people together, having verbal meetings. In some regions, it’s all chiefs call every week; in other regions, it’s email distribution lists that go out with the latest information. Something we as the federal government can do is pull the right people together, but we do look for First Nations to provide that guidance in terms of who they want to come to the table and how we facilitate that.
James, is there anything you would like to add to that?
Mr. Moxon: Thank you, Paula.
To your point, in ISC regional offices in all the different regions, staff are proactively reaching out to First Nations communities to talk to them and understand what their needs are in preparation for the upcoming wildfire season and how those can be mapped against the supports that ISC has, and also what other pathways and other supports are available through the federal family and through provincial and territorial governments and then seeking to bring them into the conversation.
Other examples are looking to leverage a forum that brings multiple different parties together with First Nations. For instance, next week in British Columbia, there is a gathering called Our Gathering, which brings together all First Nations in the province to Vancouver over the course of three days. Provincial partners will be there. There will be non‑governmental organizations, First Nations leadership and other representatives. That’s an opportunity to talk about emergency management preparedness and communicate the supports available, understand needs that are out there and understand how to best meet those among the full constellation of different partners that are out there.
Senator Robinson: Do you feel there is a concentrated enough effort — a focused effort — to address the communication issue, or could it be better? Is it something that we’re doing as an add-on to things, or is it something we’re focused on?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: No, it’s absolutely a clear focus. That is the way that information is shared. It can always be better —
Senator Robinson: Is there a plan to make it better?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Region by region or even community by community, the needs are a little bit different.
Something that could make it better is the work we’re doing to have a dedicated point person in every community, an emergency management coordinator. That local capacity is really important. Right now, there are 248. That is something we’re focused on. We would like to expand that capacity.
One other thing you touched upon in your previous question, senator, is what we are doing differently. One thing we’re doing differently now is advance payments, where it used to be a reimbursement program. The extent of these crises in some communities is a huge cash flow pressure. Providing some funds in advance to help mitigate that pressure is also a significant support.
The Chair: I have a question. Thinking about emergency preparedness and forward thinking, are there initiatives to promote sustainable land management practices that reduce wildfire risks, such as prescribed burns and forest management strategies? Is anyone in either of your departments thinking that through?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: We can start, and I’ll ask James to expand. One of the pillars of the Emergency Management Assistance Program is the non-structural mitigation program. It’s part of the prevention and mitigation pillar, so there is funding in there for some of these activities. James, maybe I can ask you to expand on the supports that are available there.
Mr. Moxon: Yes, certainly.
As Paula noted, the FireSmart program funding stream under the Emergency Management Assistance Program can support prescribed burning, cultural burning and vegetation clearing for First Nations. That’s based upon First Nations coming forward. It’s based on their traditional Indigenous knowledge, by the way. It’s First Nations determining what’s required and how to do it in their communities, and that is something that is absolutely supported across the country. As we’ve seen, it’s really critical and important. It plays really big dividends in terms of preparedness and mitigation.
The Chair: Anything from CIRNAC?
Mr. Walsh: The challenge we have is that we don’t have dedicated programs. We play more of that relationship-facilitator role. Our regional offices do work with communities in the North, the Yukon and Northwest Territories, on emergency preparedness and emergency preparedness planning. That would be the level of our engagement.
The Chair: Thank you.
I was going to ask about engaging and involving Indigenous communities in development and implementation, but I heard the answer that you both are doing that, either at the higher level or with your regional folks.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: At all levels.
The Chair: Yes, thank you.
Rory O’Connor, Director General, Regional Infrastructure Delivery Branch, Indigenous Services Canada: I could add to that as well.
I think it’s important to note that, for most of our programs if not all of them, we’re supporting the communities on reserve. It’s so important to be getting ahead of this. It’s expensive to individuals in communities and dollars if we’re just responding, so an important component is structural mitigation, non-structural mitigation and also fire protection. The key thing I would add is the training for communities and making sure they have the equipment to deal with the issues. It is particularly the training in advance, which deals with a lot of the issues. In Budget 2022, 39.2 million focused dollars were for the purchase of wildland-urban interface firefighting equipment, and that’s key to the issue we’re talking about today. There are other fire protections, such as fire halls, trucks and training, but that one is particularly relevant to this topic.
Senator Simons: Mindful of Senator Cotter’s question, some of these First Nations communities have active forestry businesses. Others, I’m assuming because of the fires — we talked about the Northwest Territories and northern Alberta, but there have been fires right in the Okanagan Valley. There have been fires that have been quite southern as well. Can either of your departments give us a sense of how many of these Indigenous communities are active in the agriculture and forestry sectors themselves and what it has meant economically for those communities to be facing wildfires?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Apologies. I don’t have that information in terms of the number of communities that would be active in forestry and agriculture as a data point. Obviously, we know that many of these communities are fully integrated in their local ecosystem. Local forestry and lands are an important part of their traditions, including economic development, but I don’t have the data specifically on that.
Senator Simons: Perhaps it’s too amorphous a question, but to come back to the ambit of the Agriculture and Forestry Committee, is there is a way to give us a sense, even if it’s not a number, but to maybe have a couple of examples of communities where this has been an economic industry that has been disrupted>
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel, you mentioned in your opening statement something about a new deal with Alberta, which perked up my ears, especially because Alberta’s government is in the midst of passing legislation that says no provincial entity can apply for federal funds without the express permission of the province. What is this initiative you have in Alberta, and how have you made that work in a jurisdiction where these issues are especially complex?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Absolutely. Before I turn it to James Moxon for an overview of what we’re doing in Alberta in terms of an all-hazard approach, Rory O’Connor had a comment around your first question regarding forestry.
As well, I will point out that we have a Strategic Partnerships Initiative program at ISC which is really about facilitating horizontal collaboration, and they have shared with me three forest regeneration/reforestation-type projects that are eligible as part of that funding stream, so I’ll try and get a little bit more information on the work through that initiative. It’s not in my sector, but I’ll commit to getting back to you in writing.
Is there anything you can add in terms of the industry piece, Rory?
Mr. O’Connor: Absolutely. Here I go a little bit to historic information I would have as the Associate Regional Director General, or RDG, in the Atlantic region for a number of years. I am aware that there are programs out there to support Indigenous communities. In the Atlantic region, there is one in the Strategic Partnerships Initiative. It is supporting multiple communities. We do have some projects that are supportive. We can definitely come back with a little bit of a flavour of that.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: James, could you give a quick overview of the work we’re doing with Alberta?
Mr. Moxon: Thank you for the question, senator.
In Alberta, we’ve pulled together funding within the department, as brought forward by First Nations in Alberta, for the critical importance of an emergency management coordinator position in each community to support, in all hazards, an emergency management coordinator position in each of the 48 First Nations in the province. That’s being implemented right now as we speak. I can say there’s been very good and close collaboration with the provincial government on that. They’re aware of that, they’re supportive of it, and, in fact, they’re coordinating on how that is brought on stream and how those emergency management coordinators are trained. The province has been engaged in those conversations and supportive of that, looking forward.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: It is an integrated approach in Alberta because the province is supporting an emergency management coordinator in every off-reserve community. ISC is sort of aligning with that, and we’re providing the support to make sure every First Nation community. It’s 48, I think?
Do I have the right number, James? There are 48 in Alberta?
Mr. Moxon: Yes.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: So that there can be an integrated approach at the provincial level.
Senator Simons: Thank you.
Senator McNair: My question is to CIRNAC. I noticed your website mentions the First Nation Adapt Program, and it indicates it provides support to First Nations communities and organizations to assess and respond to the impacts of climate change and increase climate resilience in support of self‑determined priorities. Those priority areas are identified through discussions with the First Nations. My understanding is they include wildfires, drought and other emerging priorities.
Can you indicate what type of support the First Nation Adapt Program provided communities affected by wildfires in 2023 and, alternatively, what you foresee as the types of support that will be provided in 2024 during the wildfire season?
Mr. Walsh: I don’t have the breakdown specific to wildfires. I can tell you that, first of all, the First Nation Adapt Program has two programs, one for the South and one for the North. Despite the fact we’re with Northern Affairs, we do run the southern program. For the First Nation Adapt Program, in 2022-23, the overall budget was $10.9 million, and it funded 31 new and ongoing projects south of 60. North of 60, it’s called the Climate Change Preparedness in the North Program. It had a budget of $11 million, and it funded 84 projects. We can get you the breakdown of how many of those were specific to wildfires, but, as you indicated, we fund more than just wildfires. It could be flood preparation or things like that.
Senator McNair: It would be helpful if you could provide the information specific to wildfires.
Mr. Walsh: No problem.
Senator McNair: Is that amount adequate for 2024?
Mr. Walsh: Good question. We’ll get back to you with the exact amount from wildfires.
Senator McNair: Thank you.
Senator Jaffer: In all transparency, I’m an egg and chicken farmer. When floods or fires came near, there was a big worry about what would happen to the livestock. From the Indigenous point of view, did you give any support to either save the livestock or take it to another place? I would like to ask that to Ms. Hadden-Jokiel.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Thank you for the question, senator. I’m not aware of any direct supports around livestock.
Senator Jaffer: Especially horses and things like that?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: James, I’m not sure if you have any additional information on that. It’s not something that I’m familiar with.
Mr. Moxon: No.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Support for the evacuation of livestock?
Mr. Moxon: I don’t have any specific information on instances where that may have been supported. The EMAP is focused on and supports primary home occupancy on reserve, whatever that primary occupancy may be, as well as band-owned critical infrastructure on reserve. Financial support for expenditures related to small business, including farms and agricultural initiatives, aren’t typically eligible under EMAP. However, there may be case-by-case specific situations I’m not aware of where there have been supports provided. I’m not aware right now. I don’t have that in front of me.
Senator Jaffer: Can you provide that, please, to the clerk of the committee? Will you be able to get that information, please?
Mr. Moxon: We can look into that, yes.
Senator Jaffer: Thank you.
What additional resources are deemed necessary to effectively mitigate, prepare for and respond to wildfires? You said there is never enough. That’s always the case. As parliamentarians, for wildfires and floods, what kind of additional resources do you think we should be making available to departments?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: I can start with that.
Just in terms of the EMAP, the permanent funding for response and recovery is quite a small envelope. However, we do go back — sometimes several times a year, depending on the year — to request additional funds for response and recovery efforts because it’s a reimbursement-type program.
I would say that where there are continued needs that exceed the resources available, it’s around the prevention, mitigation and building climate-resilient infrastructure. There are more prevention-type projects than we’re able to supply funding for, so I would say that’s where the greatest need is.
The Chair: Anything to add, Mr. Walsh?
Mr. Walsh: I would agree with that.
The thing that’s important to remember is that we are talking very specifically about the impacts of wildfires on infrastructure, but particularly in the North, it’s more than just wildfires. It’s climate change. It’s permafrost that is disappearing or being affected. It’s floods. That whole adaptation is a change of mindset. It’s about preparedness and about building different. It’s about that infrastructure. So, yes, I would concur.
Senator Jaffer: Thank you.
Senator Robinson: I’m looking at our mandate on this study and seeing that this study is to look at the growing issues of wildfires in Canada and the consequential effects wildfires have had and continue to have on forestry and agricultural industries. My question is focused around the point that was made, I think by Senator Simons, that we do have agriculture and forestry businesses within the communities that you are representing today.
Back again to timing and communication, Ms. Hadden-Jokiel, you had mentioned that there are now advanced funds available. We had asked the same question of the BRM folks at AAFC in response to the floods in the Fraser Valley. Generally speaking, because I know you’re talking about many different communication structures, but from when the question was asked for support until advanced funds would have been received by the people who need them, what kind of timeline are we looking at? I’m thinking of people who are running these businesses in both agriculture and forestry, and they need to be able to maintain their presence to manage their resources and their businesses and have their employees, their labour force, do the same. I’m just wondering what kind of timeline there was from when it was triggered until people actually received some kind of financial — something of substance to keep them where they were.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Thank you for the question, senator.
I would clarify that individual businesses wouldn’t be eligible for the advance payments. We would be providing the advance payments to communities in terms of supporting their preparedness planning or supporting their early evacuation efforts in anticipation of costs that they would need to be reimbursed for afterwards. That can be a very quick process, a couple of days in some cases.
When we’re having those ongoing discussions with community leadership, it’s something that officials are putting on the table as well: “Is this something that would be helpful? Is this something that you need?” So it’s not always waiting for the requests from the community. Once we have decided that that’s a way forward, it would be a matter of days, if that was what was required, or it may just be something where the community wants to indicate, “Okay, we may need this in a couple of weeks going forward as the bills come in.” I would say it’s really on a case-by-case basis.
Senator Robinson: Have you considered — maybe you have already done it — a follow-up with the players in the forestry and agricultural industries in the areas you represent to get feedback from them as to where they saw the gaps and where things were done well and where things could be done better? Have we done any kind of follow-up like that?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: We haven’t, no, as the emergency management program.
Senator Robinson: Would it fall within your jurisdiction, or would it be someone else that would need to do that?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Within ISC, there is an economic development area. That may be an area that they could look at, but it’s not within the purview of the Emergency Management Assistance Program.
Senator Robinson: You represent ISC, yes?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Yes.
Senator Robinson: Could we ask you to have a look at that and see if that’s something you could undertake, to get feedback from the people on the ground to see how the services were perceived to have been delivered?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Absolutely.
Senator Robinson: Thank you.
Senator Petitclerc: I have a question for you, Mr. Walsh, because it’s from your comment just now saying that we can’t just address fire and it’s part of climate change. My understanding is that programs and initiatives need to be done organically. I am also thinking about impact on agriculture or traditional practices, like you mentioned. I assume it’s hard to quantify, but when it comes to resilience and prevention — I understand that when something happens, it’s urgency, it’s an emergency and it’s relocating, so we have to address it very quickly. My question is whether we are investing enough when it comes to programs, financially, in minimizing the occurrence as much as is possible? Just to get a scale of that, is that possible? Are we proactive, or are we still in reacting mode?
Mr. Walsh: I would say we’re probably both, to answer that question. I mean, we do have the programs I talked about earlier, the First Nations Adapt Program and the climate change preparedness. Those are very specific programs in getting communities to think and to plan about infrastructure in light of climate change in the North.
Is it enough? I’ll tell you, through the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework, we hear from our partners, territorial and provincial governments, Indigenous governments, and they say there is a massive infrastructure gap in the North specifically. You heard it from the premier of the Northwest Territories at the time of the evacuations last summer. Lack of infrastructure led to those evacuations. People will say there is always more to do, for sure. I will leave it at that.
Senator Petitclerc: That’s helpful. Thank you.
Senator Oh: My apologies for being late. I had to chair another meeting.
Alberta forest is being burned now. There must be hundreds of millions of acres that are being burned now. I am thinking about the return of the forest. Does the government help with funding in Indigenous land or outside of Indigenous land for replanting or rejuvenation of the forests?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Yes. I don’t have extensive details on that, senator, but I do know that our Strategic Partnerships Initiative, a horizontal program that works across departments, funded a number of reforestation-type projects, and we can certainly provide those to the clerk.
Senator Oh: Yes. And does that include Indigenous land?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Yes. The program that we support would be on-reserve land.
Senator Oh: Okay. Thank you. If you could provide that to the clerk, that would be great.
The Chair: My question focuses around the sharing of and use of information from international partnerships and knowledge exchanged from outside of Canada. Is there any of that going on? Is there a value in doing that? Both of you could comment, if you can.
Mr. Walsh: There is value, absolutely. We’re not active in those. I think that’s probably Public Safety Canada and other government departments. We do have international collaboration on other areas through the Arctic Council, for example. I can say that our experience, when we do collaborate internationally, is quite helpful, but we’re not involved with this specifically.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: I would say, similar to my colleague, we rely on the large emergency management file being managed and led federally by Public Safety Canada. They would be doing the international linkages. Where we have looked for supports is primarily around work we have been doing recently on updating our risk assessment framework, so looking to best practices internationally in terms of risk frameworks.
I’ll turn to my colleague James, who has been involved more directly in some of this work. This was a direct response to one of the recommendations in the OAG report on the EMAP from late in 2022, which was to refresh the Risk Assessment Framework to make sure that it was more responsive to the changing environment. We have done some work there around best practices. James, maybe you could touch briefly on some of the things we looked at to update that framework.
Mr. Moxon: Certainly. Thank you for your question, chair.
When we were looking at this, we were aligning this new risk‑based approach with certain international standards and elements, including the United Nations Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. One of their priorities is understanding disaster risk, saying it should be based on an understanding of risk in all of its dimensions. We also included Public Safety Canada’s National Risk Profile and national risk framework for wildland fire at Natural Resources Canada, or NRCan. We were also leveraging the Canadian Red Cross’s Risk Reduction and Resilience approach.
Those international standards and national standards talk about a holistic approach and place-based approach and the vulnerability-based approach to risk. We have incorporated into the new risk-based approach the First Nation Adapt Program at Crown–Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. That program identifies regions in the country that are at relatively higher risk for climate hazards, as well as the relative risks by First Nations, using things like hazard-mapping data as well as past-incidents data.
Filtering down from those international standards, we’re incorporating in specific datasets that seek to be informed by that, as well as looking at ISC’s Community Well-Being Index which looks at the socio-economic elements of communities to understand vulnerability and the resilience of communities and their capacities to respond to emergencies. We have incorporated those two new datasets into our approach in assessing risk.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Simons: I have two quick factual questions and one existential one.
First, can you tell us something about training programs for Indigenous communities in firefighting? Is that something you have been ramping up, to equip members of those communities to take leadership in doing their own firefighting?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Firefighting specifically or —
Senator Simons: Firefighting, fire mitigation, fire control. This is a study about fires.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: I was only asking that because a lot of training supports are available as well as incident management support to build the competencies of the local emergency management coordinators as well as firefighters. ISC doesn’t provide the training. ISC provides access to the funding to access the training. A number of First-Nations-led organizations out there are offering training. Our department doesn’t provide the training directly but would provide funding.
Senator Simons: Do you have a sense of how that is ramping up? How many more people from Indigenous communities are being trained?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: I don’t have a sense of the numbers on that.
James, I don’t know if you have a sense of the uptake on that?
Mr. Moxon: I don’t have specific numbers, but it’s certainly something that communities are very interested in and focused on.
As was mentioned, under the FireSmart Canada program, funding can be made available to communities so they can access training for First Nations teams and wildfire suppression activities, as well as acquiring equipment to support those activities, such as personal protective gear. Linked to that are other initiatives such as hazard-risk mapping, understanding the risks of wildfire within communities and how best to mitigate against those and how that links, as I mentioned previously, to cultural burning and prescribed burning in communities.
In terms of the federal family and other federal departments and the supports that they have, Natural Resources Canada has funding that can be made available to First Nation communities to train First Nation teams in wildfire-fighting capabilities.
Senator Simons: Thank you for the very complete answer. The chair says I don’t have much time.
Mr. Walsh, you mentioned in your opening statement the number of Métis communities in the Northwest Territories and, certainly, in Alberta with the Métis settlement system. We have talked a lot about First Nations, but who is supporting Métis communities? Is there funding through ISC, or is that through a different pathway?
Mr. Walsh: That’s a good question. I don’t know about south of 60, but north of 60, that was part of the gap that we identified, Métis and Inuit communities and First Nations that are not on reserve. We’re dealing with the Northern challenges. I’m not sure what the reality is south of 60 for Métis communities.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: South of 60, the EMAP is available to First Nations on reserve. Métis communities are not eligible for that program. They would be accessing supports through the provincial governments, which in turn would be linked to the Disaster Finance Assistance Program from Public Safety Canada.
Senator Simons: Métis settlements in Alberta don’t have that same program. That’s important to know.
Finally, I want to come back to Senator Petitclerc’s question about infrastructure. We started with the cautionary tale of Fox Lake. Lots of Fox Lake’s problems would be solved if they had a bridge. For a long time in the North, we relied on ice roads and ice bridges. Frankly, I cast aspersions on BC Hydro’s water management, but the other challenge facing Fox Lake was the extraordinarily mild winter in Alberta. Even without the flood flows, those ice bridges took a long time to build and get ready for purpose. In a world in which we will no longer be able to depend on ice roads, in a world in which permafrost melt is leading to the heaving of runways and things, what will we do to bridge the infrastructure gap so that people north and south of 60 are safe in their own communities and are able to bring in food, fuel, building equipment and emergency relief workers when they need them?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Thank you for that question, senator, and, again, for mentioning the ice roads.
That is an area under Rory’s leadership, and it’s something we monitor closely. We have an extensive network across four provinces to support First Nations in partnership and, in some cases, in cost-share arrangements with provincial support. This year, particularly, we have monitored the length of the season, and it has been shorter in Alberta. The winter road season there was 46 days shorter compared to last season. Compared to the last five years, it was one week shorter. There is huge variability with winter roads. Certainly, it’s an area of vulnerability, particularly with the increase in climate change.
Maybe I can turn to Rory to talk about the supports we provide for roads and bridges. They are an expensive infrastructure investment.
Mr. O’Connor: They are indeed.
We have seen a gradually shortening season. It’s something we’re tracking and taking seriously. Every year can be different. Some will be longer, some will be shorter, but we’re averaging a week to 10 days shorter compared to historical averages. We’re looking at short-, medium- and long-term strategies to address that. Shorter term might be engineering solutions on winter ice roads. We’re also looking at bigger long-term projects, which might be infrastructure. There was something in the budget proposal the other day which addressed bridges which would extend the season for those who are still connected by winter roads and then also address a community directly in terms of having a bridge to provide access to the highway system in Ontario. We’re looking at those longer-term projects. They are expensive.
I will jump to the fire protection just to say that there are over 300 additional projects for fire protection across the country. That will give a bit of a scale. These cost tens of millions of dollars, and those are key things. This is above and beyond what had been historically done. They are targeting things like equipment, training, fire halls and things like that. So it is ramping up. There is always more to do, of course. This is just to give you a bit of scale.
The Chair: Witnesses, thanks very much for your participation today. It’s good to see some of you again. Your testimony and insight are very much appreciated as we move forward with this important study.
Colleagues, thanks very much for your active participation and insightful questions. It’s great to have you here this morning. I also want to thank the folks behind us and our colleagues in our offices. We always really do appreciate all the support we get from each of you, so thanks very much.
With that, if there is no other business, honourable senators, this meeting is adjourned.
(The committee adjourned)