Current Problems

Child Welfare (1-5)

AFN chiefs at odds after $47.8-billion child-welfare deal rejected

October 25, 2024

National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak, second right, led the negotiations and pushed for it to be approved. CHRISTINNE MUSCHI/THE CANADIAN PRESS

The Globe and Mail: Chiefs with the Assembly of First Nations will meet before the end of the year to try to amend a historic $47.8-billion child-care agreement with Ottawa that they ultimately rejected, but some chiefs who supported the deal are ready to walk away from the AFN to negotiate on their own.

Reached in July, the deal was the culmination of two decades of court action and negotiations to reform on-reserve child-welfare services. It was struck between Canada, the Chiefs of Ontario, Nishnawbe Aski Nation and the Assembly of First Nations.

A separate but related $23-billion deal to compensate 300,000 children who were torn from their families and put into foster care as a result of discrimination was approved last year.

But the latest agreement for long-term reform was voted down last week by 267 of the 414 chiefs at an AFN meeting in Calgary. Cindy Blackstock, executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, which helped launch the discrimination case that forced Canada into negotiations, had advocated for the agreement to be defeated.

She called it an opportunity for a “reset to ensure that First Nations kids all succeed.”

The defeated deal will be revisited at the next AFN assembly in December, with Ontario First Nations leaders saying they’ll cut ties with anyone who doesn’t support the proposed agreement.

Nishnawbe Aski Nation Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler said in a statement to The Globe and Mail this week that one individual alone cannot save the deal.

“I have not yet heard a plan for how they will [reset]. I can say that I will not gamble with $47.8-billion that could change the lives of our future generations because my ego tells me I can do better.”

Deaths of eight Indigenous people during altercations with police prompt calls for better accountability

He said the defeat of the agreement is a victory for those who benefit from the status quo and who believe colonial processes are the “fix-all for years of compounded intergenerational trauma.”

“We will continue to push, by whatever means necessary. If we have to go it alone, we will. If it comes down to cutting ties with those who do not support us, we will,” the grand chief said.

He added that the rejection of the deal amounts to “being punched down by those who should be supporting us.”

The $47.8-billion agreement was to cover 10 years of funding for First Nations to take control over their own child-welfare services from the federal government and to also help reform the system.

The federal government was forced into the talks by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, which ruled that Ottawa’s child-welfare system was discriminatory because it meant kids living on reserve were given fewer services than those living off reserve.

But even before the deal was announced in July, there was disagreement within the AFN about it. Three members of the AFN’s executive team wrote letters to the national chief saying they feared the deal was being negotiated in secret, and asked for a change in course. They also said the AFN was attempting to sideline the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, Ms. Blackstock’s organization, from negotiations.

Those concerns largely remained after the announcement. Chiefs were concerned about how the reforms will work on the ground, and service providers say their funding will be significantly cut under the deal.

AFN National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak, who led the negotiations and pushed for it to be approved, told The Globe in a statement that the AFN will follow the wishes of its chiefs and take more time “to consider how regionally specific solutions can be incorporated into a national program.”

Khelsilem, chairperson for the Squamish Nation in British Columbia who voted against the deal, said criticisms of those in opposition are offside.

“The reality is, those of us that voted against it voted against it because we think something better is possible, and we want to implement an agreement that is going to meaningfully address the discrimination,” he told The Globe in a phone interview.

“The lack of long-term funding commitments, the governance around implementation, the funding formula and how the regions are weighted, the dispute-resolution mechanism. There’s a lot of these pieces that just don’t make it a strong deal for our children.”

The deal would’ve seen the $47.8-billion dollars dispersed over 10 years, but opponents were concerned about whether future generations would be protected from discrimination and broken promises by Canada beyond that term.

It also states that any funding commitments or amendments by the parties would be subject to “annual appropriation by the Parliament of Canada, or other necessary approval processes required by the Government of Canada.”

Khelsilem dismissed as a scare tactic the argument from those who negotiated the agreement that this was the best deal in the face of a possible Conservative government after the next federal election.

Ms. Blackstock says the deal isn’t dead and noted that she was able to negotiate an additional $3-billion in the previous compensation deal by not settling. She said continuing negotiations and returning to the table could mean getting a deal closer to what is acceptable to all the chiefs and First Nations.

“My hope is that at the end of the day, we come out with a master umbrella agreement and with regional variations that take into account the distinct circumstances and cultures and kids,” Ms. Blackstock said.

WILLOW FIDDLER

With a report from The Canadian Press