Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 1 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Wednesday, February 21, 2001
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 5:30 p.m. to organize the activities of the committee.
[English]
Mr. Adam Thompson, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, I see a quorum. As clerk of your committee, it is my duty to preside over the election of the chair. I am ready to receive a motion to that effect.
Senator Pearson: I move that the chairperson be Senator Chalifoux.
Mr. Thompson: Are there any other motions? There being no other nominations, it is moved by Senator Pearson that Senator Chalifoux now take the chair. Is it the pleasure of the committee that the motion carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Mr. Thompson: Carried. I invite Senator Chalifoux to take the chair.
Senator Thelma J. Chalifoux (Chairman) in the Chair.
The Chairman: Thank you very much for having confidence in my ability to chair this very important committee.
We will get right into the next agenda item, which is the election of the deputy chair.
Senator Pearson: I nominate Senator Johnson.
The Chairman: Are there any other nominations? Hearing none, is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Welcome, Madam Deputy Chair.
Senator Johnson: What a surprise. It has been nine years now.
The Chairman: Before we get into the meat of the agenda, I would like to introduce our new clerk. I will ask Ms Joseph to come forward to give us a little bit of background on Adam Thompson. Also, you might mention where you are going and what is happening in your life.
Ms Jill Anne Joseph, Committee Clerk: Honourable senators, Adam Thompson is new to our branch. He won a competition five months ago and came to Committees Branch at a rather quiet time, with the election call, which was very much to his benefit. It gave him time to do some reading and to ask some questions, which he did. He has a political science background from Queen's University and worked with the model Parliament at Queen's for several years. He then went on to DIAND and parliamentary liaison. In Adam Thompson you have someone with a fair base of knowledge on substantive issues coming to this committee, as well as procedural knowledge. He has done well.
I am moving on to Legal and Constitutional Affairs. This change was brought about because we anticipate having two new committees in this Parliament. We also have two new committee clerks. They wanted someone with experience to work with the new committees. That required a shift in the organization. I regret leaving Aboriginal Peoples. I very much enjoyed my assignment with this committee. It has been two short years. I thank you. I had a very good and informative time with this committee.
Senator Pearson: We appreciated you.
The Chairman: Jill Anne has committed that if we need her to assist Adam in any way, she will do that. I appreciate that.
Now that we have introduced Adam and said not "farewell" but "till we meet again" to Jill Anne, let us move on to No. 3, the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure. I would like a motion:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be composed of the Chair, the Deputy Chair, and one other member of the Committee to be designated after the usual consultation.
I am open for nominations. This is the steering committee.
Senator Pearson: It is not a name that you get necessarily. You get the permission to consult and name someone.
The Chairman: I would like someone to move it.
Senator Pearson: I moved twice, so someone else can do that.
Senator Wilson: I move.
Senator Christensen: I second the motion.
The Chairman: Senator Christensen has seconded the motion.
The Chairman: We gave power to consult and name.
I do not know whether it is within my power or not, but since Senator Pearson was on the steering committee in the last Parliament I would like to recommend that her name be considered to be on the steering committee again.
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Pearson: We are doing it this way because if for some reason I am not here you have the power to designate someone else.
The Chairman: That is the point.
Is everyone in agreement with the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Number 4 is the motion to print the committee's proceedings. It reads as follows:
That the committee print its proceedings; and
That the Chair be authorized to set the number to meet the demand.
Senator Christensen: I so move.
The Chairman: Seconded by Senator Cordy.
All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Number 5 is authorization to hold meetings and to print evidence when quorum is not present.
Senator Cochrane: I move.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The financial report.
That, pursuant to Rule 104, the Chair be authorized to report expenses incurred by the committee during the last session.
Senator Johnson: I so move.
The Chairman: Are all honourable senators in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Research staff.
That the committee ask the Library of Parliament to assign research officers to the committee.
Senator Cochrane: I so move.
The Chairman: Are all honourable senators in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The authority to commit funds and certify accounts. Do I have a mover?
Senator Johnson: I so move.
The Chairman: Are all honourable senators in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Number 9, travel.
That the committee empower the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure to designate, as required, one or more members of the committee and/or such staff as may be necessary to travel on assignment on behalf of the committee.
Do I have a mover for this?
Senator Cordy: I so move
The Chairman: Do all honourable senators agree?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
We move to the a motion regarding travelling and living expenses of witnesses.
Senator Christensen: I so move.
The Chairman: Are all honourable senators in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Next is No. 11, electronic media coverage of public meetings. I need a motion for this item.
Senator Tkachuk: I so move.
The Chairman: Are all honourable senators in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Item No. 12 is concerned with the time slot for meetings. Let us have a look at that. This will be difficult. We were discussing this in the chamber this afternoon. The time slot is Tuesday mornings from 9:30 until 11:30, and Wednesday afternoons from 5:45 until the committee adjourns.
Senator Wilson: That is fine. Wednesday night, I presume we will have something to eat. We can survive.
The Chairman: We just passed a motion for the budget.
Senator Wilson: We do not stay until 8 o'clock without eating anything, though, do we?
The Chairman:No.
Senator Gill: What time on Wednesday?
The Chairman: Wednesday at 5:45.
Senator Johnson: We usually get through our business at 9:30 in the morning.
Senator Wilson: It takes me three weeks to get on to the Tuesday morning agenda, but I will be around when I can.
The Chairman: The next item on our list is other business. Do honourable senators wish to proceed in camera with our other business? We have here two young gentlemen from university who have been given the assignment to attend committee. It is up to this committee. If we go in camera, we can ask them to leave.
Senator Gill: Do we have something special to discuss?
The Chairman: We do not have anything special to discuss.
Senator Gill: Let it remain open, then.
The Chairman: It concerns future business. Item 1 is our park study. The national parks asked us if we would do this. They do not have a budget for it. We had a study on a park where there was great concern about economic development from the community living around the park. There are 10 national parks in the territories and the parks would like to know the economic development opportunities for the communities around them. This is why they have asked us to do this study. A subcommittee was selected and Senator Christensen was the Chair. Do we need to reappoint her as chair of the subcommittee?
Senator Pearson: You have to get your order of reference first, which was the original one.
The Chairman: We do the order of reference first.
Senator Pearson: The task here is to move that you submit the order of reference to that. I so move.
The Chairman: All right. Senator Pearson moves the order of reference.
Senator Tkachuk: Has this been ongoing?
The Chairman: No.
Senator Christensen: We did have one set of hearings with the minister's office.
Senator Tkachuk: Do you need to have a motion as well in the chamber to allow that testimony to move forward to the present time?
The Chairman: That is included in the second paragraph.
Senator Tkachuk: Yes.
Senator Pearson: I move that the chair bring forward the order of reference.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
This one is a broader order of reference. We will wait until it is handed out.
Senator Christensen: The package that we were given in relation to the study was quite large. I took it with me on my holidays and I donated a week to study it. It was very informative and well done.
The Chairman: I would like a mover for the proposed order of reference. This one is quite broad, but it is necessary. The Cree-Naskapi Commission would like to meet with us. It is important that we have this motion for the proposed order of reference here.
Senator Christensen: Is this our terms of reference as a committee already?
Senator Pearson: Does the Aboriginal Peoples Committee not have terms of reference?
The Chairman: The committee does not have an order of reference.
Mr. Thompson: The committee does not have a standing order of reference like the standing committees in the House of Commons. It can only examine those issues that are referred to it by the Senate.
Senator Johnson: What are we doing with this proposed order of reference?
Senator Pearson: As far as I know, that was the subject matter of this committee.
The Chairman: The reason we wanted this was to invite the leaders of the Aboriginal organizations and representatives of issues that are related to our Committee on Aboriginal Peoples.
Senator Tkachuk: It seems we are asking the Senate to empower or give us an order of reference when it is the responsibility of the Senate to refer specific matters to us. I am not sure why we have this.
Ms Joseph: I will just say that this is not unprecedented. Honourable senators will notice that other committees have had broad orders of reference similar to their mandates as contained in the Rules of the Senate from time to time. It empowers them to follow up on certain issues that they find of interest even if they do not relate specifically to an order of reference before them.
For example, the Cree-Naskapi Commission wrote a letter to Senator Chalifoux last August requesting an opportunity to present their annual report to your committee. Technically, you do not have power to hear them. Further, it is doubtful that you will receive a specific order of reference any time soon that would give you reason to call them to come.
If you have this broad order of reference, which is not unprecedented, you can invite them to explain their annual report to you or you can make other invitations from time to time. If there are new leaders of AFN or NWAC, you will have the freedom to call them.
Senator Pearson: I thought that since we are the Committee on Aboriginal Peoples that that was built into our definition. I now understand it is not. However, the idea that a final report must be no later than June 2, 2002, seems odd under the circumstances. What will we report on?
Mr. Thompson: In preparing this draft order of reference, I extended the time line. The order of reference, as it has been used in previous committees, like the Agriculture Committee, was not intended to derive specific conclusions but was rather an opportunity for the committee to hear from interested parties that might wish to present reports, like the Cree-Naskapi report, or to invite other people. That is why there is such an extensive time, as the scope will expand.
Senator Pearson: I understand the first part, I just do not understand the second part. Why must the committee report at all?
Mr. Thompson: I believe it is a requirement, in establishing an order of reference, that the committee report. That is why there is a date set far in the future, in order to meet that requirement. The committee may then invite those people that it wishes.
Senator Gill: Our mandate is very general. If we take this report of the Cree-Naskapi Commission, our report will come after the agreement with the government. Does that mean that we must report on the performance? Must we make a follow-up report on the agreement? They are reporting on the agreement that they signed some years ago and where they are right now. As a committee, this is not our responsibility.
The Chairman: I do not see that happening. Many of these people wish to make a presentation to us to ensure we have the report.
Senator Gill: Is there no expectation from those people that we might make our own recommendations on things going wrong or right?
The Chairman: There is no expectation at all. We can make that very clear. If people wish to come and meet with us, such as the Cree-Naskapi, we can make it clear that there can be no expectation that we are willing to meet with them.
Senator Wilson: As it is so general, it does cover the waterfront. What are the criteria that we will then use to decide what the matters will be? Will we simply respond if people wish to come and talk to us? What are the criteria for saying we will do this and we will not that because we do not have time?
The Chairman: That would be for the committee to decide.
Senator Wilson: The agenda committee would make a suggestion.
Senator Johnson: Submitting a final report could just be a statement of who we have seen or who we have talked to.
Senator Tkachuk: It would then be tabled in the House of Commons and the Senate. Normally, if they wish us to study it further, they refer this matter to us. If this motion allows us to bypass that process and refer it to ourselves, why are we doing this?
Ms Joseph: I do not think you would want to have that specifically referred to you. It would put you in a position, as Senator Gill has said, of having to come up with an assessment of what is going on.
The intent of the Cree-Naskapi group is to come here to inform you further on what has been happening with them, let you know about difficulties they have been having in getting the act amended and other priorities among their people.
In future, should those issues be referred to you, you will have that much more background that will assist you with other matters. You may determine that is not something you wish to look at. You may write a letter in response, telling them that such matters are not within your mandate and would require a specific order of reference that you do not plan to seek and that you simply cannot hear them.
Senator Johnson: We need these orders of reference to hear these people who send these things our way.
Senator Pearson: I have been on this committee for some time and I do not remember hearing this order of reference before. We heard from the Cree-Naskapi before the governance study. They were one of the first groups I remember hearing from.
Senator Cochrane: If this report is presented to the House of Commons and to the Senate and to the officials and we have an opportunity to read it as well and find out their concerns and what they have reported, why would we need them to come before the committee to report again?
The Chairman: That was just used as an example regarding this proposed term of reference. Some of the leaders would also like to make presentations to us. I have heard from native women leaders who wish to make presentations to us, but it would be up to the committee whether to hear them.
Senator Pearson: I tend to think we are safer without the term of reference. Once we have the term of reference, we will not be able to say no.
Senator Johnson: I do not know why the term of reference is needed.
Senator Cochrane: The term of reference is a Pandora's box.
Senator Wilson: I would assume that that term of reference is the committee's job. Rather than have other people set the agenda for us, I would hope that the steering committee will meet soon and present a proposed agenda, which we can then go at. Otherwise, we are sitting ducks.
Senator Gill: Just coming back a bit. There are recommendations in the reports. We have so many matters to discuss about the Aboriginal people. If we want to hear people, we should have a purpose, come to a resolve or come to a recommendation. Otherwise, there is no need to listen to the people if you cannot intervene in a certain way, either by recommendation or something like that. There are so many things to do. We should have some purpose for hearing people.
Senator Pearson: I agree, otherwise they can lobby us individually. I would propose that we put this aside for the time being.
The Chairman: It is proposed that we put this aside.
Senator Johnson: The steering committee will review it again.
The Chairman: We will refer it to the steering committee.
If you will notice, Senator Carney is on our membership as a member of this committee. She is not here at this meeting but she has sent us a letter.
Senator Johnson: Once again, Madam Chair, I would suggest that the steering committee review this. This is a huge mandate. We would have to undertake women in every province, we could not just do British Columbia in this particular issue. It is certainly not on our agenda at the moment. I think we should do that. That is my recommendation.
The Chairman: Do all honourable senators agree?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: This will be referred to the steering committee.
Senator Johnson: Let me just point out some history on this. We have been asked, in the last few years, to look at the whole Indian Act with regard to women. We must first set our priorities, and then we will inform Senator Carney accordingly, in case she comes to a meeting next month.
The Chairman: Yes, it will be in writing.
The next order of business is the urban Aboriginal study. This is going to be our big one. I propose to the committee that we complete the parks study first; in the meantime, our researchers have done a great deal of work on preparing the foundation for our study. Before Parliament dissolved it was decided by the whole committee that we would go to the youth as our first priority in this urban Aboriginal study. It will be a big study; we will need a lot of participation. Tonina Simeone has prepared a literature review on urban Aboriginal people for us. We must congratulate her.
I would like some comments and some direction for the steering committee to begin. Then we can do the order of reference to get this going.
Senator Johnson: I think, for a fuller discussion, we should allow our committee members an opportunity to review this material, to get caught up with what is in here, following which we can have a fuller discussion next week. I do not think we can really discuss it now. Most people who are new members do not even know we are doing the study. I do not know how the committee feels, but I would suggest that that is what we do.
The Chairman: Ms Simeone was also able to get the video, Indian Posse: Life in Aboriginal Territory. This film is about a gang, so we should have an opportunity to view this too. We can leave it until the next meeting and give everyone the opportunity to view that video.
Senator Pearson: For those who are new to the committee, I would like to affirm that we are not looking at the problems, we are looking at solutions. We are trying to find some best practices and good models, things that work well. Senator Watt will say that these have been studied to death, but we are trying to look at things that are working and then suggest some strategies. That is the general discussion we have had up to now.
The Chairman: I have often visited Winnipeg and I am aware of what they are doing in Winnipeg. The Aboriginal Society of Winnipeg is doing some really neat things at Thunderbird House. These are the things we must start looking at, which is what our Aboriginal people are doing in Saskatchewan and Alberta, all the way through, on how to resolve this issue. This is what we are hoping for.
Senator Johnson: Senator Pearson said there are many positive things happening. We want to make sure those are showcased for a change, instead of the all the bad stories. However, I still think we should look at that video.
Just as a bit of historical background as well, in terms of this particular study. We spent two years on the self-government study. The two major things that I feel evolved out of that were the plight of the Aboriginal people in urban areas and youth, and, of course, the women were very adamant about the self-government issue with regard to the Indian Act being changed before anything was done about self-government. That is not our territory right now so we decided to zero in on the urban situation. That has not been done in any constructive way before.
It is an incredible challenge for us. We will certainly learn a lot, and we can make a big contribution. Even just the material put together by Ms Simeone in here is a really great start. We can talk about it again next week.
If any of the newer members have any further questions about how this evolved, we would be happy to answer them.
Senator Cochrane: During our last term I had the opportunity to fill in for someone else on this committee, and while I was here there was a group who I think were from northern Quebec. They were wonderful, the way they were doing things. I will look back at my notes to see what group I am thinking of, but I was really impressed with what they were doing and the team effort that was taking place in their areas. We can probably get some good feedback from them. They are probably doing good things that can relate to other areas.
The Chairman: Any other comments regarding this?
Senator Pearson: I wish to share something with the committee, because it is such good news. In the process I am involved in leading up to the Special Session on Children at the United Nations in September, we have been taking youth on our delegations, which was our commitment. We have now had three delegations, two in New York and one in Jamaica. We always have one Aboriginal youth. The last one was a young man by the name of Myron John WolfChild. He is from the Blood Reserve in Alberta. He was splendid. People were blown away by his capacity to speak and to present himself and to connect with other young people. We are thrilled that we have been able to give him this opportunity. DIAND has been funding the presence of these young people, who must be under 18. They are doing a great job.
Senator Cochrane: Could we not use some of the good experiences within rural areas and apply them to the urban areas as well?
The Chairman: There are several things here that we must look at. One is the migration of people. This government -- all previous governments, in fact -- has really assisted people migrating from other countries to our country here. We are talking here about the migration of people within our own boundaries, the migration of people from the rural areas into the cities. This is another thing that we really need to examine. What is happening within our own boundaries?
I was on the plane about six months ago and I happened to sit beside one the bureaucrats from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. He brought this up. He said, "Why is it that the government is funding so many benefits for people migrating from other countries but they cannot do it for the migration of our own people within our own boundaries?" That is another interesting point to examine.
Regarding the video, we have from 9:30 until 11:30. We need to make sure that we have the re-appointments of the subcommittee for the parks study. Then we can go right into this study here. We are looking at a two- to three-year study before we get the final report on this.
Senator Gill: Is it not the duty of the steering committee to establish the subjects for future discussion? We have the urban issue. Are there other subjects coming up?
The Chairman: We established this in the last session, and this is how I always work. I like to have the whole committee make the final decision. The steering committee can recommend but the whole committee must discuss and agree. That is what happened when we agreed that the first priority would be youth.
When we look at youth, we are really looking at the whole family unit because, as you know, Senator Gill, the holistic approach is a circle. When we look at youth, we must look at the women and the families; we must look at everything. Youth is a good beginning, but such decisions must come from the committee as a whole. Otherwise, what is the point of having a committee?
Senator Gill: That means we will have the chance eventually to suggest some other subjects?
The Chairman: This dialogue will be continual. We need the input and the decision of the whole committee.
If there are no other comments, I will be making a speech in response to the Speech from the Throne regarding Aboriginal people and how we define Aboriginal people.
Senator Gill: We should talk together before that.
The Chairman: I have my first draft done.
The committee adjourned.