Skip to content
 

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples

Issue 12 - Evidence - Meeting of December 12, 2006


OTTAWA, Tuesday, December 12, 2006

The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, to which was referred Bill C-34, to provide for jurisdiction over education on First Nations lands in British Columbia, met this day at 9:30 a.m. to give consideration to the bill.

Senator Gerry St. Germain (Chairman) in the chair.

[English]

The Chairman: Welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples. I am Gerry St. Germain from British Columbia, and I am privileged to chair this particular committee.

This morning we have Senator Watt, from Northern Quebec; Senator Gill, from the province of Quebec; Senator Campbell, from the province of British Columbia; Senator Fraser, from the province of Quebec, Senator Lovelace Nicholas, from Newfoundland and Labrador; Senator Dyck, from the province of Saskatchewan; and Senator Hubley, from the province of Prince Edward Island.

On July 5, 2006, the Government of Canada, the province of British Columbia, and the First Nations Education Steering Committee signed the Education Jurisdiction Framework agreement, which would put in place a process to transfer jurisdiction over on-reserve education to participating First Nations in British Columbia.

The proposed legislation, Bill C-34, the First Nations Jurisdiction over Education in British Columbia Act, would give effect to the framework agreement. This would allow Canada and interested First Nations in British Columbia to negotiate individual education agreements, thereby transferring education authority to participating First Nations. The proposed legislation would also establish a First Nations education authority to support First Nations in exercising education jurisdiction in the three key areas of teacher certification, school certification, and establishment of curriculum and examination standards.

This morning, honourable senators, we have with us the minister, from Indian Affairs and Northern Development. With him are Ms. Huestis and Ms. Isaak. We are here to deal with Bill C-34, the legislation you have passed in the other place. You, sir, have the floor.

Hon. Jim Prentice, P.C., M.P., Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to be here. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to appear and meet with the committee as it reviews Bill C-34, the proposed First Nations Jurisdiction over Education in British Columbia Act. I fully support this committee's scrutiny of the proposed legislation and I appreciate the diligence that you and your colleagues have brought to this effort.

The passage of Bill C-34 will enable First Nations in British Columbia to take a significant step toward a brighter future. The changes introduced by this bill would see British Columbia First Nations take control over, and assume greater responsibility for, primary and secondary schools in their communities. The legislation offers First Nations an effective mechanism to improve the educational outcomes of students attending on-reserve schools in the province.

[Translation]

Access to this mechanism is entirely optional; no First Nation will be forced to use it. Any First Nation that chooses to do so, however, must ensure that its schools meet specific educational standards. As I'm sure the members of this committee recognize, standards are essential to effective accountability.

Unfortunately, though, the standards currently in place for on-reserve education are inadequate and students suffer the consequences.

[English]

In most cases, the quality of education provided at on-reserve schools in British Columbia falls short of provincial standards. As a result, student who seek to switch from an on-reserve school to a public school face considerable obstacles. Many of these students must spend considerable time in remedial programs; some must repeat entire academic years. There is no doubt that this contributes to the disturbingly low secondary school graduation rates amongst Aboriginal students.

[Translation]

Bill C-34 would require participating First Nations to ensure their schools meet provincial standards, and make it easier for students to transfer from one educational system to another. Eventually, differences in the quality of education provided by on-reserve and public schools should disappear.

[English]

Although it will take some time for all on-reserve schools in B.C. to attain provincial standards, First Nations are working hard to achieve this goal. Leading these efforts is a group largely responsible for the agreement at the heart of Bill C-34, the First Nations Education Steering Committee, or FNESC. In the past few years, the First Nations Education Steering Committee of British Columbia has devised a method to measure and assess the performance of on-reserve schools. About 21 schools in the province have already been certified.

The considerable accomplishments of FNESC, along with the group's collaborative approach to on-reserve education, fuel my optimism for Bill C-34. FNESC enjoys the support of every key player in the education system in British Columbia, including the provincial ministry of education, the teachers' college and the associations that represent B.C.'s teachers, principals, superintendents and school trustees. Working in partnership with these groups, FNESC has made a remarkable contribution to the quality of education delivered in on-reserve schools.

Perhaps the finest achievement of FNESC lies before this committee today: the new approach to on-reserve education articulated in Bill C-34. This approach was designed by First Nations to address the challenges faced by on- reserve schools in British Columbia. Although the legislation now under consideration only applies to on-reserve schools in British Columbia, I submit to you that it stands to influence the course of First Nations education everywhere in Canada. I am confident that enacting Bill C-34 will inspire First Nations in other regions of the country to devise appropriate solutions of their own. At this point, we have open discussions with almost every other province in Canada about the application of the lessons of Bill C-34.

The final point I would like to make is about funding. Bill C-34 does not specifically identify funding for participating First Nations. Rather, funding to support the implementation of these agreements will be negotiated with each individual First Nation when they negotiate their Canada-First Nation education jurisdiction agreements.

[Translation]

Significant progress has been made in on-reserve education in British Columbia in recent years. I am convinced that Bill C-34 will trigger even greater accomplishments and I encourage you to support swift passage of this legislation.

[English]

Although this bill is brief, I consider it one of the most important pieces of legislation that has been put before the House of Commons and the Senate relative to the future of our Aboriginal peoples. There is a certain genius at the heart of this bill in that it was developed, inspired and perfected by First Nations themselves, working in concert with provincial education authorities in British Columbia. This is very much their work. It is something that I wholeheartedly support. As simple as it seems, within this legislation lies the future of young Aboriginal people in this country.

The system of education that we currently have across Canada is not working. It is achieving the desperately low educational outcomes that are, on average, 25 per cent lower than the adjacent public school system. This cannot continue. We are moving as quickly as possible. I indicated when I became minister this would be a very important subject that we would turn to immediately and we have done that. We have perfected the arrangements with FNESC on the ground in British Columbia, and this legislation is the key to moving forward. It is my hope that over the course of the next year or more we will be in a position to put forward similar arrangements in each and every province across Canada.

You might well ask why we not simply do that. The challenge is the important step of making sure there is capacity on the ground. What is happening in British Columbia did not happen by accident. It happened because a group of very far-sighted educators and people from First Nation communities have, over the course of a generation, built up the ability to have a First Nation-driven school authority. Those circumstances are present in some other provinces; they are not yet present in all provinces. What we have in British Columbia is a template that can be applied elsewhere in Canada, but we need to ensure that the capacity is present to do that. Now we must turn to each province.

It is a very important bill. As you know, it cleared the House of Commons unanimously. It was quite interesting; we had students from the Bella Bella School, and school from the Okanagan and Fort Nelson, all First Nations kids who were in the House of Commons as this cleared the House. It was quite moving for everyone who was there. It was certainly very moving for them and for me.

Some of these children have been through schools that reflect what is really happening with Bill C-34 already. I spent a lot of time with these young people and they are bright, articulate, capable and well-educated. It speaks well to the kind of future we can have in this country if we get the education system functioning so we are graduating young people like them. It will make for a better future for First Nations and for a better country. At the end of the day, that is what is at the heart of this legislation.

The Chairman: Thank you. Minister, the big question is proper funding for this program. You touched on it in the final aspect of your presentation this morning. As was voiced in the Senate yesterday, there is a concern about how this will be funded. Will adequate funds be appropriated? As you know, we have just gone through the study of specific claims and funding is the challenge. Canada is not meeting its obligations.

How will this be funded? Senator Fraser, Senator Watt and others have voiced this concern, and it is important that we as a committee know how you will fund this program.

Mr. Prentice: That is a very good question. Let me just step back a bit in terms of how the funding works. I will offer a couple of general observations on funding. There are approximately 145,000 students for whom the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is legally responsible across Canada, spread out across the entire nation. The department spends about $1.2 to $1.3 billion on education for those young people.

Since I became minister I have undertaken a review of how those dollars are arrived at and expended. The system is not perfect, but in a general way the Government of Canada is putting forward dollars for education for First Nations students that in some provinces is slightly more and in some provinces it is slightly less than what is being provided for the adjoining public education system, if you will.

By and large the dollars being put forward are comparable, is the best way to phrase it. There are critics of the funding system. It is something I am looking at closely to ensure that the system is properly funded.

Bill C-34 defines a system where we will have a First Nation-driven school authority. It is voluntary. At the end of the day, every First Nation chooses to be part of this. A specific agreement includes funding provisions with the Government of Canada, and that funding agreement is part of the template that allows them to enter into the jurisdiction of Bill C-34.

The answer to your question is it will depend on the specific negotiations with each First Nation. There is no defined funding because the circumstances of each First Nation are different, but we obviously must reach a satisfactory agreement with each First Nation before they are in a position to enter into FNESC. We are cognizant that we want it to be a success, and it must be adequately and properly funded to do that.

Let me also say that one of the reasons that this has worked as well as it has in British Columbia is that the genius of it comes from the people themselves. FNESC was not built up with a Government of Canada superstructure funded by the Government of Canada. People passionate about education built it up and achieved all this with precious few resources from the Government of Canada. These people are committed to educating their young people. That is part of what needs to be present in each province, and government funding alone cannot provide that.

Senator Fraser: I take it from what you have just said, minister, that at least the money that is now being spent will continue, but it occurred to me when I was looking at this bill that there would also perhaps be start-up costs for each First Nation, and I am wondering if you are prepared to fund those costs.

What is the budget for the First Nations education authority? Have you established that budget?

How many First Nations are participating in this system? The bill says they will be listed in the schedule, but the copy I have is blank. What are we talking about here?

Mr. Prentice: As I recall, there are 198 First Nations in British Columbia. I think the signatories at the moment are 21. My anticipation as minister is we will get to approximately 40 to 50 First Nations; about a quarter of the First Nations in British Columbia. My colleague was correcting me, they are not signatories yet, but they will be soon.

In my discussions with the people at FNESC, I have encouraged that target of 25 per cent. Success begets success from there. There is start-up funding included, and it has been adequate to get FNESC up and running and make this happen. They have been satisfied with what has been provided. They have made it clear that the success of this will depend on adequate funding as well.

Senator Hubley: Welcome, and thank you for your presentation.

You mentioned provincial standards that certainly FNESC will be looking very closely at, with a view to ensuring that their students will be able to go forward to a post-secondary education.

I am wondering whether they will be working within the broader educational system as well as defining what they feel is important for their student bodies.

Mr. Prentice: Yes. That is another aspect at the heart of this proposed legislation, the capacity to have a First Nation-driven and culturally sensitive education system that respects and inculcates a sense of pride in children regarding who they are, their language, history, culture, tradition and those things that will make them stronger citizens and stronger Canadians. On the other hand, there are classes such as Physics 30, Biology 30, Math 30, all of which one would need if they want to become a doctor or an engineer, for example.

As this works — and it will work — we will be able to achieve a sense of strong cultural pride coupled with provincial educational standards, which are essential. Everyone has agreed to work on those aspects. One of the critical things in this is transparency and the results-oriented nature of it. I will describe to you one of the issues.

One of the issues was whether the results from these schools should be made public. The kids who will be tested will be subject to the same testing as kids in the provincial system. Should those results be made known to the public?

There was some representation from people in the teaching profession — and I do not want to disparage the teaching profession; I have four sisters, and three of them are teachers. However, there was some sense that these results should not be made public.

The people who spoke up loudly and clearly were the First Nations people themselves. They said they wanted the tests made public because they want to know and be satisfied that this is working and they want to see their kids actually achieving the same standards as the adjoining public system. If they are not, they want to take corrective measures. There is a commitment to achieving provincial standards.

Senator Lovelace Nicholas: My question is with respect to accountability.

Will somebody be monitoring the spending, ensuring the guidelines are met and ensuring the money goes towards education?

Mr. Prentice: Yes, clear accountability guidelines are specified in the system. You are seeing the legislation. I do not know if you are acquainted with the agreements, but they are very detailed and they underlie the statute itself. They provide very clear accountability guidelines on not only how the money is spent but on achieving educational outcomes.

Of course, one of the key sections in the act, section 9(2), is the one that requires the ultimate accountability:

A participating First Nation shall provide, or make provision for, education so as to allow students to transfer without academic penalty to an equivalent level in another school within the school system of British Columbia.

That is one of the key provisions because it specifies the expectations. It is expected that children can transfer from an on-reserve First Nations school to a public school or back without penalty.

Senator Lovelace Nicholas: The reason I am concerned about this is because I live in a First Nations community, and I know that money is continually shifted around. If they have money allocated for education, they will shift it towards health or they will shift it towards paying employees, for example. This is what I am concerned about. Please ensure that does not happen.

Mr. Prentice: The funding agreements I have spoken about will not allow that to happen; it is prohibited.

Senator Watt: Welcome, Minister Prentice. I will be coming from a different perspective, as a result of the fact that I have a bit of experience in terms of negotiating educational authorities. I did so back in the early 1970s.

If I understand this correctly, this act recognizes the First Nations not only to have a role to play with respect to their educational needs, but they have jurisdiction over them as well. Do I understand correctly so far?

Mr. Prentice: That is correct.

Senator Watt: If that is the case, then I guess it does not prevent them from entering into negotiations with the provincial government in order to negotiate their own school board. Am I correct in assuming that is the next step they would take? They will not be prohibited by this act if they choose to opt into the act. Is that correct?

Mr. Prentice: This act is enabling. It allows First Nations to come forward voluntarily to associate themselves under the umbrella of the First Nations Education Steering Committee of British Columbia.

One of the keys to success here is that FNESC will work in close association, in partnership with the provincial education system. I should pay tribute to Premier Campbell who has been supportive of this partnership and a leader in that regard. The effect of this is that the energy and resources of the public education system in British Columbia will also be available and harnessed to help First Nation education. They in a sense will join arms and work together. I am not sure if I have responded to your question.

Senator Watt: In other words, they could enter into a comprehensive agreement with the provincial government to set up a school board, if they wish. Is that correct?

Mr. Prentice: No. There is already a comprehensive agreement that underlies this act, and British Columbia is a part of it. That agreement already exists.

Senator Watt: If I understand correctly, this act only applies to British Columbia. If similar action is taken by other provinces, would it have to be tailor-made to that province?

Mr. Prentice: That is correct.

Senator Watt: Does this act only apply to British Columbia?

Mr. Prentice: That is correct. We could end up in a situation where 10 years from now we have 10 provincial statutes. At that stage, we can combine them into a single national framework.

My own view is that we should make progress where progress is to be made. At this point, that is in British Columbia. New Brunswick wants to move very quickly with exactly the same model. There is a model in Nova Scotia that has been on the ground for some time. It is similar to this and probably requires a bit of updating. We expect progress with Nova Scotia immediately. We have had discussions with Alberta. This morning, I was in a meeting with the minister from Saskatchewan. We have had discussions with Manitoba, Quebec and elsewhere.

Senator Watt: Because the funding will be dealt with when they begin to enter into negotiations with the provincial government, I guess that is part of the reason why there is no indication of operation of funds in the bill. Would they address that with the provincial government at the second stage?

Mr. Prentice: Yes, and it is actually at first stage in this case. The agreements have all been put in place, and once we were satisfied that we had cemented this with an agreement between the Province of British Columbia, the Government of Canada — myself specifically — and FNESC, we also then have individual agreements with each First Nation. Once we are in that position, the superstructure is there to put this forward and we bring Bill C-34 into law. The agreements are presently in place.

Senator Campbell: Thank you for appearing, Minister Prentice. I also want to pay tribute to my older brother, Premier Campbell. I think he has set the bar very high for all provinces in Canada.

I was interested to learn that since 1997 there has been an agreement between Canada, Nova Scotia and the Mi'kmaq First Nations.

Have we seen an improvement in the education standards for the Mi'kmaq First Nation? Is this agreement different or similar to that agreement?

Mr. Prentice: I may have to get the help of my officials on this question. I met with the Mi'kmaq education people about three weeks ago. There have been better outcomes in Nova Scotia over time; however, there is still much progress to be made there. There have been other pilot projects as well, where we have opted toward a First Nation- driven education authority. That is really what is at the heart of this, namely that First Nations take control of their own education system as opposed to something imposed by the authority of the minister. As a result, there is buy-in; that is, community buy-in, parental buy-in and culture in the schools in regard to language teaching. All of that was at the heart of the Mi'kmaq agreement. There have been issues there about funding. There have been issues in the past about the extent to which the three levels of government have been adequately working together and we are addressing those issues. I have actually encouraged the Mi'kmaq education authority to have a close look at what we have done here and update the Mi'kmaq agreements and the Mi'kmaq legislation.

Senator Campbell: I suppose that the one difference is that in British Columbia there has been an ongoing process in place between the provincial government and the First Nations. I think this bill will go along ways toward that. One of the things I want to see within this process is First Nations languages being taught in the schools because we are losing them. Once the language is gone, we cannot get it back.

Mr. Prentice: The language is important, I agree. It is part of the cultural identity of the children and if children are proud, I think everything else in life largely takes care of itself.

Senator Gill: The old question comes backs all the time: What is the policy? On the side of the First Nations, for example, do we want to put strength in the cultures and languages? On Canada's side, does the country want integration or assimilation? ``Assimilation'' is a strong word, but do we want that?

In the old days, Indian Affairs pushed hard to build schools outside the reserve and to participate in the financing of those schools. They have been there for a long, long time. I know that it is up to the communities to decide for themselves.

We used to call the community itself First Nations, but I think part, those communities are a part of the First Nation as a nation, like the Nisga'a, for example. My people have 11 communities but we are one nation. I am talking about it in this way. I know we did not talk this way within the Indian Affairs or the system. Aboriginal people are part of a nation. There are many nations in the country.

Are those requests coming from different communities that are part of a nation or from different communities that are from different nations?

Mr. Prentice: Let me answer this way, if I might, Senator Gill: The 50 communities that I am speaking of in British Columbia are considered First Nations in British Columbia. B.C. is characterized by a large number of individual First Nations who have smaller populations than in some other parts of Canada. We have close to 200 First Nations. I cannot recall the exact statistics but probably 75 per cent of those First Nations are in the range of 500 people or less.

We have a very large number of First Nations. They identify within cultural groupings. This weekend we signed treaties in British Columbia with the Maa-nulth First Nations. They are part of the Nuu-Chah-Nulth communities; there are a large number of them. Part of the special dynamic in British Columbia is that we have small First Nations. To understand why we need to do this, I need to explain why the current system does not work very well. This does answer your question.

At the present time, as the minister, I am responsible for 140,000 kids. We spent $1.2 billion. I have 30 employees administering all of that. That tells you that there is no school system at all. There are about 800 individual schools — some people call them village schools — that are operating in a void. In some areas it is working better than in others, to be fair, but by and large, across the system, the outcomes are very poor. I have said this from the very first speech I gave in the House of Commons when I was elected: It is unacceptable that we have a circumstance where the only children in Canada who do not have the protection of a school act, the protection of a curriculum, the protection of teacher certification, the protection of classroom-teacher ratio sizes, all those sorts of things, the only children in Canada who do not have rights of appeal if they are not receiving an appropriate education, are First Nations students. Currently, the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs administers, through 30 employees, about 800 individual grants to these schools. After a generation of doing this, we are not achieving educational outcomes that are consistent because these schools are not part of a system. A child who has a learning disability, for example, is not receiving the protection of what a school system would provide, which is psychologists to test the child and psychologists to define an appropriate teaching solution. These children do not have those protections. This legislation is the important step toward making all that happen.

Senator Gill: You are talking about standards.

Mr. Prentice: Yes. Standards, requirements for what is expected of a teacher, what certification they need to have, and testing of children at the end of Grade 9 or Grade 12 to ensure they are getting the educational outcomes. I am talking about all of those things.

Senator Gill: Would it be possible for a group of people, namely the First Nations — that is, 300 or 400 people coming from different communities but sharing a common language and geographic situation, and so on — to come together? They could then develop those kinds of standards together. Instead of having 300 kids together in a group of schools, this group could go to the public school and to the provincial school and say, ``These are the kind of standards we would like to have.'' Would that not be better than each individual group going to a school where they are not sure that they have the services that they would like to have as a group?

Are you ready to support Aboriginal communities that want to exchange and improve services in psychology and so on?

Mr. Prentice: I am prepared to consider anything that improves graduation rates for Aboriginal Canadian children. That is one of the biggest problems we have in this country, I believe.

This is not a cookie-cutter approach that can apply to every province. For example, when we opened our discussions in Alberta some of the First Nations advocated something close to your suggested model. They said that they could not have a single education authority in Alberta but were prepared to consider an education authority for Treaty 6, Treaty 7 and Treaty 8. In the case of Treaty 8, that would be an aggregation of about 75 First Nations in a single authority. Their needs are slightly different from Treaty 7, which has a different approach.

We are prepared to embrace those differences. In the Treaty 7 First Nations, there are only five First Nations but they are large communities, some of the largest in Canada. They essentially have a school system by reason of their size, so they do not need the same kind of protection offered in Bill C-34. However, in Treaty 8 there is high interest in this kind of approach. It will not simply be one size fits all; I understand that.

Senator Dyck: How do you envision the improvement of First Nations education when you have a fairly large number of communities, and it sounds as though a number of them have very small student populations? It is related to which strategy you see being the most effective. Will the communities try to change their curriculum? Obviously they will need resources in order to meet provincial standards so the students can transfer back and forth.

When you are dealing with small communities and small numbers of students how is it possible to bring what you call ``village schools'' up to provincial standards? What are the key points that will allow that to happen so that the education standard becomes equivalent to the provincial standard?

Mr. Prentice: Small schools are not necessarily bad schools. I graduated from a high school that had 12 students. I do not think we are engaged in criticism of small schools as long as they are part of a system, with the protection of an overall education system that even voluntarily demands testing, outcomes and standards, all those sorts of things.

Senator Dyck: Will some of those small schools on reserve have to close, and if they do, where will the students go to school?

Mr. Prentice: There is certainly no intent to close First Nations schools, quite the contrary. We are trying to ensure that the First Nations schools have all the help and assistance they need to become part of the system. It is really the contrary because all of our experience indicates that First Nation children do better if they are nurtured in a First Nations school environment.

Senator Dyck: I agree with the philosophy, but I am concerned. For example, at the high school level students need to take chemistry and biology, et cetera, where there is a need for resources such as a natural, physical wet laboratory, and not every small school can provide that equipment.

Paula Isaak, Education Jurisdiction Negotiator, Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada: One of the key features of this arrangement is provincial, First Nation and federal participation. There is much collaboration among First Nation schools and public schools to allow such things as you have mentioned around collaborating resources between neighbouring public schools and the like.

Another feature is the First Nation education authority which will allow for supports to be provided for key areas such as curriculum standards and teacher certification. Small schools will not have to create that on their own; a larger body will be available to provide that support.

Senator Dyck: At the other end of the spectrum, probably in B.C. and across Canada the First Nation population is growing rapidly. In the early years, there is provision for pooling of resources in order to deal with any potential learning disabilities and better introduction into the elementary school system. Will there be provisions for that sort of pooling?

Ms. Isaak: Yes, and because they will have the management of the funding and the system it will allow First Nations to create those efficiencies where needed to plan for those eventualities.

The Chairman: Thank you, minister, Ms. Huestis and Ms. Isaak. Colleagues, we have more witnesses to follow from the First Nations Education Steering Committee of British Columbia.

We are in the process of reviewing Bill C-34, to provide for jurisdiction over education on First Nations lands in British Columbia. We have a new set of witnesses from First Nations Education Steering Committee of British Columbia: Christa Williams, Executive Director, Nathan Matthew, Chief Negotiator, Nancy Morgan, legal counsel, and Jan Haugen, executive assistant.

Welcome and we look forward to hearing your presentation.

Nathan Matthew, Chief Negotiator, First Nations Education Steering Committee of British Columbia: Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to present on something we regard as very important. It has long been the vision of First Nations people to have an education system that is respectful of our culture and language and that provides the necessary knowledge and skills to make our way in the contemporary world.

We have been challenged in that respect. Since 1992, and the formation of the First Nations Education Steering Committee, we have been working with First Nations to create a better situation for our students. We have been holding the idea of the policy of Indian control over education very close to us the whole time, where parental responsibility and community involvement in First Nations education are the keys to success.

We are certainly challenged in the area of educational success in terms of graduation rates, with successful transitions from grade to grade and entering into the world of work or continuing on to post-secondary education.

Over time, we have had regional discussions amongst B.C. First Nations, through regional sessions. We go out every year and talk about educational issues. By holding larger assemblies, we established the idea of an education system where First Nations have control and jurisdiction. That effort has resulted in the package you have in front of you. It includes the legislation, where the federal government recognizes the jurisdiction for First Nations kindergarten to Grade 12 on reserve children. There is also a companion piece to be put into the provincial legislature that supports provincial recognition of our right to make laws with respect to education in our communities.

We have been working together and have created a system where we have legal entities that hold the jurisdiction for our communities, as well as a larger body that would manage the regulation of teachers, curriculum and the assessment of schools.

That is very broad. Most of you have seen the legislation as we have presented before. I want to turn to Christa Williams to provide more detail in that regard.

Christa Williams, Executive Director, First Nations Education Steering Committee of British Columbia: Good morning. I am a member of the Nlakapamux Nation in British Columbia. Thank you for the opportunity to present to you this morning. This is very exciting, and it is more fun than sitting in the House where you cannot be excited. I appreciate this opportunity to speak in a way that is more energetic than as of late.

It has been our privilege to have all First Nations in British Columbia come together. We have a lot of small communities that are very remote. In 1992, they came together and decided they needed to be more structured in how they provide education to First Nation learners in British Columbia, so they created the First Nations Education Steering Committee. In 1996, they created the First Nations Schools Association.

The first order of business for the First Nations Schools Association was the development of standards within our schools. It was something that communities requested. Once we had completed a lot of consultation and a lot of research, we created standards. We also created an evaluation process for our schools, and we have been implementing that certification process for about six years.

This act now recognizes that the certification process is a valid process and one that looks very extensively at the curriculum offered, the teaching methodologies and the structure of the schools. However, it is something that First Nations in B.C. have requested themselves. We wanted to ensure our kids are doing well. That is the intent of what we are looking at today. We want our students to be successful, and we need to try something different. We have developed something that we feel is valid.

We have also been working on developing a teacher certification process. We will build on the existing provincial certification process. We spent a year completing consultation with First Nations schools, and we asked them what they wanted their teachers to know and be able to do to work in our schools. We took the College of Teachers standards and competencies — there are 12 — and we scaled them down to eight. When we presented them back to the 48 First Nations who were interested in participating in the process, they wanted to know what happened to the other four. Therefore, we had to cross-reference and show them that we did not lose anything, that we enhanced the teacher standards and competencies.

We are very committed to having high-quality education for our learners. We are open to the testing. We have stood up against the British Columbia Teachers' Federation when they have been against standardized testing and the publishing of results. We are willing to be held accountable, and we look to this legislation to provide that support.

The Chairman: Thank you very much. I know how long a trip it is from British Columbia, as does Senator Campbell. I had the privilege of meeting colleagues from this group prior to our meeting, and it was an inspiration then as it is now.

The Dogrib First Nation took control of its destiny by way of education. The success story there is incredible, and this is just the start of something great.

Senator Gill: I heard the minister talking about standards. What kind of standards must we follow? Are they American standards, Canadian standards or Aboriginal First Nations standards? I bring that up because I think we must create our own standards. We have different cultures with different languages.

Maybe I am just dreaming, but I can foresee a group of First Nations coming together to establish standards to cope with what is happening in public schools. I know we must obtain certification, but I do not want to see Aboriginal people losing their specificity. It is very important for me to know about the kind of standards we will follow.

Mr. Matthew: We have agreed to maintain provincial standards as a minimum. We do not expect our students to have anything less than they would in the public system.

In B.C., over half of our children attend public schools, and there is a lot of transition back and forth. A lot of our schools feed into public schools, so we do not want them to be disadvantaged when they go into the public school system or if they require certification to get into post-secondary education. We have the nature of those standards. However, within the education process in establishing numeracy and literacy standards, we have the same kinds of standards as the public schools system, but the way we present them will perhaps be different. Certainly in the area of culture and language we will be establishing our own standards.

Senator Campbell: I have been watching this process for a long time, and you should be incredibly proud of the work that you have completed. You have set the standard for Canada, you started it by yourselves and you have reached this point. On behalf of all British Columbians, I congratulate you.

The Chairman: I reflect the same thoughts. Because both of us are from British Columbia, we aware of the challenges, the small communities and the history, and we want to see positive results. You are an inspiration. You were inspirational in my office and you are an inspiration to honourable senators here today. I thank you for appearing before us and for the groundwork that you did to get here. I know you have spoken to many people and that is why you have been able to answer our questions.

We thank you again and we wish you well. We look forward to seeing British Columbia students from our First Nations leading the way in our universities. Thank you very much.

Honourable senators, it is your committee. However, if you are in agreement, I would now like to proceed to clause- by-clause consideration of Bill C-34.

Could I have a motion to that effect?

Senator Hubley: I so move.

The Chairman: May I have a seconder?

Senator Dyck: I second the motion.

The Chairman: All in favour?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

The normal procedure is to postpone consideration of the long title and the short title contained in the clause. Shall the committee proceed in the normal way?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clauses 2 and 3 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clauses 4 to 6 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clauses 7 to 10 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clauses 11 to 17 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clauses 18 to 21 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Clause 22?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clause 23 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clause 24 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clause 25 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clauses 26 to 30 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clause 31 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clause 32 do 34 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clause 35 carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Shall the title carry?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

It is agreed, honourable senators, that the bill be adopted without amendment.

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried; unanimous.

Is it agreed that I report this bill to the Senate at the earliest convenience?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chairman: Carried.

Thank you very much, honourable senators. Bill C-34 is carried. It will be reported to the Senate on behalf of this committee.

As this is most likely the last meeting, I want to thank the honourable senators of this committee. We have worked on several initiatives and we have worked in a totally non-partisan manner, in the interests of our First Nations. I am extremely proud, as a British Columbian and as a Canadian, to be part of this, because I think we are making significant strides forward. This is just one example of the initiatives that have come forward. Initiatives have come forward in the previous administration, but we are making progress. We are making progress in spite of politics. That is remarkable in Ottawa.

I want to thank each and every one of you for your dedication, your commitment and your sincerity. I am not remiss in thanking all of our staff. I will start with the translators, because they are the poor folks back there that are generally forgotten. They do an incredible job in making certain both our official languages are represented in our committees. I wish to thank those with CPAC, and each and every one of you. I also want to thank the page, as well as our Hansard reporters, and all of the people that are part and parcel of this committee. Without each and every one of them, we would not be able to perform the functions that are expected of us by Canadians. I want to thank the library staff, Lisa Patterson and Tonina Simeon; as well as our clerk, Gaëtane Lemay; and her assistant, Anita Vinette.

Senator Gill: What about the economic stuff?

The Chairman: The economic stuff?

Senator Gill: I mean Senator Sibbeston's project.

The Chairman: That is continuing. We are going into the drafting of the report at this stage. Hopefully, I will report today on the specific claims. It will be going to the Senate.

If there is nothing else, I wish you all the very best for the festive season. God bless all of you. Let us all be back here next year in fighting form.

The committee adjourned.


Back to top