Budget 2016: Discrimination used as fiscal restraint, says Blackstock

In a budget that runs a deficit of $29.4 billion, Cindy Blackstock does not understand why the federal government drew the line at $71 million for this upcoming fiscal year for child welfare services on reserve.

“When you have a deficit… you can’t fund everything. But racial discrimination against children should never be one of those criteria upon which they base their decision. We should not be using racial discrimination as a fiscal restraint measure and that is continuing to happen,” said Blackstock, executive director with First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada.

On March 22, Liberal Finance Minister Bill Morneau allocated nearly $635 million over five years to strengthen child welfare services on First Nations. Of that funding, only 15 per cent will come in 2016-2017 fiscal year with an additional $99 million in the following fiscal year. 
Fifty-four per cent of the funds are slated to come during the 2019 election year and the year following. Blackstock is unclear if measures have been taken to ensure all the funding will be delivered.

In January, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal directed the federal government to put in place remedies that would immediately level the playing field between child welfare services on reserve and that which is available off-reserve. 

Blackstock was hopeful that this budget would be that response.

“These announcements come and there’s real pressure to feel grateful for the amount of money that’s in the budget because they have improved things for First Nations kids, but they have not reached the standard where racial discrimination is relieved. So how grateful should we be?” she said.

She points out that the $71 million immediately granted is $38 million less than what the Conservative government estimated the shortfall was in 2012. Blackstock says that Caring Society’s assessment of the situation in 2012 indicated that the Conservative figure of a $109 million shortfall was a “dramatic underestimate.”

Blackstock wants details as to what is included in the $71 million, how the figure was arrived at, and why the government has set the bulk of the funding to come at the tail end of its fiscal commitment.

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Perry Bellegarde doesn’t view the lack of initial dollars as critically as Blackstock. He sees it as a starting point from which lobbying for more dollars can occur.

“That’s the position we’re going to take forward: work with what’s there now but build upon it to make sure the discriminatory funding practises do end,” he said.

The AFN joined forces with the Caring Society nine years ago to take their challenge of federal child welfare funding to the CHRT.

“We’re part of that … so we’re not sitting on the side. We’re not going to accept it either, but we’re going to work with what’s there and build upon it,” said Bellegarde.

“I’ve heard this first step towards equity for First Nations kids for the 30 years I’ve been doing this work. What I want to do is get to the last step for equity,” Blackstock said. “Children’s lives, they change every day. Even being put off for three or four years, that could have a huge impact on kids.”

The Caring Society has until March 31 to respond to the CHRT about the immediate relief the federal government is proposing in order to meet the funding needs for child welfare services.

“Now the burden is on the federal government to say that amount is sufficient. I don’t think it is,” said Blackstock.

If the CHRT agrees with her assessment, it will direct the government to provide more funding. If the government doesn’t comply to what will be a binding order then contempt charges are possible, said Blackstock.

“I’m certainly not interested in embarrassing the government … but if it means getting children the equitable treatment they need to get, then the children’s needs have to come before the government’s interests,” she said. “So we will proceed with whatever avenue we have to.”