Introduction

The right to adequate food is an internationally recognized human right.^[1] This right has been interpreted to mean that all people should “have sufficient access to food that provides all nutrients required for a healthy and active life at all stages of the life cycle, that is safe for human consumption and free from adverse substances, and culturally appropriate.”^[2] It has been 45 years since Canada voluntarily undertook an international obligation to take steps towards ensuring that all people under its jurisdiction have access to adequate food.

Yet, food insecurity remains a serious issue in parts of Canada, particularly in northern and Indigenous communities.^[3] Food security “exists when all human beings at all times have physical and economic access to sufficient, healthy and nutritious food enabling them to lead healthy, active lives.”^[4] Conversely, people are food insecure when their access to food is limited by various factors, such as poverty and exorbitantly high food prices. Food insecurity is “an income-rooted problem that disproportionately impacts Indigenous [Peoples] and other racialized groups, those with disabilities, children, lone‑parent families, and those receiving social assistance or earning less than a livable wage.”^[5]

In 2020 and early 2021, the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs of the House of Commons (hereafter, the committee) undertook a study on food security in northern communities to find ways to ensure that Northerners have access to healthy and nutritious food. During this study, the committee heard from 38 witnesses, held eight meetings, and received 10 written briefs during the second session of the 43^rd Parliament. The committee held one meeting with four witnesses during the first session of this parliament, before the House of Commons suspended its work because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In northern and Indigenous communities, food that is purchased at a store forms only part of complex and unique food systems that also rely heavily on traditional foods (also known as country foods or wild foods) obtained from hunting, fishing and gathering.^[6] Traditional foods are particularly important to the social, cultural and spiritual well-being of Indigenous Peoples.^[7] They also tend to be of a higher nutritional value than many items purchased at a store.^[8]

The committee heard that there is a crisis of food insecurity in the North:

• Across Nunavut, Nunavik (northern Quebec), Nunatsiavut (northern Labrador) and the Inuvialuit Settlement Region (Northwest Territories), together known as Inuit Nunangat, 76% of Inuit aged 15 or over were food insecure (2017);
• In Nunavut, 57% of households were food insecure and 79% of the territory’s children lived in a food insecure household (2017);
• In Nunatsiavut, 68% of Inuit were food insecure (2017);
• In Nunavik, preliminary results from the 2017 Qanuilirpitaa? survey^[9] indicates that over three-quarters of Inuit are food insecure, with rates reaching 87% for youth between 16 and 19, and 89% for pregnant women.^[10]

The food security situation is also dire in northern First Nations communities. The communities surveyed during the decade-long First Nations Food, Nutrition and Environment Study (FNFNES)^[11] reported an average food insecurity rate of 47.1%. The study found that food insecurity increased along a south-north axis, reaching almost 80% in some northern First Nations communities without road access.^[12] To put these statistics into perspective, only 12.7% of Canadian households were food insecure in 2017–2018.^[13]

Grand Chief Garrison Settee of Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak Inc. explained that food insecurity jeopardizes the mental and physical health and well-being of Indigenous Peoples and Northerners.^[14] Food insecurity can lead to dietary deficiencies that contribute to other illnesses.^[15] It also has a negative impact on the educational outcomes of children and youth.^[16] Deputy Grand Chief Jason Smallboy of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation stated that the constant fear of food insecurity is itself “traumatic, demoralizing and unnecessary.”^[17]

This report examines the testimony heard with respect to the causes of food insecurity in northern communities, the effects of climate change and environmental degradation on northern food systems, the Nutrition North Canada program, and the need for the government to support community-based solutions to food insecurity. The committee stresses that solutions to this issue need to be designed with the direct participation of Northerners.

The committee wishes to thank all the individuals and organizations who took part in this study and who shared their invaluable experience and expertise. The committee also acknowledges that conducting this study was complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic and that the pandemic itself exacerbated socio-economic inequalities and other issues related to food insecurity.

Causes of Food Insecurity

The leading cause of food insecurity is poverty.^[18] This section of the report explores the root causes of food insecurity, which include low incomes, income inequality and the northern infrastructure deficit, as well as factors protecting against food insecurity.

Food insecurity in Canada disproportionately affects Indigenous Peoples, racialized groups, those living with disabilities, children, single-parent households and those that are recipients of social assistance or low wage earners who do not earn enough to meet their basic needs.^[19] For Indigenous Peoples living in remote, northern or Arctic communities, food insecurity is compounded by significant inequalities in employment and income.^[20] According to Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, “[l]ess than 48% of Inuit in Inuit Nunangat are employed.”^[21] Income inequality is severely high between Inuit and non-Indigenous people in Inuit Nunangat, where Inuit median income is about $23,000 per year compared to about $95,000 per year for non-Indigenous individuals.^[22] Moreover, Mr. Gérard Duhaime, Professor at Université Laval, indicated that “[l]ocally hired employees do not enjoy the same conditions or benefits … [as] … those who are brought in, who receive an allowance for food shipping.”^[23]

In 2018, according to the after-tax low-income measure, over one-fifth of Nunavut residents (21%) lived on low incomes, almost double the rate in the Northwest Territories (12%) and triple the rate in Yukon (7%). By way of comparison, the low-income rate for Canadian provinces was 12%.^[24] The high cost of living and the cost of goods in remote, northern and Arctic communities exacerbates pre-existing household poverty. Housing and energy costs can be prohibitively high. Even healthy, store-bought food is out of reach for many people. As explained by Deputy Grand Chief Smallboy:

Purchasing significant healthy food to sustain growing families is impossible for many, primarily because of the cost. Many rely on imported foods, which are extremely expensive and often nutrient deficient options that further contribute to poor health outcomes. Because of the high unemployment rates in our territory, the majority of our families are forced to purchase and consume these unhealthy foods, which leads to our communities being disproportionately affected by poorer health outcomes.^[25]

Furthermore, federal income supplement programs available to all Canadians do not consider the realities of life in the North. It appears that the income replacement schemes operating in the North replace income at a rate that in real terms ends up being lower than in the South. For example, Mr. Alex Yeo, President, Canadian Retail, North West Company, informed the committee that in his view none of the federal income support programs, such as the Canada Child Benefit or Old Age Security “are indexed to the higher cost of living, operating and working in the [N]orth.”^[26] Mr. Duhaime said that federal transfer payments for households use scales established for households in southern urban centres; however, the northern “food basket costs 50% to 100% more.”^[27]

Witnesses highlighted the role of income and other social support programs in reducing food insecurity. Mr. Malek Batal of the FNFNES argued that income support programs can lower levels of food insecurity: “in households where there was an [E]lder, a person who was on the old age pension, food insecurity was lower.”^[28] Mr. Duhaime, as well as Mr. Adamie Delisle Alaku, Vice-President, Department of Environment, Wildlife and Research, Makivik Corporation, noted the Government of Quebec provides funds to the Kativik Regional Government in Nunavik to operate a Nunavik-specific cost of living reduction measure.^[29] Mr. Alaku noted that federal programs such as Nutrition North Canada supports reductions in the cost of shipping of food to retailers; however, additional supports are warranted. The measure in Nunavik is comprised of six initiatives to help reduce the cost of living: “[E]lders’ assistance; airfare reduction; country food community support program; household appliances and harvesting equipment program; food and other essentials program; … and a gasoline [subsidy].”^[30]

Similarly, the Qajuqturvik Community Food Centre in Iqaluit informed the committee that the income support program provided to workers during the COVID-19 pandemic appeared to support food security: “In the week that the Canada emergency response benefit, CERB, was first distributed in April 2020, demand for our emergency food services suddenly dropped by over two-thirds.”^[31]

Infrastructure and the Costs of Goods and Services

The acute infrastructure gap across all northern regions puts added pressure on the supply chain and adds to the cost of foods shipped from the South.^[32] Communities in the Arctic are remote, many without all-season road access or only ice road access in the winter and reached year-round by air or sea transport. Many remote communities rely on diesel for power, and water and wastewater, some of which is subject to boil water advisories, are delivered by truck.^[33]

The infrastructure deficit translates into exorbitantly high living and operating costs. For businesses in the Arctic and northern regions, acute infrastructure needs add to operating costs and weaken the food supply chain. Mr. Yeo outlined some of the problems in Nunavut: “[t]he cost of energy is up to 10 times higher in Nunavut versus in the [S]outh. Making a repair to a building in the [N]orth can be 50% higher due to the cost of flying in supplies and skilled trades and the lack of infrastructure that previous speakers alluded to.”^[34] Witnesses called for the improvement of northern transportation networks, including all-weather roads and ice roads, the establishment of ports and docks for sealift access and the upgrading of existing airports to accommodate larger planes.^[35]

The effects of climate change erode already deficient infrastructure systems in the North; coastal erosion and permafrost thaw threaten existing buildings, as well as water and sewer infrastructure. The adaptation of existing infrastructure to climate change was also identified as an urgent priority.

Community freezers and spaces to butcher meat, process fish and store foods shipped from the South are also critical for sustainable local food systems. Lastly, access to reliable forms of energy was raised as a contributor to food security. For example, in Pikangikum First Nation in northern Ontario, which was recently connected to the hydro grid in northern Ontario, reliable electricity means “[t]heir breakdowns and their brownouts are much fewer, with therefore less wear and tear on their appliances and houses.”^[36]

Factors That Protect Against Food Insecurity

The committee also heard evidence regarding pathways to food secure communities in Canada’s Arctic and northern regions.

Grand Chief Settee emphasized that “[e]conomic opportunities are the thing that will bring emancipation to our people from poverty and education is our way out of poverty.”^[37] While employment is part of the answer, others noted that a focus on paid employment renders the different forms of unpaid labour required to serve society invisible and undervalues traditional Indigenous hunting and gathering for subsistence purposes. Accordingly, it was suggested that paid employment is only part of the solution, and several academics suggested a basic income guarantee to end food insecurity as:

most food insecure households (65%) rely on wages. To address food insecurity, jobs must be stable, wages must be sufficient, and those who are not employed such as those caring for children or elderly family, new entrepreneurs, and students must have a liveable income.^[38]

Food security for Indigenous Peoples in the North is closely linked to the practice of Indigenous cultures. Harvesting and sharing of country food transmit values, languages and traditional skills. It also fosters the practice of Indigenous cultures that were negatively affected by colonialism.^[39] As stated by Ms. Lindsay Turner, Director of the Poverty Reduction Division, Department of Family Services, Government of Nunavut, “today there is a lot of concern that country food skills are not being passed to younger generations and that similar skills related to store-bought food are not being acquired.”^[40]

The FNFNES argued in favour of prioritizing investments in local food solutions, such as increasing access to and promotion of country food programs. In addition, efforts are required to ensure Indigenous Peoples can financially afford high-nutrition market food.^[41] These types of initiatives ensure a degree of self-determination for Indigenous food security so that local communities can continue to support themselves. The committee also heard of the high costs of snow machines, boats, gas and other equipment required to hunt and access traditional foods.[42]

Raising household incomes and supporting investments in community and regional infrastructure will help make life more affordable, and healthy food more accessible, in the northern and Arctic regions. The committee values the many concrete proposals it heard from witnesses to improve food security in northern communities.

Climate Change and its Effects on Country Foods

Indigenous Peoples in the North remain closely connected to the land and have developed unique food systems that reflect this special relationship. Indigenous Peoples in the North hunt, fish and harvest, in addition to relying on market foods shipped from the South. Country foods are highly nutritious and their consumption has broader benefits such as the transmission of Indigenous cultures and languages, strengthening of social cohesion and overall well-being.^[43] As Grand Chief Settee said, “[b]eing out on the land, and having access to the land, is the way our people heal themselves. That’s all connected with food security.”^[44]

Climate change poses a grave risk to the traditions and well-being of Northerners. Temperatures in the Arctic are rising two to three times faster than the rate of the global average and ecosystems in the Arctic are at the greatest risk of seeing adverse effects of climate change. Environmental degradation, due to a warming climate, industrial development and environmental contaminants, restricts the availability and safety of country foods.

Northern food systems are closely tied to the overall health of the environment.^[45] The committee heard that climate-driven environmental changes have led to “drastic reductions in the quantity of harvestable resources available, and increased difficulty and danger associated with harvesting.”^[46] Climate change has added an element of risk for hunters, altering millennia‑old patterns of navigation and travel. In many regions, the ice is less reliable, making travel difficult as it freezes later or breaks up early. Witnesses indicated that reductions in sea ice affect the population numbers, migration and composition of marine mammals, birds and fish. For example, Mr. Wayne Walsh, Director General, Northern Strategic Policy Branch, Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, noted that “[t]he effects of climate change are having a tremendous impact on caribou herds, fish stocks and migration patterns.”^[47] These changes, in turn, can create limitations on the supply of traditional food for communities and several examples were raised.

Chief Roberta Joseph of the Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in First Nation discussed the decline of the chinook salmon migration in Yukon. She told the committee that there are various reasons for the decline in salmon stocks, including warming oceans and rivers in the rearing and migration streams. As a result of declining chinook salmon stocks, the Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in First Nation has “had to volunteer not to harvest for one full life cycle. We just recently extended that for another year until we have a salmon harvest management plan in place for our [F]irst [N]ation.”^[48]

Mr. James Eetoolook, Acting President, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., and the Honourable Johannes Lampe, President, Nunatsiavut Government, both outlined serious concerns with the reductions in sheer numbers of the Baffin Island and George River caribou herds in Nunavut and Nunatsiavut.^[49] According to the Nunavut Food Security Strategy and Action Plan 2014-16, “[p]reserving the ecological integrity of Nunavut food resources is a key component of a sustainable food system in Nunavut, and is therefore of concern to food security.”^[50] Mr. Lampe noted that Inuit in Nunatsiavut have been unable to hunt or consume caribou for over 13 years.^[51] Quotas on the allowable harvest of certain mammals are being adopted by Inuit across Inuit Nunangat or, in some cases, are being imposed. For example, Mr. Alaku observed that in Nunavik, in addition to adhering to strict quotas on beluga whales, “we are going towards a very restrictive caribou harvest going forward, knowing that the Leaf River heard is the only herd that we are harvesting.”^[52] Nunavik also reported a conflict between Inuit knowledge of the land and wildlife and Western scientific knowledge, where “polar bears are a great source of healthy food for our community, but we are at a clash with scientists. We are saying that polar bear populations are healthy, and then the trends that are projected [by scientists] say that polar bears are not healthy.”^[53]

Extreme weather events also threaten animal populations, affecting the hunt and overall food supply in the North. For example, in Fort Smith, Northwest Territories, “people have … hunted moose along the Slave River for generations, but wet weather and a short spring created so much water higher up in the woods that moose were not walking along the river this fall.”^[54]

The FNFNES raised concerns over the harmful effects of environmental contaminants in certain species of fish in northern First Nations. In northern Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec, for example, “large predatory fish (such as pickerel and northern pike) in some areas have higher levels of mercury.”^[55] In these areas where these fish are consumed in significant quantities, some women of childbearing age have “elevated levels of exposure.”^[56]

Several witnesses raised the importance of Indigenous Peoples’ involvement in environmental monitoring and integrated wildlife management.^[57] Indigenous witnesses provided examples of contributing to wildlife management and environmental monitoring. Greater inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in these initiatives was also cited as a “viable socio-economic sector that would create jobs.”^[58]

In order to adequately address environmental threats to traditional food systems, efforts are needed to strengthen Indigenous Peoples’ connection to the land and their stewardship of the environment, as well as their ability to pursue their own economic, social and cultural development. The committee believes that Indigenous priorities and values need to be recognized within relevant federal policies related to land use, development, conservation and habitat protection to maintain or enhance access to and the availability of high-quality country food. Therefore, the committee recommends:

Recommendation 1

That Environment and Climate Change Canada expand and ensure consistent, adequate, and long-term funding for Indigenous-led programs to manage protected areas, test water quality and monitor development and changes to the climate, such as the Indigenous Guardians Pilot.

As previously noted, equipment like snow machines, boats and motors, as well as ammunition, bait and gasoline, are required in order to hunt for game or fish, but these items can be expensive. Moreover, for some Indigenous Peoples, less time spent on the land due to the intergenerational effects of colonialism has also meant a loss of knowledge about country foods. For example, Deputy Grand Chief Smallboy told the committee that “land-based foods play a critical role in the diets of many, but these practices are becoming a luxury for many families who do not have the means to go out on the land or for those for whom the knowledge of country foods has been lost.”^[59]

With respect to traditional food and local food production and processing, the committee heard about problems around the imposition of food safety regulations and inspections designed in the South. Mr. Natan Obed, President of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, noted that regulatory hurdles and inspection requirements made it difficult to sustain traditional food businesses.^[60] Mr. Alaku stated that they “restrict the use of local and regional resources.”^[61] Mr. Eetoolook added that trade is hampered by the lack of federal food inspectors in the North.^[62]

Ms. Tracy St. Denis, Assistant Deputy Minister, Economic Development Industry, Tourism and Investment, Government of the Northwest Territories, explained that the Northwest Territories are trying to increase the local production of food, including of processed meats, poultry, and traditional food.^[63] According to the Hon. Ranj Pillai, Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, Government of Yukon, the territory is also trying to become more self-sufficient in order to reduce its vulnerability to southern supply chains disruptions.^[64] Similarly, Mr. Merlyn Recinos, Vice-President, Business Development, Arctic Fresh Inc., made the case for the establishment of micro-businesses in northern communities to increase self‑sufficiency.^[65]

The committee believes that the federal government should support the consumption and trade of traditional foods by dealing with regulatory and inspection hurdles. Therefore, the committee recommends:

Recommendation 2

That Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency enable the creation of new meat and traditional food processing facilities in the North supporting local harvesters; and that Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada work to increase animal production and create training programs for animal husbandry and butchering in the North.

Nutrition North Canada

In 2011, the Nutrition North Canada (NNC) program replaced the decades-old Food Mail program.^[66] Whereas the latter supplemented a portion of the expenses incurred by shipping items to northern communities (a transportation subsidy), NNC subsidizes a list of eligible items that can be purchased from registered retailers and suppliers (a retail subsidy). NNC’s goal is to make nutritious food and some essential items more affordable and accessible in communities lacking year-round ground or marine access.^[67] This section explores some of the concerns expressed by witnesses about the program, as well as their suggestions for improvement.

NNC was recently expanded with the addition of the Harvesters Support Grant, which aims to reduce the high costs incurred by traditional hunting and harvesting activities in the North.^[68] According to witnesses, this addition is “an important milestone”^[69] and was “well received,”^[70] because of the high costs associated with such activities. Mr. Obed spoke positively of the new grant, noting that it will increase the consumption of traditional food: “That not only does wonders for our food security, but it also helps with the transmission of culture and the connections that individuals have within a community. It builds community.”^[71] Deputy Grand Chief Smallboy stated that there is a need “to create more programs and services that encourage our people to be more out on the land.”^[72]

It should be noted that NNC will not, in and of itself, solve food insecurity in the North as addressing food insecurity is not an explicit goal of the program.^[73] The NNC Advisory Board,^[74] a body composed of Northerners providing advice to the Minister of Northern Affairs regarding the program, noted that NNC “wasn’t established to solve food [in]security on its own.”^[75] As the main federal program with respect to food and nutrition in the North, however, it was discussed at length by witnesses during this study.

Some witnesses stated that the program lacks transparency and accountability. Mr. Batal explained that “we don’t know how the subsidies are trickling down to the consumer.”^[76] This lack of transparency leads to distrust when community members do not see that the subsidy increases their food purchasing power.^[77] Mr. Duhaime also said that the program had been poorly received in communities, noting that “there is a hint of neocolonialism in the lists of items that were deemed healthy and subsidize by [NNC] and that were forced onto the communities, telling them what defines healthy eating.”^[78] According to Mr. Obed,

a healthy diet, a healthy lifestyle and healthy food choices are subjective. Inuit society and Inuit communities might have a very specific idea about what healthy foods fit within an Inuit-specific diet. If there are tens of millions of dollars every year earmarked for Inuit communities and the majority of the [N]utrition [N]orth subsidy services Inuit Nunangat communities but Inuit don’t control the eligible items list or the rate of subsidy, then it’s just another program that decides for Inuit what is important to Inuit.^[79]

Nutrition North, Poverty and Food Insecurity

A key challenge in addressing food security in the North is the relative absence of a poverty reduction strategy or targeted programs to reduce poverty that is specific to the realities of Northerners. Due to the high levels of poverty in the North, food remains unaffordable despite the NNC subsidy.^[80] In its brief, the FNFNES wrote that “[its] data on food cost and on levels of food insecurity in remote communities show that existing federal programs such as [NNC] have failed to reduce food insecurity in the communities where these programs are present.”^[81] Community Food Centres Canada and the Qajuqturvik Community Food Centre similarly noted that “food insecurity in the territories has deepened since [the program’s] implementation.”^[82] Mr. Wade Thorhaug, Executive Director of the Qajuqturvik Community Food Centre confirmed during his appearance that “food insecurity in Nunavut has actually increased since the implementation of NNC, based on one report, despite an increase in the quantity of subsidized food purchased in communities”.^[83] According to Ms. Turner, “[t]he program objectives should be food security rather than the shipping of food.”^[84]

The Government of Canada does not, however, measure the success of the NNC on the basis of its contribution to poverty reduction or food security in the North. Instead, the two indicators used to determine program effectiveness are whether the price of the northern food basket is maintained or lowered over time, and the overall quantity of food shipped to the North.^[85] The NNC Advisory Board stated that the program “has proven to be successful in meeting its mandated objective” and that “most Northerners appreciate that this subsidy improves access and lowers the prices of nutritious foods.”^[86] Among the program’s successes, the Advisory Board cites an increase in the amount of food shipped to northern communities since its inception and the maintenance of the rate of inflation for food prices in eligible communities below the national average.^[87]

On the other hand, Human Rights Watch stated that although NNC “has helped maintain food prices in remote and northern communities, … it has not significantly reduced them, resulting in a decrease of only 1.03 percent in communities eligible for the subsidy.”^[88] The minimal impact of NNC on food prices has led Mr. Batal to conclude that the program does not seem to be working well for communities where it is implemented.^[89] Similar concerns were voiced by other witnesses in their appearances before the committee.^[90]

Nutrition North and Socio-economic Inequalities

Mr. Obed explained that there are significant socio-economic disparities in Inuit Nunangat, especially between Inuit and non-Inuit; yet, because the program is “need‑blind,” “the family that has a median income that is three to four times that of another family is going to the store and getting the same subsidy for the same items.”^[91] Community Food Centres Canada and the Qajuqturvik Community Food Centre agree that, “[c]onsidering the level of inequality [in the North], a universal subsidy is likely not the most effective food-security intervention.”^[92] The two organizations recommended

[t]hat the federal government evaluate whether the Nutrition North Canada subsidy is benefiting higher-income households more than those that are food insecure, and make certain that any future changes to the NNC program ensure communities benefit directly from the subsidy and take into account the needs of food-insecure households.^[93]

Mr. Obed recommended ensuring that the program be targeted to support those who are food insecure, possibly reimagining it as a social program rather than a retail subsidy.^[94] Mr. Batal likewise suggested transferring the subsidy directly to households, as opposed to retailers, and possibly “aiding families to actually be able to afford food whatever the food costs.”^[95]

Witnesses stressed that the program also needs to be adapted to the unique realities of the northern and Arctic regions. Indigenous Peoples must be proactively involved in its operations.^[96] Mr. Todd Nadon, owner and manager of Fresh Market Foods (a retailer based in Sioux Lookout), explained “that this program is only successful when consumers are involved.”^[97]

Finally, Mayor Randy Jones of the Municipality of Gros-Mécatina noted that some retailers in his region are not applying to be part of the program “due to the bureaucracy and … [the] paperwork that needs to be done.”^[98] He added that often, there is only one store per community that is part of the program, which he said was unfair.

According to Mr. Thorhaug, it would be “worth taking stock of [the program’s] shortcomings” now that it has been in place for a decade.^[99] Based on what it heard, the committee agrees and therefore recommends that:

Recommendation 3

That Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada work with Indigenous Peoples and Northerners to launch a full external evaluation of the Nutrition North Canada program; that the program’s mandate be changed to improve food security outcomes in northern and isolated communities; and that, throughout this process, the Department consider, in co-development with Indigenous Peoples and Northerners:

• Ways to ensure that Indigenous Peoples and Northerners have direct input into how the subsidy is used in their communities, including which food items should be subsidized;
• Expanding the Harvesters Support Grant or establishing additional measures to increase access to traditional foods;
• Conducting a gender-based analysis plus of the program’s benefits, with a particular focus on the distribution of benefits between low and high-income households and different household compositions;
• Establishing processes and new evaluation measures to ensure that Nutrition North Canada is transparent and accountable, and that it focuses on the needs of the most vulnerable individuals and families;
• Adding a social programming component to Nutrition North Canada;
• Making the Nutrition North Canada retail subsidy available to agricultural producers as well as community cooperatives, non-profits and community organizations, such as food banks, which provide food and services in some remote and isolated communities;
• Providing the subsidy to more than one store per community, wherever possible;
• Exploring the possibility of expanding eligibility criteria to include remote and isolated communities that may not lack year-round road or marine access, but where the proportion of household income spent on food and rates of food insecurity are disproportionately high;
• Expanding the list of eligible items to include non-food items sold in participating stores and used for hunting, fishing, and gathering; and
• Decreasing the administrative burden required to join the program.

NNC only addresses one side of the equation, namely food prices.^[100] Mr. Duane Wilson, Vice-President of Stakeholders Relations at Arctic Co-operatives Limited, explained that “it does nothing to… address the most reliable determinant of food security, that being income.”^[101] It is evident that the program “does not make life in the North affordable.”^[102] Mr. Thorhaug noted that “[w]e cannot hope to address issues of food insecurity without first addressing lack of income.”^[103] In his view, the federal government needs to “boost income for those [Northerners] living in food insecurity through tax credits or social assistance programs.”^[104]

Making life affordable and increasing income levels is beyond the mandate of NNC. Nonetheless, the committee believes that new measures could complement the work of the program by ensuring that Northerners who are the most vulnerable to poverty have the means to afford food despite exorbitant prices. Therefore, the committee also recommends:

Recommendation 4

That the Government of Canada, recognizing that northern food insecurity is a complex problem rooted in poverty which cannot be solved by the Nutrition North Canada program alone, work with Indigenous Peoples and Northerners to explore economic development opportunities and options such as income supplements or other social assistance programs to alleviate household poverty and increase the income levels of food‑insecure households in the North; and that any new measure be indexed to the cost of living, population growth and inflation in the North.

Community-Based Solutions

Solutions to northern food insecurity need to be northern-based and driven by community needs.^[105] Ms. Turner told the committee that the Qikiqtani Inuit Association recommended shifting the discussion towards the notion of food sovereignty and the need to “[empower] Inuit to feed their own communities and control their food systems and supply.”^[106] According to the FNFNES, food sovereignty is a requirement for achieving food security and it “emphasizes the close connection Indigenous Peoples have with their environment, the work being done by Indigenous communities to revitalize their food systems, the transmission of cultural knowledge about their lands, and the harvesting of traditional food (i.e., hunting, fishing, gathering, cultivating).”^[107]

Grand Chief Settee explained that “[f]ood sovereignty speaks to the rights of the [Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak First Nations] to sustainably meet our food needs in accordance with our customary food preferences and harvesting practices from our traditional territories.”^[108] Food sovereignty means giving people back ownership and control over their food systems.^[109]

Throughout the North, communities are developing and implementing innovative solutions to improve food security.^[110] Deputy Grand Chief Smallboy observed that “communities are eager to make change for themselves, but they need financial support so that they can acquire equipment such as rototillers needed to create gardens, infrastructure such as storage facilities and community-owned stores.”^[111] Mr. Laurie Chan of the FNFNES also emphasized that “many of the solutions can come from the communities, but oftentimes they don’t have the resources to implement them. A couple of [federal] programs that can eventually support local solutions would probably be the most effective solutions.”^[112]

Examples of local and regional initiatives mentioned by witnesses included:

• Young hunter mentorship programs;
• Community freezers (where residents can donate and share traditional food) and other storage facilities;
• Community-owned stores and centralized distribution centres;
• Community gardens, kitchens, and greenhouses;^[113]
• School food programs; and
• On-the-land programs.^[114]

Moreover, to achieve food sovereignty and lower food prices in the North, witnesses advocated in favour of increasing local food production, as well as other solutions that do not rely on food being shipped from the South.^[115] Mr. Chan explained that enabling Northerners “to access more local traditional food or find solutions so that they can store or share traditional food will be a more effective solution than subsidizing imported food to go into communities.”^[116] Mr. Frank Suraci, President and Chief Executive Officer of FJJ Growtec, a company selling “turnkey commercial grade indoor growing facilities,” said that we need to “enable communities to grow fresh produce locally at commercial volumes to meet community demands.”^[117] According to Mr. Duhaime, “local production by and for communities would have to be supported in a big way, and not only on a commercial basis.”^[118]

The committee agrees with Deputy Grand Chief Smallboy, who said that northern communities cannot keep going from crisis to crisis: they need long-term solutions.^[119] Often, these solutions already exist; the government only needs to provide meaningful support. For millennia, people thrived in the North. Today, Northerners still know what is best for their communities. Therefore, the committee recommends:

Recommendation 5

That Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, recognizing that food sovereignty is a precondition to food security, enable Indigenous Peoples and Northerners to make their own decisions with respect to their food systems, including by:

• Focusing on the North’s existing and well-established food systems;
• Providing long-term, sustainable funding and resources to support community‑based projects, and to strengthen food production and processing capacity at the community level;
• Exploring innovative technologies to support local food production, processing, transport and storage; and
• Establishing new co-developed mechanisms and governance models to address gaps in existing policies and programs.

Conclusion

Food insecurity in northern Canada is deeply rooted in complex and interrelated issues such as poverty and socio-economic inequalities. Environmental degradation and climate change are further complicating the situation. And although the federal government put in place the Nutrition North Canada program to make nutritious food more affordable in the North, the committee heard that the program needs to be reassessed and reformed to lower food prices and support food-insecure households. The committee also heard that the Government of Canada must support community-based initiatives aimed at increasing food sovereignty in the North in order to improve food security.

The committee believes that the recommendations contained in this report will help ensure that northern communities have access to healthy and nutritious food. As it has done in the past, the committee will continue monitoring northern food security going forward. The committee agrees with Mr. Thorhaug: “We should not be content to live in a country where so many of our citizens are unable to meet their dietary needs, where food banks dot the landscape and where regions that were once food sovereign are dependent on subsidized imports.”^[120]