THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL FINANCE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, March 29, 2023
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met with videoconference this day at 6:46 p.m. [ET] to consider the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024; and, in camera, to consider the Supplementary Estimates (C) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023 (consideration of a draft report).
Senator Éric Forest (Deputy Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Deputy Chair: I wish to welcome all the senators as well as the viewers across the country who are watching us on sencanada.ca.
My name is Éric Forest, senator from the province of Quebec and Deputy Chair of the Senate Committee on National Finance. I will now ask my colleagues around the table to introduce themselves, starting on my left.
Senator Gignac: Good evening, Mr. Chair. Clément Gignac, Quebec.
Senator Loffreda: Good evening, everyone. Tony Loffreda, Quebec.
[English]
Senator Bovey: Patricia Bovey, senator from Manitoba.
Senator Boehm: Peter Boehm, Ontario.
Senator Duncan: Pat Duncan, senator from the Yukon. Welcome again and thank you for coming.
Senator Smith: Larry Smith, Montreal, Quebec.
Senator Marshall: Elizabeth Marshall, Newfoundland and Labrador.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: Jean-Guy Dagenais, Quebec.
The Deputy Chair: Also with us this evening, as always, are Mireille Aubé, our clerk, and Sylvain Fleury and Shaowei Pu, our analysts, who support us in our work. Welcome everyone.
We are continuing our study of the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024, which was referred to this committee on March 7, 2023, by the Senate of Canada.
To assist with this study, we are joined by senior officials from Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
Welcome to all of you and thank you for accepting our invitation to appear before the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance. Since there are many of you and to save time, I will introduce the two people who will be making statements and will ask the others to introduce themselves if they are asked to speak.
[English]
We will now hear opening remarks from Philippe Thompson, Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer, Indigenous Services Canada. Mr. Thompson, the floor is yours.
Philippe Thompson, Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer, Indigenous Services Canada: Thank you, honourable senators, for the invitation to discuss the 2023-24 Main Estimates for Indigenous Services Canada. I would like to begin by acknowledging that we come together on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin and Anishinaabe people.
With me are Keith Conn, Assistant Deputy Minister, First Nations and Inuit Health Branch, Indigenous Services Canada, Kelley Blanchette, Assistant Deputy Minister, Lands and Economic Development, Indigenous Services Canada, Sylvain Souligny, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations, Indigenous Services Canada, Ian Kenney, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Education and Social Development Programs and Partnership Sector, Indigenous Services Canada, and Lisa Legault, Senior Director, Children and Families Directorate, Indigenous Services Canada.
[Translation]
For the upcoming year, in partnership with Indigenous peoples, the department will focus on priorities that are linked to the following six service areas.
The first service area is health. The intended result is that, through Indigenous Services Canada programming, Indigenous peoples are physically and mentally well, and have access to federally funded quality health services.
Examples of these contributions include: community-based funding for public health promotion and disease prevention, the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program and mental wellness initiatives, as well as Jordan’s Principle and the Inuit Child First Initiative.
The second service area is children and families. Our goal is for Indigenous peoples to be culturally safe and socially well through Indigenous Services Canada programs, such as safety and prevention services, child and family services and income supports programs.
These initiatives include immediate and long-term reform to child and family services on reserves and in the Yukon, and ongoing implementation of the Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families.
The third Indigenous service area is education to ensure that Indigenous students are progressing in their education. Indigenous Services Canada is working to transform elementary and secondary education programming for First Nations students to support education that respects First Nations’ methods of teaching and learning. Also, through distinctions-based post-secondary education programming, Indigenous Services Canada is working toward increasing the number of post-secondary Indigenous students.
The fourth service area is infrastructure and environments. It enables Indigenous communities to have sustainable land management and infrastructure. This includes safe drinking water, housing, building and renovating school facilities to enable community infrastructure. It also includes land management and land-use planning, environmental reviews and addressing concerns associated with waste management and contaminated sites, as well as emergency management.
The fifth service area is economic development to ensure that Indigenous communities are progressing in their business and economic growth. Indigenous Services Canada’s economic development funding respects the right to self-determination by Indigenous partners and uses a distinctions-based, inclusive approach. For example, the Indigenous women entrepreneurship initiative increases accessible supports for women and improves social and economic security for Indigenous women entrepreneurs.
The last service area is governance, to enable Indigenous communities to have governance capacity and support for self-determination. Funding initiatives, such as the New Fiscal Relationship Grant, seek to provide First Nations with autonomy in the design and delivery of services.
[English]
In order to deliver these service areas, Indigenous Services Canada’s 2023-24 Main Estimates are $39.6 billion. It should be noted that the Main Estimates are the first step in the fiscal cycle and do not include additional approvals or funding that stem from Budget 2023. Funding for additional approvals will be accessed through future estimates.
The 2023-24 Main Estimates reflect a net increase of $5.9 million, or 0.01%, compared to last year’s Main Estimates. Major changes include: An increase of $981.5 million for costs related to compensation to First Nations Child and Family Services and Jordan’s Principle programs; a net increase of $454.6 million to support the implementation of the act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families; a net increase of $228 million for Indigenous community infrastructure; a net increase of $162.7 million related to child and family services; a net increase of $123 million for emergency management on reserve; and an increase of $113.3 million to implement the federal framework to address the legacy of residential schools. There is also a decrease of approximately $241.6 million due to the sunset of funding for implementation of the British Columbia Tripartite Framework Agreement on First Nation Health Governance; a net decrease of $374.3 million for non-insured health benefits for First Nations and Inuit; a decrease of $2 billion for out-of-court settlements; and a net increase of $562 million for a large number of other initiatives and changes in the approved funding level.
Together, these resources help ensure that we continue to work with our Indigenous partners to address key elements of this mandate and our commitment to reconciliation.
[Translation]
These Main Estimates will enable us to continue to collaborate with Indigenous partners to address systemic inequities and disparities, and to support the transfer of services to Indigenous partners.
I look forward to discussing any aspects of the estimates with you. My colleagues and I welcome your questions.
Meegwetch. Qujannamiik. Marsee. Thank you.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Véronique Côté, Director General, Planning and Resource Management, Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Office Sector, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
Véronique Côté, Director General, Planning and Resource Management, Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Office Sector, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada: Thank you, honourable senators, for the invitation to discuss the 2023-24 Main Estimates for Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. I would like to recognize that I am speaking to you today from the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe people. I am accompanied today by senior officials from the department who will help respond to your comments or questions.
The funding in the Main Estimates allows Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to continue on the path to renewing the relationship with Indigenous peoples; to further its work to modernize institutional structures and governance to support self-determination; to progress on righting wrongs from the past, towards Indigenous reconciliation; and finally, to advance its work to protect the environment and ensure prosperity, sustainability and health in the North.
[English]
The 2023-24 Main Estimates will provide the department with $9.2 billion, a net increase of approximately $3.4 billion when compared to last year’s Main Estimates of $5.8 billion. The major items contributing to this increase include the funding for the Gottfriedson Band class settlement agreement of $2.9 billion, as well as $475.5 million for comprehensive land claims, self-government agreements and other agreements to address section 35 rights.
The department’s 2023-24 Main Estimates are composed primarily of transfer payments and operating expenditures. Transfer payments account for 53% of the Main Estimates, or $4.9 billion, while operating expenditures account for 47%, or $4.3 billion.
Mr. Chair, I would like to take a moment to highlight some of the work that these estimates will allow Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to undertake in 2023-24. With this funding, the department is accelerating the renewal of the relationship with Indigenous people. Specifically, the department will increase the number of treaties, self-government agreements and other constructive arrangements concluded, as well as the settlement of claims.
Work is also progressing to modernize institutional structures and governance to support Indigenous visions of self-determination by collaborating with our partners to advance joint priorities, co-develop policies and monitor ongoing progress. The department also continues to implement the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action related to missing children and unmarked burial sites.
As well, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada is advancing work in the North through the establishment of regional governance mechanisms and an implementation plan for Canada’s Arctic and Northern Policy Framework with Indigenous, territorial and provincial partners. In addition, the department continues to help make nutritious food and essential items more affordable and accessible to residents of eligible isolated Northern communities, supports clean energy and climate monitoring projects and continues remediation of Northern contaminated sites.
We look forward to discussing these estimates with you and welcome your questions. Thank you.
[Translation]
The Deputy Chair: Thank you very much for your statements.
We will now have our question period. I would like to emphasize to senators that they have a maximum of five minutes for one round.
I would like to remind you that the committee is going to go into closed session after this panel, at 8 p.m. I would ask that you ask your questions directly and that the witnesses respond succinctly. The clerk will notify me when the time is up.
[English]
Senator Marshall: Thank you to the witnesses for being here.
My first question is for Mr. Thompson, as usual. Can you give us an update on the money set aside for compensation to First Nations children and families because of the underfunding in the child welfare system. Is that money still in your budget or has it been paid out? Exactly where is it? Give us an update.
Mr. Thompson: Thank you very much for the question. Much appreciated. The short answer is, yes, the funding is still in our reference level. It had been carried over. You see it in our Main Estimates. There is a little increase with regard to the funding. We have received additional funding for compensation. We have an additional $981.5 million, and we are still working on a settlement agreement.
At the moment that we reach an agreement, we will be in a position to initiate a process to issue the payments.
Senator Marshall: Where is it, in vote 1 or 10?
Mr. Thompson: It is in vote 1.
Senator Marshall: It is in vote 1?
Mr. Thompson: Yes.
Senator Marshall: Thank you. This is for both departments, but I could start off with Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
Professional and other services have been in the media quite a bit lately because the budget has gone up to over $20 billion. How much is in your budget for professional and other services?
I will ask the same question to Indigenous Services Canada.
Ms. Côté: Thank you for your question, senator. In terms of professional and special services, we have $591 million in our Main Estimates for 2023-24.
Senator Marshall: That is what I had. That is good.
And Indigenous Services Canada, I have $1.76 billion. Is that figure right?
Mr. Thompson: With regard to contracts for the fiscal year 2022-23, the total value of contracts was $322 million — but the fiscal year is not completed in 2022-23.
I am very pleased to report at that we achieved a 16.9% target on Indigenous procurement this year. As you know, the government target was 5%. The department did very well.
You were asking more specifically on management services?
Senator Marshall: Professional and other services, which should be in vote 1. My understanding is that it is a part of vote 1. It shows up as professional and other services. I was wondering how much is in your budget?
Mr. Thompson: On contracts, for the last year of money, the amounts for 2022-23 were $322 million.
Senator Marshall: Okay.
Mr. Thompson: By February.
Senator Marshall: And how much is in your budget for this year?
Mr. Thompson: For this year?
Senator Marshall: Yes, that was last year.
Mr. Thompson: I do not have the number with me, but I can get back to you with that. I should have it with me. I can try to provide it to you later.
Senator Marshall: Okay, thank you.
For Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, why is there a big increase in vote 1? Last year’s Main Estimates, it was $972 million. During the year, it went to $5 billion. Now, this year, it is at $4 billion. What is in that number and why did it increase?
Ms. Côté: A lot of our vote 1 expenditures are funding related to the resolution of claims. There is a big increase, if you compare the Main Estimates of the fiscal year 2022-23 with the estimates to date. Considering all of the money that we received through supplementary estimates we have, for example, the funding for the Gottfriedson Band class settlement agreement which by itself is $2.9 billion, accounting for the majority of the increase within that year.
Senator Marshall: Do I have time?
The Deputy Chair: Yes, you have time. One minute.
Senator Marshall: I was looking at the different types of claims. How do you track them in the department? Someone gave us a big, long list. How do you track them? Is there something where there is a finite list of claims? Is there is a person in your department who is responsible? Could you just walk us through that? We see it sometimes as almost like a generic claim. But there is more to it than that. Can you run through how that works?
Ms. Côté: Of course. We have different types of claims in the department. Litigation, of course, we work in collaboration with the Department of Justice. They do have a tracking system there in terms of claims that are filed and the details of those.
We do have, in the financial management portion of the department, officials who are working in collaboration with the Department of Justice to track the estimates of how much the outcome of those claims could be. Litigation is a big piece of it, but we also have, for example, specific claims. We have comprehensive land claims. Those types of claims, which are not pursued through the courts but mostly pursued through negotiations, are tracked.
We have specific programs within the department. We have a database of inventory to track all of those. We do have a fair number of claims in the department.
Senator Marshall: How many claims are outstanding? How many would be on your list now?
Ms. Côté: That is a good question. In terms of specific claims alone, we are over 500 claims that are being —
Senator Marshall: My time is up now.
The Deputy Chair: Yes, perhaps for second round.
Senator Marshall: Yes. Second round, thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Gignac: I would like to welcome the representatives of both departments. Before I ask a question, thank you for your work. If the quality of life and the standard of living in Indigenous communities has improved over the last few years, I believe that you have contributed to this. Having said that, we are here to analyze the numbers and ask some slightly more difficult questions.
I will start with the Auditor General’s remarks. Mr. Thompson, in her 2022 report, the Auditor General talked about emergency management in First Nations communities, and I’m quoting a paragraph from the report:
Overall, Indigenous Services Canada did not provide the support First Nations communities needed to manage emergencies such as floods and wildfires, which are happening more often and with greater intensity.
In light of the findings in Report 8 of the Auditor General, what steps has Indigenous Services Canada taken to improve its emergency management support for First Nations communities?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you very much for the question. It is much appreciated.
So, for the current year that will begin in a few days, the total budget for emergency management has increased by $123 million to $231.8 million. However, I’d like to specify that this is not the only work that we do in emergency management. This is the specific budget for emergency management. There is a lot of work that is being done on infrastructure and health services and other things as well.
Every year, the department spends its entire budget on emergency management, and then some. Every year, there are reimbursements for damages that have been incurred and, every year, there are budget requests. There is no shortage of money per se for emergency management. Of course, more could always be done in disaster mitigation, but the department is always there when it’s time to restore a community and address emergencies.
I will turn the floor over to Sylvain Souligny, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations, who will be able to elaborate on this.
Sylvain Souligny, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations, Indigenous Services Canada: Thank you, Senator Gignac. I would like to respond quickly to your reference to the report. The department has taken full note of the report and has developed a very detailed action plan. Our goal is to put forward the measures that we presented in relation to the various plans. This includes an investment on our part for prevention; an effort is being made, and this includes a partnership with other organizations and multilateral agreements with the First Nations and provincial and territorial governments involved. There is a lot of work being done on that front, but the department is committed to ensuring that where there is a need for recovery responses, it remains very active and is able to provide funding. We’re leveraging the funds that are allocated.
Senator Gignac: My second question is for both departments.
The point is that it’s not just the Auditor General who is sometimes critical of what the two departments are doing, but also the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Last May 18, he released a report indicating that basically, since 2015, so since the government has been in power, the budgets have indeed increased significantly. However, that has not resulted in a commensurate increase in the capacity of organizations to meet their targets. I’d like you each to take a minute to respond to the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s comments, and I’d like Mr. Thompson to respond first.
Mr. Thompson: Thank you for the question. It’s much appreciated. Obviously, it’s easy to say that there’s always a gap between the investment that’s made, the money that’s invested and the results. Some of the results are going to extend over generations. Also, in some areas of intervention, according to our departmental plan, there are performance measures for which it is easier to benchmark, while for others, the communities do not necessarily agree on the measures used. They say that they cannot be measured in the same way because of their distinctions and realities. There is a lot of work that goes into this.
There is $81.5 million in our budgets to work with our Indigenous colleagues on data and work performance management to measure performance. So, work is being done on that side.
Senator Gignac: Ms. Côté, the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s remarks were also addressed to you.
Ms. Côté: Thank you for the question. My answer is similar to that of my colleague Philippe Thompson, in that we are working hard to improve the quality of the data we have to be able to measure outcomes. Specifically, in terms of our performance indicators, we have had to revise our results framework to try to measure the good things as well.
So, that being said, there is less continuity from one outcome to another in terms of comparability. However, we are improving the performance indicators and the data by which we measure them.
[English]
Senator Smith: Mr. Thompson, maybe I could ask you the question and you or your colleagues can give us some answers.
In your organizational Departmental Plan 2023-24, there’s mention of the risk of shortages in supply, labour and equipment to the implementation of various infrastructure projects, which could also increase costs.
Do you have data on the number of infrastructure projects that have been delayed due to the aforementioned variables? In which areas are these risks more prevalent?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you very much for the question. It is correct that, with inflation and especially with the pandemic, we had a lot of delays. It was difficult to bring resources to the communities. We do less with the funding we have because of inflation and the cost of labour.
I will turn to my colleague Mr. Souligny to give you more information about the work we’re doing on infrastructure and about potential delays with projects.
Sylvain Souligny, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations, Indigenous Services Canada: Thank you, Senator Smith. That’s a great question.
In terms of specific figures, I’ll have to come back to you with any information we may have. I don’t have that at hand. Certainly, there have been some impacts, such as the pandemic as Mr. Thompson mentioned, or other elements — procurement of material in some cases, but also access to certain communities may have an impact on plans.
That being said, we have a thorough plan in terms of infrastructure and we are working closely with our partners. We’ll make sure we get back to you with some figures.
Senator Smith: If I could follow up. How do these risks affect the measurement of the various infrastructure-related metrics set out by the department, and how are these risks being mitigated?
Mr. Souligny: In terms of the risks, we have a good understanding of the different variables that we’re aware of and we are able to plan against them.
That being said, again, it’s about working with our partners and communities, and ensuring there’s transparency and that we’re able to adapt where we need to in terms of the plans that are in place. That’s what the department is focusing on.
At the same time, we’re working on strengthening our approach from a risk-based perspective. We’re looking at what risks and results are expected and, to your point, what the mitigation is that we need to put in place. We’re in the process of strengthening this from an infrastructure perspective, given the investments.
Senator Smith: I’m trying to get the idea that if you have three or four metrics that you use on your projects and you’re having some difficulty completing them, what are those metrics? Do you have a checklist that you update all the time so that, as you go forward, you can check your metrics in terms of the progress or lack of progress on your projects?
Mr. Souligny: What is important in our case is that we provide funding to the communities and organizations they’re working with in order to be able to advance on infrastructure. In those cases, it’s working with them and getting a sense of how things are progressing.
On our end, I’ll go back to the teamwork. We have expertise in terms of those areas to see if there are any specific metrics that we are tracking, but it’s really through the partnerships that we have in place and the communities being able to advance on the work they have identified through their own plans.
Senator Smith: If we could get a couple of these metrics because they’re going to give you signals that you can use for your projects. If you could provide those to us, that would be fantastic.
Senator Loffreda: Good evening, and welcome to all our panellists.
My question is for Indigenous Services Canada. I will continue on the report of the Auditor General of Canada that found that Indigenous Services of Canada was spending 3.5 times more money on responding to and recovering from emergencies than on supporting communities to prepare or mitigate the impacts. That data is from the years 2018 to 2022. According to the Auditor General of Canada, however, for every $1 invested in preparedness and mitigation, $6 can be saved in emergency response and recovery costs.
Is the funding allocated among preparation, mitigation, response and recovery the responsibility of the minister and deputy minister? What is your reaction to these comments by the Auditor General? Are you considering more investment in prevention in the coming years? How are you planning for the years to come?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you for the question. We appreciate the report from the Auditor General because it points us in a good direction in terms of what we need to do in the future.
As I mentioned, we allocate the funding we receive on mitigation on a yearly basis, and 100% of that funding is allocated. It is allocated on a risk basis. There is no zero risk. The number and magnitude of natural disasters are increasing year after year. We have a vast territory. There will always be impacts. Even if we mitigate to the maximum, unfortunately, we can’t completely eliminate the impacts. There will always be a need for response.
We hope to be able to reduce the amount of money that we have to put towards response and recovery. We hope to be able to continue to increase mitigation. When we do an infrastructure project, we want to increase mitigation and build stronger infrastructure so that when disaster hits, people are less impacted.
My colleague Mr. Souligny may want to add.
Mr. Souligny: Thank you, senator, for the question. As I stated earlier, we take the recommendations seriously. Certainly, the function of preparedness and prevention was highlighted.
Starting off for the new year, our budget allocation saw an increase in terms of funding for preparedness and mitigation. Also, some initiatives were launched following previous budget decisions. For example, the FireSmart initiative looks at building skills in First Nations communities to prevent and prepare for wildfires. We have the Capacity Enhancement program over five years, which looks at resilience in terms of disaster and provides funding for emergency management coordinators in communities to look at preparedness and what the needs might be. Last, non-structural mitigation and preparedness investments are ongoing, but also with a massive investment over five years to ensure we have projects that look at readiness when events occur.
Investments and efforts are taking place. Also, partnerships with other organizations, including provinces and territories but also First Nations communities, are important to enhance the function.
Senator Loffreda: The Auditor General states that emergency management on reserves has not improved since 2013. That’s ten years now. Do you foresee an improvement in the upcoming years? Why has it not improved? The funding is there. You ask for funding and we approve these estimates year after year, so what is lacking?
Mr. Souligny: We take the recommendations very seriously. We have a clear plan of action that looks at each of the items. As Mr. Thompson said, the department is optimizing the funding that we get. There’s a lot of effort in terms of recovery and supports that we offer when events occur. The department is deploying its capacity and working with our partners on that front. To your point, with the action plan we have in place, we’re expecting to see ongoing improvements moving forward, absolutely.
Senator Loffreda: I’m looking forward to those improvements in the upcoming years. Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: I’ll start with you, Mr. Thompson, to follow up on an exchange we had about the payment of funds that the government was to make to compensate Indigenous children and families with respect to Jordan’s Principle.
I mentioned to you at the time that it was an extraordinary sum of $2.1 billion, and you surprised me somewhat by saying that your department would still be the one to decide who this money goes to, but that you were about to pay it all to a third party who would issue cheques at your request. Even more surprisingly, you refused to say who would manage this large sum of money. I think you were to negotiate with a trustee.
Now, nine months later, can you tell me who will manage this money and under what conditions?
I imagine it will cost a certain amount. Besides, this money has obviously not been spent. Who is going to collect the interest on this $2 billion until the money is disbursed?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you for the question. Negotiations continue to progress. We have not yet reached an agreement. As for the details of the mechanics of the payments, I could invite my colleague Lisa Legault to come to the table. She will be able to give you more details on how the money will be invested once the agreement is reached, who will administer the funds, and who will determine how the payments will be issued and acquired.
Senator Dagenais: The lady is smiling, so she’s going to give them to me.
Lisa Legault, Senior Director, Children and Families Directorate, Indigenous Services Canada: As Mr. Thompson just explained, we are negotiating. We have not yet reached an agreement.
I’m going to backtrack a little bit. We had an agreement in July of last year. In the agreement, which became public — I’m going to speak to you in French, but I spend most of my days speaking in English, so maybe I’ll speak in English too — An agreement was reached with the parties on compensation in July. In that agreement, there were conditions for deciding on a third party to implement the payments for the beneficiaries.
This agreement was not accepted by the court. We are back at the table to negotiate and address the differences that the court said were not resolved. At this point, I can only tell you that there will be a third party, as in other class actions. For example, in the other actions, we had contracts with accounting firms. It will follow the same logic in this case, but I cannot explain to you in detail now who will have the contract and how the funds will be disbursed. I just spent all day with the lawyers talking about the details that need to be worked out to be able to answer that question.
Senator Dagenais: You will understand that I find this surprising. I consider that the people in the department have the necessary skills. Why do we need a third party to distribute this money when you should be able to do it, I would think?
[English]
Ms. Legault: I don’t want to insult my colleagues who are accountants here. The reason why we would go and seek another firm is because we don’t have the experience that comes with the development and delivery of such complex payment systems, but others, unfortunately, have developed that expertise through previous collective agreements. For example, the firm that I’m thinking of is Deloitte and the other one that did IRS.
They’re large firms that have the expertise to be able to provide us with good governance, good oversight and financial management. Although we have a great deal of expertise in managing departmental funds, I think when it comes to managing something of such great importance — we are talking $20 billion to be paid to individuals — we need to look to people who have expertise, and those firms provide to us that kind of expertise.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: This is a question from Senator Gignac: You just said you spend $81 million to measure your performance. That is a lot of money. What costs $80 million, and who do you give that money to?
Mr. Thompson: This is funding that we received over a period of a few years to increase the capacity of Indigenous communities to build their own statistics institute. It’s to enable Indigenous communities to manage and own their own data and measure their performance. There is work that needs to be done with respect to the transfer of data held by Statistics Canada. There is a plan for each distinct group to be able to build their capacity to have their own data. The funding is dedicated to Indigenous communities to build that statistical capacity.
[English]
Senator Boehm: I would like to thank our witnesses for joining us on what has become a dark and stormy night here in Ottawa. My questions are for — it’s basically one question, but for both departments, and I’m following on my colleagues Senators Gignac and Smith. This is about performance and performance indicators.
If you take your minds back — and I think you’ve all been in the public service for a few years — to the beginnings of this government, where the philosophy of “deliverology” was very much up front and centre, departments had to set out certain performance indicators and then meet them, and if they could not, explain why. This was the philosophy also behind publishing the mandate letters of ministers. Deputy ministers also had their moments in the star chambers. I recall those moments quite well.
I’m just wondering over the space of — government is now going into its eighth year — whether you have refined your own “deliverology” methodology, to use some words. Each department had someone charged with making sure that the indicators were attained. In some departments, it was the CFO, and in others it was someone else in the corporate structure of the department.
I’m just wondering, as you go ahead, whether — and given the large amounts of money that we’re looking at here, year after year, and it’s all very important, we know that. But how has your approach to indicators changed, if it has changed? How do you account for the unexpected in terms of the question of risk — whether it’s a climate fire, flood emergency — or to explain the backlog of 112 infrastructure projects, recognizing that there were extenuating circumstances, the pandemic, et cetera?
I’m very curious as to whether your methodology in this process has changed to adapt or whether, in fact, the overall picture as directed out of the Privy Council Office has changed and whether you are in any position to benchmark yourself against other government departments.
Mr. Thompson: Thank you for the question. This is a question that is dear to my heart because I have “results and delivery” in my title, so this is something that is very important to me. I’m very proud to report that our department has done great work the last two fiscal years in developing a new Departmental Results Framework for the organization. When I joined the organization, I was questioning the way that we were reporting, and I know that you all read thoroughly the Departmental Plans and the Departmental Results Report. You will have noticed that in the new Departmental Plan this year, we have introduced the new Departmental Results Framework, and I feel like the story is way more focused and strategic because now we have those service areas where we can really tell the performance story on health, economic development, infrastructure, et cetera. It was a little convoluted before; it was complex to navigate.
The Departmental Results Framework has been adopted. It is the first iteration in the Departmental Plan. We still have work to do in terms of these outcome performance measures. Now, we have those outcome statements.
What is challenging sometimes is to define that outcome statement. What are we trying to achieve? How do we define effectiveness?
We have landed. We have worked with Indigenous organizations as well. We have engaged with the Assembly of First Nations, or AFN and the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, or ITK, so that it really represents the Indigenous world view, the way that we are picturing that. We have those outcomes.
Now, we really have to focus on the performance indicators that matter for our partners.
If you look at health, for instance, I think we are there a little more because we have been working on these indicators for many years. But there are some sections in our Departmental Plans where you will see that we are still discussing. We have tried in the notes to give a good overview of where we are in terms of working with our partners to agree on those performance indicators.
There are lots of performance indicators that we use to manage the business, and our partners are using those performance indicators. But in the Departmental Results Framework, we are limited to a series of indicators that are very public. We are committed to work with our partners to determine which are the right ones, and what are the targets.
There will also be questions on distinction-based. Can we really benchmark communities against the same indicator? Sometimes that is the big challenge that we are dealing with. Can we agree that this is the indicator that we agreed to benchmark on? That is where we are at. We are very committed to that work.
The funding that I just described on Indigenous data, building the capacity in the community is going to help us getting there. I wish that we were more advanced. But we have to work with our partners together.
It is kind of unique to our reality. Other government departments do not necessarily have to do that negotiation to land on performance indicators. They can decide by themselves how they will measure their performance. In our case, I think that we owe that to our partners to be more collaborative in that way. Ms. Côté, I do not know if you want to add to this.
Ms. Côté: It is very similar. As I mentioned to Senator Gignac, we’ve done a few improvements over the years. Our Departmental Results Framework has changed quite significantly over the years. We’re still developing targets to determine what the goal is, and what we want to achieve out of those indicators.
As Mr. Thompson mentioned, we are working in partnership with Indigenous First Nations to develop those so that it is meaningful, and the goal now is to have stability.
Senator Boehm: Your interlocutors are learning about the outputs and the whole “deliverology” sequence without using that word anymore.
Ms. Côté: They are involved in determining what it is they want us to achieve.
Senator Boehm: On claims, for example?
Ms. Côté: On claims, for example, we do have some indicators on them. I know that it is new in the 2023-24 framework. We have very specific targets in there. Off the top of my mind, I know that one target is to conclude 35 specific claim settlements this year. So yes, they are aware of that, and it is one that is publicly available.
Senator Boehm: Thank you very much.
Senator Duncan: Thank you to our witnesses for being here. If I could direct my first question to Mr. Thompson, in the Main Estimates in 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23, two lines leap out at me. They are grants to provide income support to on-reserve residents and status Indians in the Yukon Territory, and contributions to provide income support to on-reserve residents and status Indians in the Yukon Territory.
When I totalled the amounts in Supplementary Estimates (C) and asked the same question and totalled the amounts, it looks like $1.32 billon were going to the Yukon Territory. We have had the discussion before about on-reserve and the lack of reserves in the Yukon.
When I asked the question, I got a fulsome answer about the difference between grants and contributions. Could you please clarify those lines in your Main Estimates for me?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you very much for the question. I would like to apologize to the committee because I have been asked that question on a number of occasions, and I think that I misunderstood the question previously. I should have provided that clarity on the answer before. Now I know what exactly the confusion is.
There is confusion in the way that the line item is described in the table. I will make sure that we will correct this with my team. I will look into rephrasing it.
When you read the contribution or the grant — because there are portions for both contributions and grants — to provide income support for on-reserve residents and status Indians in the Yukon, it gives the impression that it is all directed towards Yukon. While all the income support funding is regrouped together, there should be maybe a comma in the sentence.
It is really the contribution to provide income support to on-reserve residents, comma, and status Indians in the Yukon. The $1.3 billion covers all of Canada and the Yukon portion is included in the $1.3 billion, but the $1.3 billion is not going all to the Yukon. It is the total funding for income support all across the country.
Senator Duncan: Thank you. Would you be so kind as to provide in writing a breakdown of where that money is spent throughout Canada?
I notice that in an answer that was previously provided — I do not mean to usurp my colleague Senator Pate — but in 2018, Indigenous Services Canada committed $8.5 million over two years to work with and engage First Nations on an income assistance program. The engagement by the department was to institute a program reform process.
In the Yukon, in the report entitled Putting People First, the Yukon government committed to work with First Nations and, of course, Canada — because there are different relationships — to look at a basic income program of some kind.
I have not had the opportunity to discuss this with Yukon officials or Yukon First Nations, but has there been any progress by Canada in examining an income support program with Canadian First Nations?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you very much for the question. I will ask my colleague Mr. Kenney to answer the question.
Ian Kenney, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Education and Social Development Programs and Partnership Sector, Indigenous Services Canada: Income assistance program is within our sector. You are right, $8.5 million was given to us in Budget 2018 for an engagement process to reform, basically, the income assistance program across the country. That engagement took place over two years. It was delayed a little bit because of the pandemic, of course. But we did wrap that up in 2021, I believe.
Then we worked with partners to take the results of those engagement findings — the discussions that were held across the country — and put them into policy advice. We are still working together with our partners to put together some policy options coming out of those discussions.
The hope is that we will be able to come forward with a new program basically. Actually, I would rather not use the word “program,” a new way of thinking about income assistance — social assistance — that gives communities, including Yukon First Nations, in a sense, much more control over how they want to administer their own system in their own communities. In some communities, that may include something that resembles a basic income.
I know the idea of a guaranteed livable wage was something that came up in the discussions around the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls inquiry. That was really in the context of a Canada-wide type of a system, and that is a little beyond the scope of our one program. But, again, we’re trying to build into a new program something that would give communities the flexibility to provide something similar in their own backyard or perhaps in collaboration with neighbouring communities as well.
Senator Duncan: Are the results of your report public or could we have them submitted to us so that we can see what it looks like across the country?
Mr. Kenney: The engagement report is up on our website, but we can provide that.
Senator Duncan: Thank you very much. Second round.
Senator Bovey: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you all for being here. I find all of this fascinating and interesting.
Mr. Thompson, your third point was education. As we all know, the federal government is responsible for the education budgets for the Arctic, which may be Ms. Côté’s side.
In 2017-18 into 2019, the Senate had a special committee on the Arctic. We tabled a report in June of 2019 called Northern Lights: A Wake-Up Call for the Future of Canada. As we were meeting with people, I happened to meet with two young women who were the first two graduates of Grade 12 in their northern community. They came down to a southern institution for post-secondary work. Within two weeks, they realized something was wrong. They each got an A-plus in their English and their Grade 12 math. They asked to be retested. Their English level was Grade 7 in the South, and their math level was Grade 5.
When we talk about education in the North and wanting more post-secondary placements, can you tell me what part of these budgets are addressing those education levels and the ability to bring them up? They are living in bad housing — most of them — with multi-families, no room to do homework and poor internet, if that.
You also talked about infrastructure with schools and building schools, I presume. Are you building school libraries? These kids don’t stand a chance if they don’t have the resources to do the work.
Ms. Côté: Thank you, senator, for your question. We do have funding as part of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to help improve post-secondary education in the North. Maybe I will turn it over to my colleague Mr. Walsh who could go a bit further in that sense.
Wayne Walsh, Director General, Northern Strategic Policy Branch, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada: The short answer is that Grades K-12 in the territories, like in the provinces, are the responsibility of the territorial governments. The territorial governments get funding through their annual transfers from the Department of Finance.
Having said that, though, Minister Vandal did appoint an independent task force on post-secondary education. They submitted their report on March 31 — a year ago Friday — to provide to not just the Government of Canada with recommendations on advancing post-secondary education in the North, but to all of the partners — territorial governments, Indigenous governments and partners of the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework.
A huge chunk of the report, which will come as no surprise to you, focused on the very issue you just raised with very specific recommendations on post-secondary education, the importance of post-secondary education and diversity in the North, but also on improving the K-12 system in order to position the students moving forward.
We’re working with our partners, territorial governments and Indigenous governments to go over that report, and we’re looking at developing some initiatives jointly moving forward in order to address what they call their calls to action as part of that report.
Senator Bovey: So what monies in these budget requests are being directed to that, and can we see that report?
Mr. Walsh: Yes, the report is public, so that’s not a problem.
We, as a department, currently have done some funding for the transition of Yukon College to Yukon University. We’ve also provided funding for Dechinta for on-the-land learning. We’re also providing some funding for the transition of Aurora College to a polytechnic university.
That’s all on the post-secondary side. That’s where our investments have been. In terms of the investments on the K-12, that’s really under the jurisdiction and purview of the territorial governments at this point.
Senator Bovey: My next question: We talk about economic development, and Ms. Côté talked about rights. I think I’ve raised this before and it’s a new topic, so I don’t really expect answers, except I would like to know what you’re doing about protecting the rights of Indigenous creators and Indigenous artists. They are businesses on their own; they are small businesses.
I’d like to know what kind of money you’re putting into this to deal with intellectual property of Indigenous creators to help them develop their businesses because they’re losing hundreds of thousands of dollars to international fraud rings.
Mr. Thompson: The question is on economic development. Maybe Ms. Blanchette has something to add to what I will say. In terms of direct programs, we don’t really have programs and services that are related to intellectual property.
Senator Bovey: The human rights have rights to creation, right? And expression, so that’s where I’m confused as to where this sits.
Mr. Thompson: Absolutely. I feel that this would fall under other authorities. It could be other departments. There are law enforcement components to that. We are really focused on providing services. I’m sure we have programs that support arts and economic development, but in terms of copyrights, this is really outside the mandate of the organization. We wouldn’t have services directed towards these kinds of activities — unless, Ms. Blanchette, you want to add something? But, unfortunately, I doubt that we have anything.
Kelley Blanchette, Assistant Deputy Minister, Lands and Economic Development, Indigenous Services Canada: No, I can speak to our economic development programs generally, but if you’re looking specifically at intellectual property, I think that would be the Department of Justice.
Senator Bovey: I think there’s a big gap.
Senator Pate: My apologies to my colleagues and to witnesses for being late. My prior committee went overtime. I also apologize if what I ask has already been asked, and I thank my colleagues for their questions.
The Auditor General found that Indigenous Services Canada was spending three-and-a-half times more money on emergency responses than on prevention.
You are nodding, so you are familiar with that issue.
When I looked at the Departmental Results Report for 2021-22, the percentage of money and resources going into family violence prevention seemed to be much lower than the incidence that is reported in other areas.
I understand the cross-jurisdictional issue that you just raised, but it strikes me that the higher instances of chronic illness; the contribution of past trauma; the contribution, as Ms. Blanchette would know well, to criminalization and other issues that belong — I’m curious as to how you are fitting all of that with what looks to be decreases in resourcing going into communities to fund some of those preventative processes, particularly in light of what the Auditor General found.
If I have misunderstood in reading your documents, I certainly want to be corrected. If I haven’t, could you provide the explanation, and if it requires more data, could you provide that to us as well?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you for the question. We are increasing funding and prevention across, I believe, almost all of our business lines. If I think about child and family services, we are currently reforming the program, directing more and more funding towards prevention services. That’s part of the negotiation that we have as well on that front.
On family violence prevention, this year, there is an increase of $55.9 million compared to last year’s estimates. We discussed earlier the additional funding that we provide on prevention with regard to emergency management. We have seen increases in mental health support as well. I was referring to the Departmental Results Framework as well, where we’re looking to the suite of programs in a more holistic way, looking at the social determinants of health and understanding that the more we invest in there, the more we reduce in corrective measures.
All of the thinking in terms of our programming is really towards putting more money in prevention. That was the discussion we had on emergency management. We don’t have to spend on things that don’t happen.
I see it all across our service area that we are investing more and more in prevention and making the case for prevention.
Senator Pate: I thank you for that. Is there somewhere where the sort of culmination, the way that you’re trying to disaggregate the data around that and what you’re seeing as results in terms of mitigating more emergency spending — is any of that available at this stage? Or is there information that you can be providing to us that will assist us to receive a more fulsome picture?
Mr. Thompson: If we go through the inventory of all of the programs, we can identify in the programming, when we go more into the details in our public accounts, the programs that are more preventative in nature. It would be a part of the program description as well.
I agree that, sometimes, when you look at the aggregate numbers, it is a little difficult because we take the program view. We try to really tell that story in our Departmental Results Reports and in our Departmental Plans on all the work that we do in order to prevent things from happening. A lot of the information is reported in a qualitative way.
We have limitations in the number of indicators that we use. We are focusing mostly on outcome indicators rather than activities in our public reporting. In program evaluation, for instance, with all the evaluations that we publish on our website, we would have the details in terms of the indicators, the activities and what is directed towards prevention.
I agree that in our public reporting, at a very high level, it may be more challenging to identify those discreet activities that are focused on prevention.
Senator Pate: When I look at something in particular like the health infrastructure support, it looks like it has been decreased for this fiscal year. Am I misreading that?
Mr. Thompson: For health infrastructure?
Senator Pate: That is part of my confusion about the preventative component.
Mr. Thompson: I don’t know. Maybe my colleague Mr. Conn could provide a quick answer. No?
The only programs that we have seen a decrease in health for this fiscal year in our Main Estimates are non-insured health benefits, but this is a demand-driven program. We should see funding for non-insured health benefits in our supplementary estimates.
Also, the British Columbia Tripartite Framework Agreement has come to an end. We are renegotiating. This will be part of our future estimates.
Yes, you are correct; there is an element of infrastructure in the funding that is related to the B.C. Tripartite Framework Agreement. That is why you see a reduction in the funding, but you will see that funding coming later this year through our supplementary estimates.
[Translation]
The Deputy Chair: We have only eight minutes left for a second round. I ask that you be concise in your questions and answers and avoid preambles.
[English]
Senator Marshall: I checked my numbers for professional and other services for Indigenous Services Canada, and I have a figure of $1.76 billion.
Mr. Thompson, you said you would give us the number. Can you send whatever the number is to the clerk and indicate what types of professional services you are going to hire during the year?
The other question: I’m back to the claims, and an answer in writing will be fine. I’m just trying to understand how we can follow the outstanding claims, so if you can give us something as to how the department manages. I have the figure of 500 claims. I don’t know if you gave me that number. You did. They have to be major claims, so maybe there are 20.
I would just like an idea as to how you track them. I see the word “claims” and “settlements” scattered all throughout your budget and Mr. Thompson’s budget, so it is very hard to match them up and follow what is going on. If you could send something that would indicate how we can track that, that would be very helpful.
Mr. Thompson: I can provide a very concise answer. It is my evening to apologize to the committee; I misunderstood your question. I needed to be warmed up.
You are correct on the $1.7 billion. I apologize because I provided you the number on contracting. The reason that we have such a huge number is because on health services, we are contracting a lot more of our professional services, such as nurses and uninsured health benefits. That is why you see the $1.7 billion, but in terms of contracts to outside firms, it is very small. It’s the number that I gave you earlier.
Senator Marshall: If you have a listing of what’s in that $1.76 billion, if you could send that to the clerk, that would be very helpful. Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: Mr. Thompson, you spoke about a sum of $81 million to help put management systems in place and administer them. Could you please send us in writing the list of accounts payable with that $81 million?
Mr. Thompson: It will be my pleasure.
[English]
Senator Duncan: I will try to be very concise. In 2000, back when premiers were arguing about the amount of health care funding, Premier Doer said at a Western Premiers’ Conference that Canada is the fourteenth province at the table when it comes to health care funding for First Nations, Indigenous people and veterans, as well as, to some degree, the RCMP. Yet in all the discussions about health care funding, nobody has talked about how much funding Indigenous Services Canada, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada or Health Canada get to assist First Nations.
Could I ask for a breakdown of the Non-Insured Health Benefits, or NIHB, program in writing? Whom do we call when we want to have a fulsome discussion about it at the National Finance Committee? Is it Indigenous Services Canada or Health Canada? Because there seems to be a bit of a difference. The NIHB program is administered differently across the country, so in your fulsome answer, which I know you will provide for us in writing, could you outline how each province and territory deals with NIHB programming for status First Nations? Thank you.
Mr. Thompson: My pleasure.
Senator Duncan: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Gignac: My question is for Ms. Côté.
In the Main Estimates, there is a 57% increase over last year. In the last fiscal year, you surprised us by asking for more money in the supplementary estimates; you asked for $7.9 billion last year, over and above the Main Estimates, which were $5.8 billion. These are big numbers. Can you reassure us that your $9-billion request will cover the total for the year, or will we be in for a surprise like last year? Also, could you explain why this surprise will not return this year in your Supplementary Estimates (A)?
Ms. Côté: Yes, that was a big increase in the supplementary estimates last year. For claims resolution, we may need to carry over funds from one year to the next. We see that showing up in the supplemental budgets: sometimes it’s large amounts when it comes to class actions.
It’s also worth mentioning that a lot of the temporary funds come from budgets. For the budget announcement, for example, which was made yesterday — There may be initiatives that have been approved in the budget that will have to be funded from supplementary budgets. I can’t promise anything in terms of the amount that will be requested in the supplementary estimates, but I know there will be others. Last year, in my opinion, was still exceptional.
Senator Gignac: So, it’s a little bit out of your control and it depends on appeals and decisions in the budget. Thank you.
[English]
The Deputy Chair: Thank you. We have now reached the end of our time, so we will conclude the meeting. I would like to thank all of our witnesses for appearing today. It is much appreciated.
[Translation]
Before we go in camera, I would like to remind the witnesses to please send their responses in writing to the clerk by the end of the day on Thursday, April 13, 2023. I would also like to advise senators that our next meeting will be on Tuesday, April 18, at 9 a.m. — we can finally celebrate the return of our chair — to continue our work on the 2023-24 Main Estimates.
[English]
We will now prepare for our in camera meeting.
(The committee continued in camera.)