Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 32 - Evidence - February 27, 2013
OTTAWA, Wednesday, February 27, 2013
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, to which was referred Bill C-27, An Act to enhance the financial accountability and transparency of First Nations, met this day at 6:46 p.m. to give consideration to the bill.
Senator Vernon White (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good evening. I would like to welcome all honourable senators and members of the public who are watching this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples on CPAC or on the web. My name is Vern White, from Ontario, and I am the chair of the committee. The mandate of this committee is to examine legislation and matters relating to Aboriginal peoples of Canada in general. This evening we will continue our examination of Bill C-27, An Act to enhance the financial accountability and transparency of First Nations.
Tonight we will hear from three organizations: The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, represented by its national chief and vice chief; the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, whose spokesperson is its prairie director; and the Peguis Accountability Coalition, represented by its president.
Before hearing from our witnesses, I would like to ask the members of the committee who are present today to introduce themselves, and I will start with the deputy chair.
Senator Dyck: I am Senator Lillian Dyck, from Saskatchewan.
Senator Watt: Senator Watt, from Nunavik.
Senator Ataullahjan: Senator Ataullahjan from Toronto, Ontario.
Senator Raine: Senator Greene Raine from British Columbia.
Senator Demers: Senator Jacques Demers from Quebec.
Senator Patterson: Dennis Patterson from Nunavut.
The Chair: Members of the committee, please help me in welcoming our witnesses this evening. We have combined them into one panel instead of two.
They are Ron Swain, National Vice-Chief; Colin Craig, Prairie Director of Canadian Taxpayers Federation; and Phyllis Sutherland, president of the Peguis Accountability Coalition. I would ask you to keep your presentations concise. Hopefully you will be able to stay and allow us to ask some questions. I thank you again for being here tonight. I am not sure if you chose an order of speaking?
Ms. Sutherland, how about if you go first?
Phyllis Sutherland, President, Peguis Accountability Coalition: I am from the Peguis First Nation, and I am the President of the Peguis Accountability Coalition.
We have an audit that is late again. I spoke to the Senate committee a couple months ago, and issues are still ongoing. The audit is late, well beyond 120 days. It was due in July 2012 and to be presented to Peguis band members at a band meeting. It is now February 2013 and still not presented and explained at a public band meeting for members.
Full accountability of all flood funding advances of $10 million and full accounting of all work activities and expenses is still not available to the Peguis members for the period 2011-12. Flood damage remediation and repairs are still outstanding and mould is still present in many flood-prone houses. There was funding of $4 million received for flood-proofing of houses, yet the majority of housing units in flood zones are still unprotected and will likely flood again in 2013 and cause damage to repairs and renovations completed and result in waste of limited resources to pay for flood-damaged homes.
Access to information is still being denied. Some committee members are waiting for retroactive pay for 80 meetings, at $500 per meeting and $300 per meeting, for a total of $40,000, and $24,000 each respectively, yet no minutes are provided to members who have made numerous requests for minutes. There should be 80 sets of minutes but not one set of minutes have been made available under access to information requests.
Members are being denied full disclosure of all revenue and expenditures from all sources of revenue, whether it is government source funding or own source funding, such as gaming revenues, band business revenues, gas bars, grocery store, hardware store, development corporation or rentals.
Chief and council are still exceeding salary and travel limits that were set to diffuse public concern over scandalous amounts of remuneration approved by themselves for their own benefit while many members live in poverty and substandard conditions.
Essential service funds are being redirected to pay down the deficit caused by extravagant spending, for example, scarce education funds. As a result, the education program is severely compromised and standards are reduced. Post-secondary sponsorship is drastically limited, with a long waiting list. Many potential students are being denied the opportunity to obtain valuable education improvement and advancement to become self-sufficient and independent. As a result, many are perceived to be a burden on society rather than the asset they aspire to become.
Funding agreements are continually being violated year after year by leadership in control of funds on reserves. For example, in Peguis the annual audit for 2011-12 has still not been presented at a public band meeting for the members. The mandatory management action plan has never been presented and ratified by the Peguis membership as required, yet the regional office of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada has accepted the MAP. The MAP bypassed the Peguis members, which is a violation of the funding agreement.
As a result of the continuation of extravagant and frivolous spending by chief and council, the ordinary band members continue to live on welfare, are jobless and live in overcrowded, mould-infested living conditions.
The prudent thing for AANDC to do would be to halt all further funding until all these violations are corrected. No one is fulfilling their fiduciary responsibility to protect the rights and interests of the reserve membership. Full disclosure of all chief and council remuneration from all sources, both internal and external, is still not being provided to the band members. The chief especially can collect salary and travel from the band office for every day of the week, and also collect honorariums or per diems and travel for the many boards or committees of external Aboriginal organizations, which are federally funded also.
All duplicate double or triple dipping should be recovered by the federal funding source such as AANDC. A consolidated forensic audit should be performed on all the federally funded Aboriginal organizations to expose the fraud and funding abuse and the funds returned for proper use to improve the lives of the average band members being misrepresented. Many grassroots people believe that the real reason some chiefs are against government bills is due to Bill C-27, and some chiefs' refusal to be accountable to their members. The other bills are just being used as a smokescreen to potentially derail the process to enact Bill C-27.
I also want to mention a public band meeting that was shut down because a band member wanted to video record the meeting. This shows very poor governance and lack of accountability and transparency. I encourage each member of the Senate to watch the video in its entirety and you will see what we as members are subjected to when we want accountability and transparency from our elected leaders. I have made a copy. It can also be watched on YouTube by looking for Peguis First Nation community consultation meeting in Selkirk, Manitoba, February 7, 2013.
I also want to make reference to a letter dated February 25, 2013, to the Honourable Bernard Valcourt from a band member, Gerald Slater, who is running as a candidate for chief in the upcoming election in March 2013. Mr. Slater has a very serious concern about 250 potential members being added to the membership list just before elections. I have also submitted a copy of that letter.
Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I will take the commentary from the next witness, please. Mr. Swain.
Ron Swain, National Vice-Chief, Congress of Aboriginal Peoples: Good evening, Mr. Chair, and committee members. It is a pleasure to be here in the traditional territory of the Algonquin peoples to speak to you about Bill C- 27, An Act to enhance the financial accountability and transparency of First Nations.
My name is Ron Swain. I am the national vice chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. Since 1971, the congress has represented the rights and interests of off-reserve, non-status, status, Metis and Inuit Aboriginal people living in urban, rural, remote and isolated areas across Canada.
I will begin by commending the government on taking the necessary steps to move forward with Bill C-27. In 2002, the Joint Ministerial Advisory Committee concluded in their report that it seemed reasonable that legislation could provide the basis for establishing consistent and comprehensive band financial management and accountability regimes. The Joint Ministerial Advisory Committee report was also instrumental in forming the proposed First Nations governance act. The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples participated in the original consultations under that governance act, Bill C-7.
We further endorsed the notion of having First Nations bands provide greater financial accountability to their band members. Our organization contends that greater financial accountability should be provided to all First Nations people, both on and off reserve. Under the Indian Act, First Nations are accountable to the minister and not to the community. Our concern about financial accountability is to distinguish who should be accountable and to whom.
We do believe First Nations governments should be accountable to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada and they should be accountable to the Aboriginal people who live in the communities both on and off reserve. This is a simple matter of good governance. All citizens of Canada should expect greater financial accountability from their governments, whether it is federal, provincial, municipal or band councils. Hypothetically, if you are living in or associated with a First Nation community and ask members, "Would you like to know what your government is spending money on and why?" the most probable answer is, "Yes, I would like to know."
There are band members who live away from their communities and have a direct and ongoing interest in the governance of their home communities. Since the Corbière decision, they have had the right to vote in elections and they have the right to participate in and vote on decisions regarding specific claims and resource issues. If off-reserve people are to participate fully and be confident that policies that affect them are being correctly applied, they require this information. Improved transparency and accountability will strengthen community bonds and allow community members to fully exercise their democratic rights.
It is fair to say I am a big proponent of financial accountability, not only for Aboriginal people but for all governments. Financial accountability locally allows citizens and their communities to go further and build upon their communities' success. The communities that are providing financial accountability to their community members prove this point. Take, for instance, the Nisga'a Lisims government in British Columbia, a self-governing community that is quite successful in its own right.
As I stated earlier, the congress represents the interests of Aboriginal people who live off reserve, tax paying Aboriginal people who want to know why, when, where and how their tax dollars are being spent. Our organization believes in providing accountability to its members, which is why we publish our audited statements online for all constituents to view. In our audited statements, you are told the salary of our national chief, as well as shown her travel expenses for the year. Her salary is taxable and she remits income taxes each year, as I do.
The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples stands by the notion that if Aboriginal governments are to be seen as legitimate governments, they have to be held to the same standard of government, public or private organizations; corporations; or community non-profits when it comes to accountability and transparency.
Recently, the Federal Court ruled in the Daniels decision. This decision affirmed the position of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples that Metis and non-status Indians are Indians under the Constitution, granting some 600,000 Aboriginal people across Canada rights and legitimacy previously denied.
With this ruling, it is paramount for our organization and our communities to continue to move forward in the 21st century and exercise, or preferably exceed, the standard of financial accountability and transparency, not only for ourselves, but for our future and the future of all Aboriginal peoples and Canadians. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Mr. Craig?
Colin Craig, Prairie Director, Canadian Taxpayers Federation: Good evening and thank you for the opportunity to speak here today on behalf of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and our more than 84,000 supporters nationwide.
I want to begin tonight by especially thanking our donors who make our work possible, and especially those who donated to pay for the cost of our presentation here this evening. As many of you are aware, when individuals and groups are invited to speak, the Senate offers to cover the costs, but we do not believe that those who disagree with our opinions should have to cover those costs and vice versa. Therefore, we would especially like to thank the donors who made our presentation this evening possible.
Without our donors, we probably would not be discussing Bill C-27 here this evening. After all, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation called for this legislation back on December 21, 2009. At the time, we were helping to expose the outrageous salaries on the Peguis Reserve in Manitoba. The chief and council in the small community were making more than the Prime Minister of Canada.
There whistle-blower behind the release of the information, Ms. Sutherland, had sent the pay details to all three parties in Ottawa, but none reacted to the outrageous pay information. I cannot comment on why all three kept quiet about the situation, but I can say that, at the time, many politicians did not want to touch such issues for fear of being called a racist. However, let us be frank: Some in Canada throw that word around irresponsibly in an attempt to try and shut down debate about worthwhile issues like accountability and transparency. We were not scared to touch the Peguis issue, though. After all, we had the grassroots on our side. They wanted accountability and transparency.
We released the pay information to the media nationwide and the story took on national attention. We literally did media interviews about the sky-high salaries from coast to coast. CBC National, Global National and CTV covered the story. The issue was also a hot topic on the radio. Talk shows across the country had us on and their phone lines lit up. Post-media, The Canadian Press and Sun newspapers also reported the topic. In fact, the comment sections on news sites were overwhelmingly in our favour.
The public was fed up with stories about chiefs and councillors living high on the hog while band members lived in mouldy homes and worse conditions. After all, these types of stories had popped up many times in the past. The public was fed up.
As we drew attention to the Peguis situation, we kept repeating the same message: Canadians needed to speak up and tell Ottawa to put the pay information for all chiefs and councillors on the Internet. That would bring them in line with municipal, provincial and federal politicians across the country who also have to disclose their pay to the public.
If Canadians did not speak out, we warned that we would continue to hear stories like this for years and years to come.
During the next year, we kept exposing more and more cases of outrageous salaries. How did we do it? The grassroots kept leaking us information and crying out for help.
A whistle-blower from the Enoch First Nation in Alberta sent us their community's chief and council pay information, along with a note that began:
I am writing this letter out of pure frustration. I live on the Enoch Cree Nation and we should have no problem providing for our people. The problem is the greed of our leadership and the lack of motivation. They know there is nothing we can do to change the policies.
The letter continued:
The government is far and away in the state that you have to go through the local Indian Affairs office where they refer you back to the leadership. I have requested copies of the budgets for several years from both Indian Affairs and chief and council and have never received anything.
In many of the stories we exposed, the chiefs and councillors were making huge amounts of pay and keeping the details hidden from their own band members. Consider a councillor from the Glooscap Reserve in Nova Scotia. He took in $978,000 in 2008-09. Apparently, some of the money came from contracts he did with the band. What a coincidence — he was also the band's financial controller, and some of the contracts were not tendered.
Since that story broke, he and his colleagues have been replaced. It seems band members there were irate when they found out about the news. They did not have much sympathy for Chief Shirley Clarke and her cries about not being able to expense her dry cleaning.
Thankfully, MP Kelly Block responded to our campaign by tabling her private member's bill, Bill C-575. We want to thank Ms. Block for listening. We also want to extend a thank-you to the 15 Liberal MPs who put aside partisan differences and voted for her bill. Her legislation was not perfect, but it was a step in the right direction. We immediately provided feedback to her office and the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs. While her bill died as a result of the election, we were pleased that Minister Duncan responded with the legislation here before us today. On that note, we would like to again thank him for listening, especially as this bill contains many of the recommendations that we put forward. We are quite pleased about that.
Bill C-27 is a good bill. It will not solve all the problems on reserves, but it will help the grassroots living on reserves know more about where the money is going, and it will be another tool that they can use to hold their leadership accountable. That is not to mention that communities with more accountable leadership and better governance structures are more appealing to potential investors. This bill will also help the many good chiefs and councillors out there. It will help remove the dark cloud of suspicion that can unfairly hang over them every time a chief is exposed for outrageous pay.
Finally, this legislation is good for taxpayers, including Aboriginal people who live off reserve and pay income taxes. This legislation will allow everyone to know more about what is happening with public funds on reserves.
Again, thank you for considering our feedback, and thank you to the government for this legislation.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We will begin with our questions.
Senator Dyck: Thank you for your presentations this evening. I would first like to say I totally agree that information should be made available to band members. Certainly there are cases such as the one Ms. Sutherland described, and it sounds unbearable.
I know there are situations like yours where you do not seem to be able to get the information. How will this bill make your chief and council give you that information? As I understand it, this bill is really no different than the policies and regulations that are available to the minister right now, such as stopping all the funding; the minister can do that right now. It sounds like your situation has gone on for some time, and yet the minister has not done anything to keep the chief and council in line. They are just allowing it to happen time and time again.
Ms. Sutherland: That is true, and I do not know how to correct that. The minister puts these rules in place and then does not follow through with them, either, so we are left in the same predicament. It is very frustrating. We brought these concerns up time and time again.
However, since my last appearance at the Senate, before I got back to my reserve, the audit was online. Therefore, it is helping, and hopefully things will keep improving. Once they have to post their salaries and travel expenses, I think they will be more careful about how they spend federal funding.
Senator Dyck: Would the other witnesses care to contribute?
Mr. Swain: Senator, I would like to make a response to that. What I like about Bill C-27 is that it specifically speaks to having to post online and provides a mechanism for people to ask for different audits and accountabilities.
If it is not being provided, it also allows for funding to be cut. You are right that the minister could probably do that now.
It also talks about giving an opportunity to that First Nation governance to come up with a plan to rectify that. There are different steps.
Nothing is perfect, but this bill needs to have teeth. The councils must be able to post the audits and this information.
Once you start putting that into the public — not just the general public arena as Canadians, but individual members who will be voting and are affected by that governance — that information will be vital. It will expose people who are taking advantage of situations. Like my colleague from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation said, it would reward those doing good governance and give some credibility back to the system.
Mr. Craig: One thing I would stress to the committee is that this is not an isolated situation where you hear of a band member who cannot get information from their community. We are routinely copied on requests to the federal government in cases where band members cannot get the information locally.
One of the stories we often hear is that the band members go to the local band offices, ask for the information and cannot get a copy of it. Then they go to the federal government and ask for a copy. In some cases they are turned on their heels and the bureaucracy — I think it has gotten better — would play this game of go back and ask your band office for it. They know full well that the band office will not give it to them. The rules now state that the band members have the legal right to this information. If they cannot get it from the band office, ultimately the federal government will provide it.
The other problem is that they provide is that band member walks into the federal office and they say, "Can we see your ID?" The band member says okay, here it is. Then they phone the office and say John Smith, or whatever the person's name is, would like a copy of their annual audit. If you are John Smith and living in this small community and the band office knows that you are the one trying to speak out, you are seen as a troublemaker. We hear stories of people whose names are put on the bottom of the list to get their house repaired when they do that. Their kids do not get support for education. Some of these guys are operating as dictators and it is disgusting. This legislation will put that information on the Internet so band members can access it anonymously and that is a huge advantage.
In terms of improvement, since we have been blowing the whistle on some of these cases you have already seen brand new slates of band councils. On the Glooscap Reserve, I believe all of them are making more than the Prime Minister of Canada. They have a small community of 300 people or so. They are all gone now because the band finally found out what was going on and said this is outrageous, let us get these guys out of there.
The Annapolis Valley is a good new story. The former chief was making $150,000 a year tax-free and band members were outraged when they found out. They turfed him and elected a lady named Janette Peterson. She said, if you vote for me the band can decide my pay. She got elected and kept her promise. She held a public meeting and let the band members decide her pay. That is a great example of better leadership that comes from transparency. That is why this legislation is so powerful.
Senator Dyck: As I understand it now, bands are supposed to post that information, not on the web but in a conspicuous place somewhere in the band office or I do not know where. This legislation will make you put it online, but it is supposed to be available on the reserve somewhere.
Ms. Sutherland: On our reserve it is not.
Senator Dyck: I will not belabour the point. The other issue that has been raised by witnesses is that if you post the consolidated financial statements that contain information about band-owned entities, it will put them at a disadvantage with respect to increasing economic activity.
If we were to go the route of putting information online, what is wrong with the idea of having that information restricted to band members? For instance, you could set up a system where you would need a password. All the band members would have access to the password, but the general public would not have access to it. Why could not we have that?
Mr. Craig: Maybe we could think about it this way: You are a member of Parliament and a local band is coming to you and saying we want more money. You could go on the Internet and see what the situation is with that band. You hear that there are mouldy homes, no drinking water and all kinds of terrible social conditions. Then you go on website and see the chief is making $150,000 a year tax-free — an outrageous sum. Would you, as a member of Parliament, want to give that community more money?
Senator Dyck: You are not answering my question.
Mr. Craig: One powerful part of this is that it empowers elected officials by making this information transparent and also lets taxpayers know too, because they ultimately vote for elected officials. It is their right to the information, too.
Senator Dyck: Ms. Sutherland, would you like to answer?
Ms. Sutherland: One thing I would like to mention is that on our reserve is we have VLTs, which has an enormous amount of money going through their every year.
Senator Patterson: What is a VLT?
Ms. Sutherland: Video lottery terminal. On our reserve, there was over $4 million given away in community services and to this day we do not know what that means or who got it. To me, the public has every right to know how that money is being spent.
The Chair: Ms. Sutherland, if I may, the direct question was whether or not you felt the general public in Canada should have access or should if it be limited to the membership of the band.
Ms. Sutherland: Own-source funding? I think everybody should be able to see that information. I do not think it will put the band at any disadvantage.
Senator Ataullahjan: Thank you for your presentation. We have consistently heard from previous witnesses that this bill would endanger businesses that are run by First Nation communities. The idea is that they will be less competitive, the financial information is made public and they will have issues regarding joint venture litigation. Do you agree with that?
Ms. Sutherland: I will just mention a few things about the businesses on our reserve. There is a lot of involvement with consultants from outside companies. A lot of the revenue is going to those outside consultants, lawyers. I do not think a lot of these businesses they are talking about on reserves are even helping the ordinary band members. We do not see any benefits. Maybe it should be made public so everybody can see where the funds are going.
Mr. Swain: People posting their financial statements online is not a new thing. You can take a look at any stock market and pretty well look at every financial statement. If a business is going to be dynamic, functioning, existing and healthy, you want that published online. You want people to be able to see that. If it is a pathetic business that cannot make money and is not doing well, that is when people do not want it published online. If it has practices that are not healthy for that community, the community needs see that. They are all public businesses and not individuals businesses. They are businesses of that community.
When it comes to transparency, yes, you must have every financial statement posted online. There is nothing wrong with that. It is a standard practice in today's society.
Mr. Craig: I think Mr. Swain makes some very good points. A lot of businesses already have to disclose this information.
In terms of what would be disclosed in these statements, we are not talking about anything commercially sensitive, such as how much a business that is owned by the band is paying for widgets, or something that is confidential, or secret recipes, or anything like that. It is the bottom-line information: How much is the band getting from the business each year?
It is not really a very secretive document. Provincial governments have to report how much their Crowns are making. The City of Winnipeg owns golf courses. They have to disclose how much they are making from each golf course. You could argue that is commercially sensitive, but it is already disclosed. I think that argument is a bit of a stretch. I have heard that one before.
Senator Munson: Thank you for being here. Just to follow up on that, some of the witnesses that we have had here, I guess they are part of the many good chiefs you have said are out there. You say this bill is to help the many good chiefs who are out there. Some of the many good chiefs who are out there have talked about competitive edge, having a gas station or whatever, and working and selling and doing all their things. They have their own business plan. Yet, if you have to give everything away to keep that competitive edge, how do you stay competitive, if people are watching your practices of what you sell and how you sell it?
I understand the word "transparency." It is a big word around here these days. However, how do you think that works when you are giving up that competitive edge? This is what you described the many good chiefs are doing right now, and they feel they will lose that competitive edge with this bill.
Mr. Craig: What is it that you feel they will disclose that is competitive?
Senator Munson: The way they disclosed it is in terms of their business practice, the money they make, how they make that money, that sort of thing.
Mr. Craig: That will not be disclosed. It is not the finer minutia, such as the cost of widgets and how much they are charging for smaller services. It is the bottom line that is disclosed. As Mr. Swain pointed out, it is not commercially sensitive information that would be realized.
Senator Munson: You are sure about that?
Mr. Craig: Yes.
Mr. Swain: Clause 7 says a First Nation must, on request by any of its members, provide the member with its audited consolidated financial statement, which should be produced; the schedule of remuneration and expenses, which is pretty standard, I think, if this bill gets passed; the auditor's written report respecting its consolidated financial statements; the auditor's report or review engagement report, as the case may be, respecting the schedule of remuneration and expenses.
When I am reading through the bill, it does not talk about the detail that these former witnesses mentioned. I was not here to listen to their evidence, but in looking through this bill, it does not talk about driving down to those details. It talks about consolidated financial statements. In fact, when we produce our consolidated financial statements at our annual general meetings, people want more detail. There are requests for further detail. When we produce those consolidated financial statements, they do not have the detail that I feel the chiefs are speaking to.
Senator Munson: Why can First Nations not help First Nations? Why is it always this Big Brother approach, big White brother knows best about how First Nations should run their nations?
We have had witnesses in front of us from Alberta and other places who have had very successful enterprises, and run without the mouldy houses you talk about. I recognize some of the Third World conditions that are out there, but their argument is that we can be transparent. Transparency works another way, too; it is by helping other First Nations in the way we do our business.
As my colleague said, the minister has these tools already to do what the government perhaps should have done but did not do. Yet, you seem to be casting a cloud over the entire First Nations community. There seems to be, from my perspective, a bit of overkill here. First Nations have been making incredible strides in terms of doing things. They have offered it here before us, to say we can go to British Columbia and to Manitoba and talk about these best practices. What is wrong with that approach?
Mr. Craig: Do you not, as a senator, and does the House of Commons, as representatives of the government and the people of this country, not want to know how money is spent on reserves? When you cut a big cheque to a community each year, do you not want to make sure it is actually reaching the people rather than getting siphoned off at the top?
We just helped blow the whistle a couple of weeks ago on a new case from Saskatchewan, the Standing Buffalo First Nation. The chief was making $194,000 a year, tax free. That works out to about $317,000. It was $2,000 more than the Prime Minister of Canada. All the full-time councillors from that community were making more than Premier Brad Wall. The community has 443 residents. Is Parliament not concerned about the money not reaching the people?
Senator Munson: The question was about First Nations helping other First Nations.
Mr. Craig: It is not coming.
The Chair: We are not here to debate. If you have questions and responses, please; we are not here to have a debate.
Mr. Swain: I can respond to that, senator. The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples represents people who are actually members of these First Nations communities. Unfortunately, if you do not have legislation like this talking to transparency and actually having this information, what we are here for is mainly to the members who have a right to see it.
I will give you an example. We had to go to court to be able to vote on a First Nations community with the Corbière decision. It had to be a court case to force that to happen. We are not having First Nations communities and their leadership volunteering to work with us. Unfortunately, there is some sort of resistance to people outside the community. People in the greater Canadian society, Aboriginal people who are status and have a right to participate in those communities, are being denied that.
We look at this as an opportunity for our constituency to have important access. We have a right to vote now. We have a right to economic opportunities in those communities. However, we know that if you are not in that community, you just do not get access. They might have posted the audits on someone's office somewhere, but we do not have access to that, to go to that community and to participate.
First, we are in a modern age. Posting information on the Internet is something we do. Our organization has voluntarily done that. Our communities and our people have said: We are putting everything on the Internet, so our communities, the taxpayers, senators — anyone — can go online and take a look.
Senator Munson: There will be a second round, but on this particular round I really want to get information from the three of you, particularly from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, who seems to take great pride in whistle- blowing and all the things that you are doing. I do have some questions about the Canadian Taxpayers Federation afterwards.
You say there are some good chiefs out there. Of the 600-odd First Nation groups, from your perspective, how badly is this bill really needed? Is it 90 per cent, 50 per cent, 20 per cent? While there may be honourable intentions behind this bill, what it does is it casts a shadow over the entire First Nations community and makes everybody look like they are committing fraud and taking away from their peoples, when you talked about the specific examples. What is your feeling on how widespread it is?
Mr. Craig: I think it is widespread. As I mentioned, I would be happy to leave these with you. We have gotten a whole bunch of requests over the years from band members across the country, with some pretty sad stories behind them in some cases. One gentleman, not too long ago, described how he went out for milk. He was known as someone who was a whistle-blower, and he was trying to get some accountability in his community. He came back and there was a death threat written on his driveway, because he was the type of guy who would ask questions in his community.
There are a lot of sad tales out there. I do not know what the percentage is. I have spoken to the Frontier Centre for Public Policy about this, because they have done a lot of research in trying to measure the level of access that band members have to information, and they have said there is a significant enough problem there. I do think there is a significant enough problem that it needs to be addressed through legislation, because it is not happening right now. Bands are already required to release this information and we are still getting all these requests. At the same time, I believe taxpayers have a right to know how this money is being spent on reserves. I think every member of Parliament should want to know as well so that, when you are deciding budgets, how much is going to be spent, how much different communities are receiving and which ones are truly in need, you can have a bit more information as to how the money is being spent without just simply cutting another cheque.
The Chair: If you could keep your responses a bit more crisp, I would appreciate it.
Senator Demers: This bill has driven me nuts because I want to do the right thing. I just listened to Senator Munson and I have a question and a few comments; it could also be questions for you.
To come back to Senator Munson, if you have 10 people and 2 are out of line, people will say that the whole team is out of line. That is, I think, in many ways what you were saying.
This is driving me nuts because I sit here tonight and, honest to goodness, this is the first time that I get to the real true meaning about what is going on, and you gave it to me. I am listening. I just told my colleague here, Senator Patterson, that I understand more. There are some good chiefs who have come forward and have spoken well, but I am one who thinks that if it will clean this up, everyone will benefit. The good chiefs will benefit because they certainly want that. They cannot help but want that if they are good, honest and treat their people right.
What Ms. Sutherland said was very touching. You all spoke very well, but she really hit on some points there. If I am having problems in a situation and someone will come in and back me up or have my back and we all work as a team to work it out, then everyone will benefit. That is a comment, but I would like to ask a question.
The federation has stated that it would like the federal government to ensure full accountability. That word's been used a lot, even when you spoke. I like the word "accountability" because accountability is very important in life. With on-reserve funding, could you explain what is considered full accountability and does this bill respond to it?
As a team coach, I had some players that always got along on the line. I had some players who got arrested and then we were all a bunch of bums, but we were not. We worked. We were good people. Then we got everyone together and we all made a solid team and everyone benefited. That is how I feel tonight, that I have understood more of this bill. I have listened to our people here and they have great points, but that is what I got out of it tonight.
The Chair: Senator Demers, I do not think I got the question. What was the question?
Senator Raine: He asked it.
The Chair: I did not get the question. I apologize. Go ahead.
Senator Raine: It was: Will it deliver full accountability?
Senator Demers: Yes; thank you, Senator Raine.
Mr. Swain: I would like an opportunity to respond. The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples believes in self-governance. That is why we have no problem in really supporting this bill, because it values accountability and transparency. We believe that there will be different models of self-government in the years to come and there are different models right now. However, if you have a value of accountability and transparency, which this bill encompasses, we support it. We support our people governing ourselves. This is an instrument or a tool to help, we believe in time, to expose these terrible, terrible abuses of people's elected privileges when they are governing these communities.
We need these kind of instruments because right now in Aboriginal communities across this country we have the highest levels of teen suicide, suicides, housing issues; all the different social ills. There must be a remedy, and this is an incremental step in the right direction. In the whole bill, I do not see one word that says we will limit what people are getting paid or we will limit remuneration. All it says is that we will make sure that the members who vote in that community and the greater public is able to see what those numbers are. That is a value we embrace.
Senator Demers: Thank you very much.
The Chair: Mr. Craig, I have a short question. You have looked at, I am sure, different sets of books across the country now, in particular from Aboriginal groups. What would you see is a best practice across the country right now from someone who is already meeting public expectations, whether it is consolidated financials or others?
Mr. Craig: I would have to think about that for a few minutes.
The Chair: It is a bit of a loaded question. I had someone email me a couple and I went and looked at one of them, Membertou First Nation, for example. Their financials are spectacular. As a matter of fact, I would argue very few governments in this country provided the level of financials that the Membertou First Nation does. I appreciate the fact that you get the negative lots of times, but this is not only about negativity. There are lots of First Nations out there doing great stuff and very much pro-actively disclosing and providing information to all Canadians.
To be fair, this is not just what happens in this room. I do not want it left out there that the only information being provided is negative. I have seen some very positive ones as well. I just wondered if you had as well.
Mr. Craig: I always try to stress that, too. There are lots of good chiefs and councillors out there trying to do the right things to disclose how much they are making, what their expenses are and what their annual audits are so that their band members are informed, and so forth. I will try and think of a best practice. If I cannot get back to you today, I will certainly try and email you with one.
One tale that comes to mind is a chief from northern Manitoba who called me up and said he would like to meet. We went for coffee and he slid across the table his remuneration for him and his council. He said, "I have no problem disclosing this. We are open and accountable. Here it is. You can put it on your website, if you want." That is a great example. I did not see the full accounting set; I am sure he would have provided that, too
The Chair: Thank you very much. I will go to Senator Raine.
Senator Raine: Thank you very much. It has been very interesting tonight.
My big fear is that we can put this regime in place where everything is accountable and then when people do not follow the rules what are the repercussions and will it, in fact, be enforced?
The intent is obviously so that people in the First Nations will see this information and will react and not elect people who are not doing a good job. Yet, Ms. Sutherland, I know that in your case 2009 was when it was first made widely public that you had a problem with remuneration and accountability. Then there was an election, I presume, in 2011. Did the same group of people get re-elected?
Ms. Sutherland: Yes.
Senator Raine: Do you think they will get re-elected again in 2013?
Ms. Sutherland: It is quite possible.
Senator Raine: If the people of your community want to be treated that way, it is tough.
Ms. Sutherland: It is a great big issue, and one of the issues leads back to current leadership having control of the membership list and the material that goes out to off-reserve members. They can mail these nice, rosy pictures out that say everything is just fine in Peguis and he is doing a great job. He is the only one that has access to that membership list, and we have more off-reserve members than we do on-reserve.
Senator Raine: So it is not just a problem of accountability. It is a problem of governance in general.
Ms. Sutherland: Yes. It is a big problem.
Senator Downe: That is why we amended the First Nations Elections Act.
Senator Raine: Exactly. One can only hope that you will find a way to change the leadership.
Ms. Sutherland: As I said, too, I submitted a letter with one concern where they are trying to add a whole bunch of new members again. That would put the present chief in favour again of the new members if they are passed, which happened at the last election also. Members were being added as the voting was going on.
Senator Raine: Can your group being organized for accountability coalition appeal to the government, to Aboriginal Affairs?
Ms. Sutherland: We have appealed. It has not gone anywhere. A lot of our problem is funding. It takes money to appeal. It takes money for lawyers. If you are not in favour with the elected leadership, a lot of us are out of jobs. It is a big issue.
Senator Raine: Yes. Thank you very much.
Senator Patterson: I would like to salute Ms. Sutherland and thank her for appearing in particular, along with the other excellent witnesses. It has been said in this committee, even tonight, I think, that we do not need the bill and everything is okay. The band members are entitled to this information, and they just have to go to the department or they just have to go to the band office. They are already entitled to that information, and this bill does not do anything to improve that situation. I wonder if you could tell us if you tried to get financial information from the band or from the department, and how that went.
Ms. Sutherland: All my requests went to the band. I never received one response. I think I might have got something from the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs a couple of times. The last few times, I had to send for it from Ottawa, which took months. I have never once received information from my band.
Senator Patterson: How does it make you feel to have to go to the department to get information that your band is supposed to get to you? Is that the right way it should happen?
Ms. Sutherland: No. It should be readily available to all band members who want to look at finances.
Senator Patterson: The other criticism of the bill is that there is no enforceability that is not already there, that is, if bands refuse to provide information, then the funding can be cut off, but we do not need the bill because the funding can be cut off under the present regime.
Do you think the bill will make a difference, since it will give band members information, assuming the information is disclosed, in the course of elections? You have said that there has been no change and there may be no change if the information is disclosed and people really know what salaries and benefits are being made. Do you know what the extent of salaries and benefits are in the Peguis First Nation? Does anybody know?
Ms. Sutherland: I know some, but not the true amounts. For instance, our chief sits on numerous boards. We do not know any of the amounts that he is getting from there. I suspect that if we were privy to all that information, there would be a lot of shocked people.
Senator Patterson: Do you think it might influence the course of an election?
Ms. Sutherland: Barring any corrupt practice to do with election. I mean, in the past, we have had people carrying in bags of votes. You know, it is frustrating.
Senator Patterson: I would like to thank you for coming. I know you have had some difficult family circumstances lately, so your attendance is greatly appreciated.
Ms. Sutherland: Thank you.
Senator Seth: Thank you very much. I have been listening, and I have not come to any conclusion about what should be said and what should not be said. Based on your testimony this evening and that of the previous witnesses, I gather that there is a risk of intimidation and problems when requesting this kind of information. My question is: Do you have any alternative suggestion for accessing this information other than what is stated in the current Bill C-27? What would you suggest? What should be done?
Mr. Craig: In terms of amendments?
Senator Seth: No, no. What is the problem that is arising here? That is what I want to know. Are there any other alternative routes to get access to this information for the members?
Mr. Craig: Well, right now band members have the right to the information. I mean, the bill clearly notes that. The feedback that we have heard overwhelmingly from many different band members is they cannot get it from their communities, so then they go to the federal government. In the past, they have been denied the information from local Aboriginal and Northern Affairs offices. They have been told, "No, no, go get this from your band," so they are getting caught in a loop. They go back to their band and ask for it, and they do not get it. They come back to the federal government, and they say, "Go back and ask your band." That process has gotten better, whereby it seems the regional department offices are starting to hand the information over more freely, so that is good. We encourage the government to keep doing that. That is the status quo right now.
Left out of that picture, however, is the ability of taxpayers to know how the money is being spent, and we think that is equally as important.
Senator Seth: I agree, yes.
Mr. Craig: If all this money is flowing to these communities, people want to know that it is actually reaching the grassroots and being used to help address issues like poverty and youth suicide problems and those things.
Ms. Sutherland: One of the solutions we might have talked about is governance on reserves. You have the chief and council have all the power. They control everything. In any other form of government, like sitting here, you have opposition. I think an opposition party on a reserve would do great things. It would give a voice to the people. Right now, the people feel powerless. Nobody is listening to them. I have people phoning me on a continuous basis, and I am powerless. I do not have any power to help them. I could listen to their concerns, but ultimately it is the chief and council that have the ability to help them.
Senator Seth: Maybe it would create more problems.
Ms. Sutherland: An opposition?
Senator Seth: Yes.
Ms. Sutherland: I do not think so. I think it would be healthy.
Senator Munson: You are saying we create problems?
Senator Patterson: Never.
Senator Seth: No, we do not have a problem. It is different. We do not have a problem because you guys are nice.
The Chair: We will move on to the next question.
Senator Watt: I asked specific questions on this Bill C-27, and I understand that you are looking for solutions. After hearing all kinds of news around the world over many years in relation to the Aboriginal people, I am not surprised that you are looking for solutions. In the sense that you are looking for solutions, I support you in terms of looking for solutions, but I think you are looking in the wrong area. Just let me say why I tend to think that you are looking in the wrong area.
If this bill becomes law, we are not sure it will do what you think it will do. It could even have an opposite effect. Knowing the fact, I for one question how it will be enforced. Not having knowledge of how it will be enforced, this piece of legislation could be passed and be sitting on the shelf, and I do not think it will be any use to you on account of the fact that the system is already in place. This is a duplication of what is already in place.
I will just stop there, because I have great difficulty understanding your point. However, at the same time, I do understand that you are looking for solutions. You are frustrated by the fact that you are not getting the information from your own people.
Maybe what you should do is look inside your community and begin to start restructuring your community so the accountability and transparency can exist on a daily basis.
However, if you look outside or look towards the government — the big father — will they really help you? I do not think so. They will pass this bill here and they will be sitting on it. There will be no money to enforce it. If one were to make a law and want it enforced, money would have to go with it. If there is no money, there is no enforcement. That is the way life is.
Let me say that I share your frustration. I really do, because I have similar problems within the Inuit community. However, I think the most important thing is to look inward rather than look outside for help.
The Chair: Do you have a question, Senator Watt?
Senator Watt: I have no question. It is the same thing as the other day; I had no questions.
Senator Dyck: Thank you, Senator Watt. He is our elder.
I just have to say one more thing with regard to that. I hate to say this to my Liberal colleagues, but in my mind, Bill C-27 will be like the gun registry: Good intentions to clamp down on those who use guns for the wrong reasons, but it did not work. In my view, Bill C-27 will be the same, because we have the same tools and nothing is happening.
Right now, in order to get your contribution agreement, a First Nation is supposed to submit all that material to the department. Presumably, the department has the information. If it has that information and it is not giving it to the band members, why is it not? Why do we need to have all this rigmarole? If they are giving the information to the department, the department could just hand it to you.
Senator Patterson: Privacy concerns.
Senator Dyck: You are not the witness, sir. I am asking the witnesses.
Senator Patterson: Sorry.
Senator Dyck: Privacy is an important point, and one of the things that this bill will go around is the Privacy Act.
The department is refusing to give it to you but they should be. The bad person here is not the band chief and council. The bad person is the department.
Why can you not get that information from the minister? I know you cannot answer that, but they should do that. Do you not think they should give it to you? If they have it, should they not be giving it to you? For salaries they should be able to.
Mr. Swain: One thing the Congress really likes about Bill C-27 is the Internet access. Why should an individual member like me — an Aboriginal person living off the First Nation — have to jump through all these hoops to get information? In our technology age, we should be able to just go to the Internet and click it and there it is.
Senator Dyck: It is on the Web already; some stuff is on the Web.
Mr. Swain: It is not universal. We have members right across Canada who cannot get access to basic, simple information.
Therefore, one part of the bill that we really like is the part about the Internet access; it is easier access.
I know people are frustrated it does not go far enough. It is a small bill; it is not a bill that will crush First Nations communities. It will not put them in bankruptcy. This bill is just talking about posting basic financial information on the Net and giving access to membership. That is a good value for any governance system.
Senator Dyck: Why can the department not just post it instead of making the chief and council responsible for posting it?
Senator Patterson: It is in the bill.
Senator Dyck: The department should post it rather than the chief and council. The department should post it without waiting for the chief and council. That would get around this whole rigmarole — the waiting for the chief and council to do it. If the department did it, they would not have to threaten you to say, "If you do not post it, we will take away all of your funding."
Mr. Craig: They cannot post it right now because of a decision called the Montana decision. A judge ruled decades ago when someone tried to get the information and they could not. The ruling said that the federal government did not have the legal authority to disclose the salary amounts alongside the names of chiefs and councillors. When we got our information, we got the salary information for every chief and councillor nationwide, but all of the names were blacked out.
You question was whether the bill will work and whether transparency will work, and it has already worked. As I mentioned before, when we helped expose what was happening on the Glooscap First Nation, band members were furious. The next thing that happened during the next election was that all the bad apples got turfed. It was the same with the Annapolis Valley First Nation. Even in Ms. Sutherland's case, the salary there is astronomical. Her chief is making more than the provincial premier, but it has come down significantly from three years ago. It is already working.
The other point that I would note for the whole committee and for you is that reserves are different. We have to remember that. It is not similar to, say, someone who is living in a provincial riding and can just go out tomorrow and try and invoke change. Reserves are often made up of big families, and if you are on the wrong side of the chief, good luck; you may never get the changes that you want to happen. In some cases, asking for this information would be like asking the Mayor of Winnipeg how much he makes. Then he finds out who is asking and he has the power to put your house at the bottom of the priority list for renovations. This is the different dynamic that happens on reserves that does not happen off reserves.
The Chair: You are not suggesting that he is doing that, are you, Mr. Craig?
Mr. Craig: No, he has not — not to my knowledge.
Senator Raine: Mr. Craig, when you tell us that people are making more than the Prime Minister or more than the Premier, is that their salary or is that their salary and expenses?
Mr. Craig: In those cases, we have taken their salaries. In some cases, chiefs and councillors receive a salary and then they receive an honorarium and all these different pay packets. We have added all those together. Since it is tax free, we calculate what the equivalent would be for someone off-reserve paying income taxes. That is when we do the comparison.
Senator Raine: I think you have to make that very clear.
Mr. Craig: We do try and make that very clear in our news releases and comments when we say that publicly.
Senator Raine: When you start talking about salary and expenses, people immediately think that they are somehow receiving and benefiting from all of these expenses, but those are expenses incurred on work, not play.
Mr. Craig: Again, we are not talking about expenses for computers or pens or anything. We are referring to straight-up pay. As I mentioned when I was talking about the Standing Buffalo First Nation chief, and I described how he made $194,000 tax free, which was the equivalent of about $317,000 for someone in Saskatchewan who is paying income taxes. Again, we are not talking about expenses but strictly pay. On top of that, he had travel expenses. That is completely separate.
Senator Raine: Okay. Thank you very much for clarifying that.
We have heard people say that this information should be available only for First Nation members, on-reserve and off-reserve, and that there could be an access code or a user ID password situation for getting access to the financial information. Do you think there is any value in that or do all of you think it is much better to have it fully available to anybody in Canada and around the world on the Internet?
Ms. Sutherland: We have members all over Canada and the U.S. I do not have any problem with disclosing to the general public.
Senator Raine: Thank you.
Mr. Swain: I think it would be helpful if it was broadly available. In time, people would then get over this assumption that Aboriginal governance systems are abusing these funds, because the majority of them are not. If it is publicly broadcasted and open to the general public, especially Canadian citizens, that stereotype of fiscal mismanagement would eventually disappear over time.
Mr. Craig: I think it would be a small nightmare to set up a system whereby you had to issue passwords and usernames and all that kind of stuff. Even if that was the case, you would still be denying taxpayers the opportunity to know how those funds are being spent. We think an important aspect of this legislation is that it allows taxpayers more insight as to how money is being spent in these communities and it can give them the opportunity to see if the dollars are actually reaching the grassroots. If they can see that a community is doing well and perhaps wants money for something that Joe voter might feel would help that community lift out of poverty, they might be open to it. However, if there is a veil of secrecy and you do not know if it is getting to the grassroots or not, you might not be as inclined to support that.
The Chair: I had one question for Ms. Sutherland. You talk about transparency as much as accountability. Do you see this piece of legislation offering transparency and accountability for your First Nation and the members of your First Nation?
Ms. Sutherland: Yes, it is a start. We have to start somewhere.
Senator Patterson: Mr. Craig, we have been discussing publication of the information required in the bill on the Internet. As I understand it, according to clause 9 of the bill, if a First Nation does not publish the required documents on its Internet site, or an Internet site, then this bill would give the minister the authority to publish those same documents on the Internet, on the department's website.
Is that something that is new in this bill that was not there before? Did you say that the minister now has an authority to publish information that the minister did not have were it not for this bill?
Mr. Craig: If I understand your question correctly, right now the minister does not have the authority to post it online. Is that what you are wondering? This goes back to the Montana decision. It goes back to a case where a reporter from the Calgary Herald tried to get chief and council salaries from a particular community and he or she was denied again. I am going by memory, but they were denied and took it to court. The Montana decision ruled that the federal government could not release the information under the existing privacy laws.
Senator Patterson: It is not true to say that this bill does not change anything?
Mr. Craig: Yes, it is not true; it does change enough. One other issue I would raise is that some have suggested this creates some huge paperwork burden. That is not true. These reports are already produced. The legislation says we are going to scan it and stick it on the Internet, which is not a significant burden on the government at all.
Senator Munson: Ms. Sutherland, the word "transparency" has been used tonight. You have made powerful arguments about transparency and you used the words "it is a start." Even with all of this, how does this bill address accountability? You said even with the next election and the lack of transparency that bags of votes were brought in for the last election. First Nations have been arguing for a First Nations Auditor General about accountability. How do we get to that point of accountability and the voting patterns inside your First Nation? Would you be in favour of an outside group? Canada sends monitors all over the place to observe elections, such as the Ukraine. How do you get to the bottom of what I think is an equally serious issue to change that? I see nothing in this bill that will change very much for you and what you describe of living in an environment of intimidation.
Ms. Sutherland: It is a big job and there is so much that needs to be worked on. In talking about the elections, AANDC has to get involved more at the grassroots level. The people know what is going on. They should be listening to the people more instead of sending you back to your chief and council when you take your concerns to them. I heard that mentioned. That does not do us any good because they are not answering us.
They got the power and they want to keep the power. One of the problems with the elections right off the bat is chief and council are allowed to appoint who they want as the electoral officer, which is wrong. It is usually someone they know. Before our electoral officer became our electoral officer he was the membership clerk. From there he got trained to be the electoral officer. Even that is wrong. It should be someone completely neutral who has no ties to the community and cannot be swayed.
Senator Munson: How do you get there? The government seems so determined on this particular bill to get toward transparency and salaries and expenses, but how do you get there in a legislative form? Should Elections Canada get involved and how would that work? That, to me, is as serious an issue as the other one.
Ms. Sutherland: It is a very serious issue.
Senator Munson: Just because of the issue of transparency to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, and I will date myself and have the Gordon Sinclair question for you on "Front Page Challenge," since our salaries are posted and you have 84,000 supporters in terms of blowing the whistle. Some chiefs have big salaries — that is on the record — and have not been good to their people. You are the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. You get your salary. What is your salary? How does that work so we can all be transparent? If we are making arguments about it, we must have context here.
Mr. Craig: Can I trade my salary information to see your expense account?
Senator Munson: You can see my expense account, yes. It is online.
Mr. Craig: The details are not.
Senator Munson: I am asking the questions now. I am willing to do whatever. Whatever we do in the future, I will always comply.
Mr. Craig: It is late at night. I am trying to have a bit a fun with you.
Senator Munson: So am I.
Mr. Craig: I make $65,000 a year, roughly. We comply with everything required of non-profit organizations. As I noted at the beginning of my statements, we do not receive a cent in government funding. When organizations receive government funding we expect transparency. Obviously, Aboriginal communities receive a lot of public funding from the federal government, provincial governments and so forth. We expect full transparency there.
Senator Munson: In my old business, we used to get the Canadian Taxpayers Federation to come on to balance out our report. I think people would like to understand a bit about your organization. You have 84,000 supporters and you make some strong pronouncements on various issues across the country.
You are involved in this issue. It is a serious question because if we are going to be talking about this, we have to know each other a bit better.
The Chair: Thank you very much for the response.
Mr. Swain: The senator brought up a good point — I know this is off topic — about the Aboriginal ombudsman.
Senator Munson: Auditor General.
Mr. Swain: We want to go on record that we support both those concepts. I want to read a line. I always carry my policy stuff with me and it speaks to what you are talking about with elections.
The issue is where an Aboriginal person has a dispute with their community's government or with their federal government, it can be difficult to seek resolution.
In the case of a local dispute there may not be an individual viewed as impartial to whom to make a complaint. For off-reserve individuals there may be logistical difficulties in making contact or representation. For people with a complaint against the federal government, it is difficult to know where to turn and it is unlikely that the department in question will be seen as a neutral party. The recommendation of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples is an Aboriginal ombudsman should be established. This individual and their office would be tasked with accepting complaints from Aboriginal individuals about their perceived mistreatment by either an Aboriginal government or a federal government department or agency. The ombudsman would have unfettered access to individuals and records and their findings and recommendations would be binding on both parties.
It goes on to talk about how it would connect with an Aboriginal Auditor General, but that would be quite a few paragraphs to read.
Senator Munson: Ms. Sutherland, I would like to know from you how intimidation works. Could you give me a personal example? I think it is always important to have everything on the table. In your case, how would intimidation work?
Ms. Sutherland: We are sitting around at a general band meeting and I get up to ask a question so I go to a podium. In the one incident that really scared me, I was speaking at a podium and a gentleman came running from the back right up to me. I thought he was literally going to hit me.
The tactics used at band meetings are such that the elected chief has his little hit group ready and if people talk they are shouted down by the one group. Legitimate questions do not get asked and they do not get answered because of the yelling.
You can watch this meeting I mentioned. I was not at this meeting, but another band member posted it on YouTube. The reason he wanted to post it is to show what goes on at band meetings. They literally shut the meeting down because they did not want it posted. It is a band meeting. He wanted to share it with family in B.C. He was threatened.
I also have another friend who was trying to tape a band meeting and the elected leader at the time pointed right in his face and told him to shut the camera off or he would be sued. That is a common thing that happens at band meetings.
The Chair: What is the population of your community?
Ms. Sutherland: On reserve there are about 4,000.
The Chair: That is a good size.
Ms. Sutherland: It is quite big.
Senator Munson: Thank you very much for your answers. I appreciate it.
Senator Watt: This time I will be asking questions. In regard to Bill C-27, if it becomes law, whose responsibility will it be and where will the finances come from to implement this? Do you know whether that will be taken out of the money coming from the Department of Indian Affairs that normally goes to the community either for education, health purposes and housing? Do you know if that will bite into those funds? Do you have any idea how it will be implemented when it becomes law?
Normally when it becomes law, money has to go with it and resources have to go with it. How will it be financed? How will it be policed? How will it be enforced? Has the Department of Indian Affairs given you an indication that they will cover the cost to implement this law? Do you have any idea?
Mr. Craig: I can take a stab at it. I do have some experience of a similar process because when we get leaked documents from band members we put it in our photocopier, hit scan, it goes to my computer and I load it on our site. To do one community's information to put it on line is not onerous at all. It probably takes maybe 10, 15 minutes. If you have 600 communities nationwide, it would not be very much in terms of a staff cost or time at all, from what I could see.
Senator Dyck: That is if you have a website.
Mr. Swain: I understand there are contribution agreements with the different departments that already pay for audits and pay for these different financial instruments. I imagine that the First Nations communities would have to negotiate that into their contribution agreements or their agreements.
Senator Watt: I would think so, yes. That means they will be biting into the money that normally goes into social services and educational and health needs. I am saying there is only one pie and most likely it will be coming out of that pie.
I would caution you that in one hand you might receive what you are looking for but, on the other hand, the money that goes into your community may not necessarily be the same amount. That is a possibility.
Ms. Sutherland: One comment I would like to make is in regard to our community. We already pay for numerous websites sponsored by our band, so I do not see it even as an extra cost for them to download. Any kind of information that he perceives as positive, it is on there.
Senator Watt: I do not think it is only related to downloading from the Internet whatever information you have to access. I am talking about physical people who have to be in place in the office to be able to administer this.
Mr. Craig: There is even an easier solution that I did not think about the first time, and that is that the bands get this information electronically from their auditors. All they do when it comes in an email is upload it. As Ms. Sutherland said, many communities already have websites. You can go on the Internet and within 10 minutes sign up for a free website somewhere. If the band did not have a website, it is not an onerous task at all to place on the bands to put this information on line. It is certainly not for the federal government because they already have reserve profiles for every community in Canada.
Senator Raine: As the information is already being submitted to the minister under clause 9, he must publish the documents on the site of Indian Affairs and Northern Development without delay. You could simply put a link to a very simple website and a link to the ministry's website. It would be there and it would be available.
The Chair: That was not a question. Thank you very much.
Senator Raine: I think we are all trying to find solutions.
The Chair: That is okay. It is good information. I was going to say cost of doing business, but it would not be a question.
Senator Dyck: I have a supplementary question to Senator Watt's line of questioning about costs. We all know there are some band councils that will not post their information, so under this bill if a band council does not post it a band member can take the chief and council to court to get an order to have that information posted. Who will pay for that?
Mr. Swain: The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples has gone to court many times with the Daniels case, over $2 million, the Corbière case to be able to vote in our own communities. If people are not going to be providing the information that our people want, the individual members will be taking these people to court. There must be accountability. Our members are demanding accountability and more transparency to know the facts and take a look at the figures. Any self-government model that denies members access to information is a model that is broken.
Senator Dyck: You gave me the answer. You are saying the band member has to pay; is that what you see?
Mr. Swain: I can see that is what we are doing now. It is our individual people and our communities are doing that work.
Senator Dyck: We heard you.
Ms. Sutherland?
Ms. Sutherland: I have a different take on it, I guess. Living on the reserve and knowing the realities of what happened, if you want to take your chief and council to court, if you are in favour with the elected chief and council, you are well taken care of so you do not have any problems. If you are on the outside you are without — and I think I mentioned this before — a job, you do not have the resources, which is where a lot of our band members are.
I believe I brought this up with AANDC a number of times. They should really be concerned about the ordinary band members taking their own chief and council to court. The figures run in the millions. I am speaking for the ordinary band members who do not have a voice.
Senator Dyck: Thank you for your answer.
The Chair: Thank you very much. In particular, Ms. Sutherland, thank you for being here tonight. I know you do not represent an organization and I know that you are representing the impact this is having on you personally in your community and I truly appreciate that.
Mr. Swain, thank you very much for being here, and Mr. Craig. I want to thank the members of the committee as well.
(The committee adjourned.)