The Reality of Aboriginal Communities

In 1991, for example, just before the results of the aforementioned polls were released, Québec’s then Minister for Native Affairs described the living conditions of Aboriginal people as being underdeveloped across almost all sectors. He pointed out that Aboriginal people had a functional illiteracy rate that was four times higher than the Québec rate, an infant mortality rate that was three and a half times higher, a suicide rate that was six times higher for young people under 20, incomes that were 33 per cent lower, and so on. (Gouvernement du Québec 1991)

Band Council Funding: An Issue That Fuels Prejudice

People are often amazed at the level of funding provided to band councils, which administer services on First Nations reserves, compared to that of similar-sized municipalities. It is important to remember, though, that no municipality in Québec is res­ponsible for delivering health, education and social services. With regard to housing, for example, the restrictions arising from the guardianship regime under the Indian Act require band councils to assume significant responsibilities in the areas of funding, access to property, building management and management of all reserve lands. These responsibilities are in addition to the other services generally provided by municipalities that also fall to band councils. However, funding is the area in which First Nations reserves and municipalities differ the most, as demonstrated by Louise Séguin’s article published in Municipalité in 1995:

In Québec, small municipalities derive most of their revenue from the property taxes they collect. Thanks to property tax revenues, municipalities are at least 90 per cent self-financing and enjoy greater financial autonomy than Aboriginal communities for a smaller scope of jurisdiction. Municipal councils are recognized as a level of government; their relationship with the Ministère des Affaires municipales et de l’Occupation du territoire (Québec department of municipal affairs) is neither one of financial dependence nor one of guardianship, even if the department maintains overall responsibility for ensuring the smooth operation of municipal government.

The lions share of band council funding comes from the federal government, in its capacity as ‘trustee’ for Aboriginal peoples under the Canadian Constitution and the Indian Act. Aboriginal peoples do not own reserve lands. In addition to government funding, some communities derive revenue from companies they own. Some also receive financial compensation for the potential impacts of development projects on their way of life. Contributions from the communities themselves vary widely, but rarely exceed 25 per cent of the community’s budget.

Séguin, 1995

Photo credit:  Pierre Lepage

A study conducted in 1991 by the sociologist Pierre Drouilly, comparing the situation in First Nations reserves and northern villages with the situation in Québec as a whole, concluded that Québec’s Aboriginal population was experiencing disastrous economic conditions that contributed to deteriorating social relationships. (Drouilly 1991, 44)

A few years later, in 1998, the Québec government released partial data on the social and economic conditions of Aboriginal people in Québec. (Gouvernement du Québec 1998, 910) The statistics were troubling: the unemployment rate among Aboriginal people was twice the average rate for non-Aboriginal Quebecers, the average income of Aboriginal households was 20% lower than that of Québec households overall, whereas Aboriginal households had almost twice as many individuals, and Aboriginal population growth was liable to soon cause serious social problems. According to the survey, the growing Aboriginal population combined with a difficult socioeconomic context could create tension between Aboriginal people and Quebecers as a whole. (Ibid.)

At the First Nations Socioeconomic Forum held in Mashteuiatsh in October 2006, Ghislain Picard, Regional Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador, sounded the alarm about the huge gap between the living conditions of Aboriginal people and those of the Québec population in general. Based on the results of an extensive survey of 4,000 Aboriginal people, Chief Picard highlighted some key facts: 

Half of all adults have not completed secondary school, and half of all children have had to repeat a year. Obesity affects 52% of children, 42% of teenagers, 67% of adults and 67% of seniors. The rate of diabetes among young people is 15%, three times higher than the Québec average. Ten percent of houses are overcrowded and one out of three is infested with mould… Employment insurance and social assistance provide 44% of income, even though the employment rate has increased slightly.

Picard, 2006

Photo credit:  Pierre Lepage

Group of young people in Kitcisakik, 2005.

Photo credit:  Pierre Lepage

In Nunavik, the Katimajiit Conference held in Kuujjuaq in August 2007 specifically addressed ways to improve the living conditions of the Inuit. A population explosion, chronic overcrowding in homes and many other difficulties are compounded by a cost of living that is substantially higher than else­where in Québec, with “food costs averaging 57% more than in the south of Québec.” (Makivik Corporation 2007) The conference ultimately led to the signing, on December 9, 2013, of the Agreement on the Financing of Measures to Reduce the Cost of Living in Nunavik between the Québec government, Makivik Corporation and the Kativik Regional Government (KRG). Under the agreement, Québec pledged substantial sums between 2014 and 2017 to mitigate the effects of the high cost of living on Nunavik Inuit (Nunavimmiut), while vesting Inuit organizations with the powers to set their own priorities and administer the programs set up. (KRG 2017)

However, a 2016 research report compared the cost of living in six Nunavik communities with the cost of living in the city of Québec. Despite the measures implemented to reduce the cost of living in Nunavik, “. . . a basket of groceries costs, on average, 54.6% more in Nunavik; household operations are 48.7% more expensive; alcohol and tobacco products are 39.4% more expensive; recreation is 31.1% more expensive, and so forth. Only shelter is less expensive in Nunavik.” (Robitaille, Guénard and Duhaime 2016, i) In an interview with Le Soleil,  the lead researcher, sociologist Gérard Duhaime, said that the cost of housing is less expensive in Nunavik because people live in public housing that belongs to either their employer or the Kativik Municipal Housing Bureau (Lévesque 2016). Still, Nunavimmiut households devote between 60% and, in the case of households with the lowest income, 70% of their expenditure to food and shelter. By comparison, spending on food and shelter accounts for 40% of the budget of Québec households overall. (Idem.)

Poverty Indicators Among First Nations

  • The death rate among Aboriginal children is triple the death rate among non-Aboriginal children (Canada); 
  • Life expectancy is shorter by six to seven years (Québec); 
  • Diabetes is two to three times more common (Québec); 
  • The risks associated with experiencing, as of early childhood, situations of poverty, negligence and placement are three to five times higher (Québec); 
  • Nearly half of the families are single parent families (44%) (Québec); 
  • Two out of every three women has an income lower than $10 000 (Québec); 
  • One out of every four adults is faced with unemployment (Québec); 
  • In 2006, 4200 First Nations homes out of a total of 12 500 homes were overcrowded and 6700 were in urgent need of repair and/or decontamination (Québec); 
  • High incidence of shigellosis and tuberculosis, diseases associated with overcrowding and which are especially prevalent in third-world countries (tuberculosis case in Uashat-Mani-utenam); (FNQLHSSC) 
  • Nearly 30% of people living in communities say they have experienced racism. (FNQLHSSC).

Source: First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission (FNQLHSSC), 2011.

A group of children in Salluit, Nunavik.

Photo credit:  Michèle Morel

Coût de la vie au nunavik en 2016 en comparaison à québec (ville)

Food

+ 48 %

Household furnishings

+ 42 %

Shelter

– 28 %

Clothing and footwear

+ 15 %

Transportation

+ 17 %

Personal care

+ 24 %

Alcoholic beverages and Tabacco products

– 37 %

Recreation

+ 32 %

Source: Robitaille, Guénard et Duhaime, 2016

This site is registered on wpml.org as a development site. Switch to a production site key to remove this banner.