Bill C-53

Recognition of Certain Métis Governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan and Métis Self-Government Act

An Act respecting the recognition of certain Métis governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan, to give effect to treaties with those governments and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

This enactment provides for the recognition of certain Métis governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan and provides a framework for the implementation of treaties entered into by those Métis governments and the Government of Canada. Finally, it makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

[Dave Lamouche]

Yes, we do.

Most of our Métis people have historical connections that come from the eastern part of Canada, and many of them have come to Alberta as well.

There is a Métis Nation in Canada. We're not saying we're not part of that Métis Nation. What we are saying is that there are two governments in Alberta. One is being recognized under Bill C-53, but the Metis Settlements General Council has been around for many years. It operates and has responsibilities as a government within Alberta. We, too, are working towards our federal recognition, and we are also working towards our treaty with the federal government.

Since Daniels, as Blake mentioned earlier, since 2016, things have changed, and we are moving towards that goal as well. What we are saying is that one government cannot overreach and take over another government within Alberta.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Roy, what I gather from your testimony is that you want the government to move quickly. You say they don't listen to you enough. And yet, it's having an impact on your community, much like Bill C‑53 might.

Could you tell us more about these consequences for your community? You said that, in terms of reconciliation, the pace was glacial or very slow—I can't remember the word you used.

In the short term, what would be the consequences? How could we work better and make sure you're heard?

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

I understand very well that it is stressful to appear before us to talk about a bill that requires difficult discussions.

I'll try to put things as simply as possible. Bill C‑53 would recognize the Métis Nation of Ontario as a government. This could lead to treaty negotiations.

Do you believe these potential negotiations could affect your title and rights, given your territory?

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I also thank all the witnesses.

I'd like to ask Mr. Justin Roy about what he said earlier. I believe that at the beginning of his presentation, he mentioned that he would see a problem with any discussion of certain rights or recognition of rights on the territory of the Kebaowek Nation.

What would be the impact of Bill C‑53 on the titles and rights of the Kebaowek Nation, if passed?

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Let me clarify this, for a second. The purpose of Bill C-53 is to get that exact, explicit and clear vision you are talking about, in terms of who represents whom.

Should it be up to the government to determine that, or should we not pass that over to the Métis themselves to determine, then come back...? I understand there is always going to be opposition to every discussion and move forward, but isn't that part of democracy? You have your opposition toward things that may be important to the whole, which some do not agree with.

[Dave Lamouche, President, Metis Settlements General Council]

[Witness spoke in Cree]

[English]

Good afternoon, Chair and honourable members of the committee.

As the duly elected president of the Metis Settlements General Council, I am proud to be here today, along with my colleague, vice-president Brenda Blyan.

I also acknowledge our settlement leaders, who are seated behind us today to observe the proceedings.

For nearly a century, we have been entrusted by our people to protect our land, our culture and, more importantly, our future. It is no different today, particularly as it relates to the significant deliberations on Bill C-53.

Our written submission provides a robust history of who we are as the Métis settlements in Alberta. It is our responsibility, passed on to us by our forefathers, the Métis Famous Five and those who followed them, to ensure that our voices are always heard.

In the wake of the north-west Métis risings in the late 1800s, our Métis settlement leaders worked hard to ensure Métis prosperity in Alberta, and subsequently to secure our 1.25 million acres of lands, a land mass equalling the size of Prince Edward Island.

In the 1990s, Alberta saw fit to entrench our lands under the Alberta constitution. Through legislation, they recognized and committed to our settlement government, which now serves our people across eight settlement communities.

We are the only group that has appeared before you regarding Bill C-53 who can lay claim to being recognized under existing provincial legislation and a Crown relationship that is backed by a constitutional amendment.

Like you, as governors of the people of the land, we are also responsible for the care of those who live in the settlements that we govern, including for housing, infrastructure, water and sewer systems, waste management, land management, emergency and protective services and other important duties of care. Just as Canadian citizenship comes with responsibilities for both citizens and the government, the same is true for the Metis Settlements General Council and our people.

Today, we commend those who strive to attain the goal of federal recognition of Métis rights and self-government. Our immediate goal is to build upon our current framework agreement with the Government of Canada for our own federal government legislation. Given the complexities of our unique position, we remain deliberate in our actions and measured in our approach to this work.

While we want to see forward movement on Métis rights, we believe that Bill C-53 has the effect of overlapping with authority that is long held by MSGC within Alberta. When the arrangement made between the Métis Nation of Alberta and the Government of Canada is looked at as a whole, there is significant lack of clarity on jurisdiction and responsibility, and there is a risk of short- and long-term impacts.

In our view, Bill C-53 compounds that lack of clarity. Despite what the MNA and the Crown assert, we believe that Bill C-53 and subsequent agreements will ultimately impact us and our people. This must be addressed. The bill must be specific, explicit and clear—unequivocal—on these points. The committee has heard several times that the bill should not affect anyone else, even inadvertently.

We have proposed two amendments to the legislation. We believe that they specifically ensure that the intent of the bill or subsequent agreements do not inadvertently infringe on the rights and legislated obligations of the Metis Settlements General Council or other indigenous governments' responsibilities. We are happy to provide those proposed amendments to the committee via the clerk for your consideration.

In conclusion, I want to impress upon you today how critically important the recognition of Métis rights in Canada is. However, we must do so with care and consideration of unintended consequences of such actions where unique and complex and long-standing jurisdictional responsibilities exist, where land and land rights may be impacted and where care of the settlements and those who reside in them are concerned.

Ekosi. Kinanâskomitinâwâw.

With that, thank you for your time today. We look forward to your questions.

[Justin Roy, Councillor, Kebaowek First Nation]

Meegwetch, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon. Kwe kwe.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify with regard to this important but awkward discussion.

I do this on behalf of Chief Lance Haymond and the rest of my council members of Kebaowek First Nation.

First of all, the Crown representatives and Canada need to find ways to discuss these matters on a nation-to-nation basis. It is awkward not to have that existing relationship to inform the Crown of how it may impact Kebaowek on matters such as this. To be clear, we would have a problem with any discussion of Métis rights and Métis nation recognition in any part of our unceded territory.

We intervene today to draw attention to the fundamental importance of the glacial pace of Crown reconciliation related to title and rights. There are multiple unfulfilled obligations that those rights impose on the Crown, which we continually bring to the attention of governments, the public and our citizens. If we finally had the attention we deserve, we would not be nearly as busy intervening in parliamentary processes, and we would be focused on the governance and developments in front of us in our territory.

It's the lack of true recognition of title and rights that brings us here today. There is a lack of true recognition of our self-determination and our rights to decide for ourselves who the Algonquin Anishinabe of our nations and our territories are. The new-found expression of settler citizens claiming the right to indigenous lands and title through self-identification is a sharp contrast to our governance systems, which have accountability, kinship and relatedness built into our understanding of who we are and who our relatives are.

In Canada, the federal Indian Act has caused confusion and has misinformed generations of non-status Indians about how to keep their ancestral connections to territories. The Indian Act has disconnected them from their true Anishinabe governance systems. Yes, the problem here with Bill C-53 has been the century and a half of the Indian Act and ignoring the indigenous human right to self-determination, or running roughshod over this right through subsections 6(1) and 6(2) of the Indian Act. This is a deliberate strategy to disrupt our connections and practices of living on our territories, and we address that in our communities through restoring ourselves and our relationships.

The issue of the recognition and protection of inherent rights is, or should be, paramount to any Crown government regarding sovereign indigenous peoples and their relationship with us. Unfortunately, we have to say that there are still many flaws in our relationship with the Crown, as well as continued colonial and unilateral policy that would contradict the principles found in Bill C-53.

Let me remind you that the British Crown, and later the Canadian government, took our lands by force, without our consent, without compensation. Our people suffered greatly as a result. Ignoring these historic injustices is unacceptable.

This is still going on. We have several concurrent battles to wage because of our unrecognized title, which hampers our capacity to govern our territory. This means that we must, in a piecemeal fashion, commit to challenging Crown decisions that will lead to impacts on our titles and rights.

That is why we felt it important to come today to shed light on a pressing issue that weighs heavily on our hearts: the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's pursuit of licensing for the permanent NSDF—near surface disposal facility—on the Chalk River, Ontario, site, along with many other nuclear files.

This proposal is causing deep concern within our communities. We are concerned about the health of the river, the animals and all life that depends on the great Kichi Zībī, the Ottawa River. The proposed handling and storage of nuclear waste in such close proximity to our sacred river, the Kichi Zībī, is a risk that cannot be taken lightly. This river holds immense spiritual and cultural importance for the Algonquin nation and the communities that will be directly impacted by environmental issues. This will disconnect us in two ways from the lifeblood of our ancestral lands. First, it will have impacts on the environment itself. Second, it will, through generational knowledge of the fact that nuclear poisoning has been allowed to occur, result in our citizens' being cautiously proactive by staying away from a potential source of harm to their human health. This will result in a severing of this key spiritual relationship between our people and the Kichi Zībī itself.

Our utmost concern is the lack of proper consideration for fundamental self-determination, a human right to free, prior and informed consent, a right safeguarded by both Canadian and international laws. We understand that Canada is consulting a group with no recognized section 35 rights about this project. This is the danger of recognizing a corporate body such as the Métis Nation of Ontario. It has no historic relationship, and certainly no pre-existing legal order or relationship, with the great Kichi Zībī. That relationship rests with the Algonquin nation and the 11 recognized communities.

We implore the Government of Canada to comply with its obligations to recognize and protect our rights, and to voice its opposition to this endeavour to recognize a group of people who have not yet proven that they are section 35 rights holders. To be clear, this legislation must be withdrawn, and real consultations with the rights and title holders have to occur.

Thank you. Meegwetch.

[Wendy Goulet, Treasurer, Cadotte Lake Métis Nation]

Tansi kahkiyaw. Thank you for having me today. My name is Wendy Goulet. I have travelled to Ottawa today to speak on behalf of my nation, the Cadotte Lake Métis Nation.

Before I speak about the draft bill, I want to talk a little about my community. Cadotte Lake is an independent, self-governing, rights-bearing Métis community with distinct historical roots. Our community is located in the Peace River-Lesser Slave Lake area, approximately 500 kilometres northwest of Edmonton, Alberta.

Our community holds protected constitutional rights as the direct descendants of the historic community founded by the Carifelle, Noskey, Thomas, Supernant, Manitosth, Chalifoux and Cardinal families. These families make up our community to this day. It is about my community's rights that I come to speak today.

Many of the speakers in favour of this bill have spoken about how Métis self-government recognition is long overdue and, equally, that it is the right of the Métis to choose their own government. I agree; 100%, I agree.

However, this House must not make an error in a rush to make up for the historical wrongs committed against the Métis and trample over Métis rights in the name of many over a few.

Bill C-53 is a blunt instrument. If enacted, it will allow one Métis group in Alberta, the Métis Nation of Alberta, to exclusively represent the rights of all Alberta Métis communities, including my own. My community did not vote to pass its rights to the Métis Nation of Alberta. My community was not asked or consulted by Canada or the Métis Nation of Alberta about the agreement that has bartered our rights away.

Instead, together, Canada and the Métis Nation of Alberta have defined the Métis nation within Alberta, which appears in the schedule of this draft bill as the constituency of the Métis Nation of Alberta, to include all Alberta Métis communities, as long as those community members could join up with the Métis Nation of Alberta.

The 2023 agreement was signed in February 2023 between the Métis Nation of Alberta and Canada. It was tabled with Bill C-53 as a sessional paper. Métis nation within Alberta means the Métis collectively and is compromised of Métis nation citizens who are citizens and Métis communities in Alberta whose members are citizens and individuals who are entitled to become citizens based on their connection to these Métis communities living in Alberta and elsewhere. This overreach cannot be permitted. It is not in accordance with the principles of self-determination and self-government. It is other government and other determination.

I recommend that this committee amend the schedule to remove the Métis Nation of Alberta and the Métis nation within Alberta until such time as an agreement that defines that term is properly restricted to confine it solely to registered members of the Métis Nation of Alberta.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Good afternoon, colleagues. I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to the 85th meeting of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

Pursuant to the Standing Orders of the House, today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. Now that we're in session, there are no screenshots, photos or recordings allowed.

We'll skip the formalities for the virtual participants because, if our members haven't figured it out by now, we have larger problems.

I welcome those who are online.

For those in the room, welcome to all of our witnesses. We have an excellent team here who will work on turning your microphones on and off. If you need interpretation, you need to select the language of choice.

When we get into questions, I have a card system here. When there are 30 seconds left, I'll show the yellow card. When the time is up, we'll have a red card. Don't stop mid-sentence; finish your thought, and we'll move on to the next person. Having discussions is an important part of the meeting. It's pretty rigid in how we do it, but I want to give everyone the time they need to share the thoughts they have within the restrictions we're operating within.

Before we introduce our first panel, I want to remind members that all amendments, including subamendments, must be submitted in writing and sent to our committee clerk by noon tomorrow, Wednesday, November 29. If you wish to propose amendments, you can include the legislative counsel, Alexandra Schorah, with your written instructions. She'll ensure that amendments are drafted in the proper legal format.

Now, to jump right into it, we have on our first panel, to continue our discussion of Bill C-53, three organizations represented. First, we have Wendy Goulet and Jason Harman from the Cadotte Lake Métis Nation. We have Justin Roy, councillor, Kebaowek First Nation; and Dave Lamouche, president and Brenda Blyan, vice-president of Metis Settlements General Council.

If I got anybody's name wrong, I apologize. You can fix it when you get your chance to speak.

Each of the organizations will have a five-minute opening statement.

We start with Wendy and Jason, when you're ready. I'll start the clock when you start speaking. You'll have five minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

With that, we are going to need to end this round. Unfortunately, colleagues, that's the amount of time that we have.

There is a brief in camera discussion we need to have, so I'm going to suspend. We'll need to clear the room. I need our members online to get back into the closed session as quickly as possible. It's a question of where we go next, because it's our last planned week of hearings on C-53, so there's a question I have to put to the committee on that. We're going to suspend and then resume in camera as quickly as possible.

Thank you to both of our witnesses for joining us. I really appreciate your making time to be here with us today.

[Proceedings continue in camera]

[Grand Chief Joel Abram, Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians]

Thank you.

Good afternoon, members of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

My name is Joel Abram. I'm the grand chief of the Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians, whose seven member nations include Batchewana First Nation, Eelünaapéewi Lahkéewiit or Delaware Nation, Caldwell First Nation, Wahta Mohawks, Oneida Nation of the Thames, Hiawatha First Nation and Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte. All together, we advocate for approximately 20,000 first nations citizens.

I am here today to speak of our strong concerns that this bill will irreparably destabilize the foundation of Canada's relations with our member nations. Our member nations affirm their sovereignty, founded in the responsibilities provided to their respective nations by the Creator. The member nations have their own constitutionalism and self-determination, including pre-existing laws that govern over treaty relationships, and they are steadfast that they cannot surrender their sovereignty, territory or way of life.

We stand united in our opposition to Bill C-53, and I am here to ask you to kill the bill. We cannot be idle when this Métis nation claims sovereign rights in our territories in southern, central and northeastern Ontario. Bill C-53 is another example of the Canadian government's attempt to assimilate and subjugate our peoples. It ignores our inherent, aboriginal and treaty rights, and prioritizes Métis rights in lands they have no indigenous claim to.

In 1969, Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau introduced a 1969 “Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy”, more commonly known as the “white paper”. It proposed eradicating the special legal status of Indians in this country. The result was a first nations uprising and uproar that put an end to that policy. This was the beginning of AIAI: a shared commitment to our sovereignty as indigenous peoples.

We are actively participating in a similar response to Bill C-53 hoping to achieve the same result, because it seems Bill C-53 has the same endgame: eradicating the meaning of the special status we are recognized as having in your Constitution. We are widely known as a first nation organization that takes to the streets to organize demonstrations when Canada goes too far.

Subsection 35(2) is not a colonial equalizer of rights, and our member nations are still called “Indian” alongside Métis and Inuit, but this does not erase the Haudenosaunee, Lenape or Anishinabe nations' very unique and special relationship with Canada.

Co-equal first nation, Inuit and Métis policy continues the harm and damage of the Indian Act. We have communities and nations to heal and revitalize, and the Métis run up the middle with equity-seeking funding they do not deserve in municipalities that have clean drinking water, well-funded schools and first world infrastructure. More specifically, in Bill C-53, recognizing section 35 rights of groups that do not actually have that unique constitutional status waters down the significance of that recognition. This is assimilation all over again through a slightly different angle.

Our nations have treaty relationships that existed before Confederation. At no time did we recognize or have kinship relations with these distinct and separate Métis communities, let alone nations, in our territories. It is that simple. They did not exist at the requisite time they would need to in order to have an inherent right to self-government in territories near or adjacent to our nations. However, our nations must deal with these organizations, the Métis Nation of Ontario and their collectivities within municipalities in southern, central and northern Ontario, and this legislation will make their questionable and illegitimate claims real, while our inherent and treaty rights become subservient.

We were your military allies before Confederation, and we were key treaty partners who shared our territories for the settlement of southern, central and northeastern Ontario. Canada's history could have been a much different one without these important treaty relationships in the 18th and 19th centuries. Bill C-53 grants rights to a Métis collectivity not because it meets the criteria in a Métis right to self-government analysis, but because its name is added to column 2 in a schedule. We are going so far beyond Powley with this legislation.

Our lawyers inform us that differential treatment has always been part of the honour of the Crown and the Crown policy of aboriginal rights, and ignoring these doctrines is to undermine the significance of section 35 for nations that hold inherent aboriginal and treaty rights based on sacred relationships to our homelands and adherence to the law. This is assimilation all over again.

Not only does Bill C-53 promote assimilation by ignoring section 35 analysis, but it also subjugates our member nations and their jurisdiction to that of this modern treaty contemplated in this legislation.

Clause 7 of Bill C-53 states that a Métis treaty would take precedence over any inconsistent provisions of the bill or of any piece of federal legislation. This includes existing first nation treaty implementation legislation and means that the implementation of legitimate first nation treaties would take a back seat to the implementation of the Métis Nation of Ontario’s treaty in event of any conflict.

[Dean Gladue, Regional Director, Thompson Okanagan, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister of Sports, Métis Nation British Columbia]

Good evening. My name is Dean Gladue. I am Métis. I was born in Dawson Creek in northeastern British Columbia and was raised in a Métis community known as Moccasin Flats, which is currently known as Chetwynd. My parents are Bill and Blanche Gladue, née Desjarlais. My father's Métis parents are Louis Gladue and Madeline Gladue, née Laboucane and Lafranaise. My mother's Métis parents are Joseph Desjarlais and Helen Desjarlais, née Belcourt. My family has generations of Métis people marrying Métis people. I am proud to be Métis as enshrined in the Constitution of Canada.

Thank you for your invitation to appear as a witness today. I open today with one statement and one call to Canada.

I support the self-determination of the Métis-governing members of the Métis National Council—Métis Nation of Alberta, Métis Nation-Saskatchewan and Métis Nation of Ontario. I am optimistic that Bill C-53 establishes a pathway to self-determination for Métis in British Columbia.

Today, I'm thinking of my ancestors and all the things they would want to say. My family continues to practice our language, nehiyawk. We speak the language, and we practice our culture very intently. To this day, I'm a son, grandson, great-grandson, brother, uncle and cousin. There are many cousins, as we know, in the indigenous world—lots of cousins.

My family lived on road allowances. My mother attended residential school. I was almost scooped out of my family at the hospital shortly after being born. I carry teachings of what it means to be Métis, the people who govern themselves—of the resistance. This was passed to me from my grandfather, my mooshoom, Louis Gladue. He shared what his mooshoom, his grandpa, said.

Also, I served 26 years in the RCMP, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Since 2017, I have served as an elected leader in the ministry with the Métis Nation B.C. Every generation of my family has been involved with the Métis nation and this movement since 1816.

I do this work because Métis people are struggling. I see it in my own family. Métis voices are limited. Even in the next generation we are seeing that. The policies of Canada and its provinces are still negatively impacting us. This is the outcome of Canada not recognizing Métis rights to self-government.

I carry my Métis laws with me—my right to care for my children, to speak my language—nehiyawk—to practice my culture, and my right to identify as Métis and to be claimed by a Métis family and nation. I have a right to be supported by Métis society and Métis government.

I am still Métis here in front of you today. My Métis government, Métis Nation B.C., submitted a brief on Bill C-53, which also supports this bill and calls on Canada to see the bill as a pathway to self-government for MNBC. Bill C-53 is Canada upholding a right of self-governance for our fellow governing members.

For you truly to uphold UNDRIP, Canada must recognize the history and cultural practices that all Métis in Canada, including section 35 rights-holding Métis living in B.C. I am sharing the Cree word. It's also a very well-known word in the Métis culture, otipemisiwak, which means people who govern themselves. You heard it earlier with President Caron.

Métis people have always had our laws, our ways of organizing ourselves, distinct Métis societies and recognition of Métis governance. This is key to the recognition of our rights. Métis are highly mobile through cultural practices and livelihoods. We are also a displaced people due to colonial practices such as the residential schools and sixties scoop. Métis laws, cultural governments and jurisdiction over our families were intentionally disrupted and silenced. Outcomes of Canada's laws and policies.... For example, our children, the government continues to deny our jurisdiction over our children. To this day, Métis people live in fear that their children will be taken away by the government. Once Métis children are gone without a recognized Métis government, the individual families must fight to learn where their children are. The inability of Canada to enter into government-to-government agreements with MNBC has caused this.

My story, my family's story, shared in part here with you today is an example of our Métis laws and practices. I believe that some of my family members are still alive because of my parents exercising their Métis rights. My family knows that we need a Métis nation, a Métis government, to advocate with the provincial and federal governments to respect our laws and culture and our Métis-specific services.

My family worked with Métis Nation B.C. to create Naomie's principle, in recognition of my niece Naomie. When you lose a life because of Canada's or B.C.'s policies, that affects us deeply and emotionally. This is hard to talk about. It must be talked about, because you must understand the effects of colonial government. We are creating Naomie's principle because of the continued loss of life due to the lack of culturally safe Métis wellness services. We must ensure that B.C. is a safe place for Métis to be Métis.

Building relationships, transformation and reconciliation is possible. Métis are doing this every day.

I hope this bill gets passed so my Métis brothers and sisters in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario are recognized by Canada. Bill C-53 is a step forward on the path of reconciliation. My hope is that you also realize and understand that Métis in British Columbia are missing from this legislation. We have been forgotten. We've been known as the forgotten people for over 100 years. Our rights must be recognized and respected.

Thank you. Maarsii, all my relations.

[Witness spoke in Cree]

[Cassidy Caron]

First and foremost, Bill C-53 is not about benefits. It is about the internal governance of these Métis governments.

Citizens have the opportunity to choose who represents them and who delivers programs and services to them. If an individual is satisfied with the governmental structure of the federal government and the provincial government that currently represent them, and they choose not to register as a Métis citizen of Saskatchewan, that is their choice.

If they choose to be represented by the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan, again, that is their choice.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

We had the MMF here a few weeks ago, and I'm sure you were watching. In the context of some of the concerns they raised, they made a comment—which I think we're all aware of. They're in the final stages of treaty negotiations with the Government of Canada for MMF.

My question is actually pretty simple. I'm just curious about your response.

What happens if Bill C-53 doesn't get passed but the MMF treaty does? What does that mean to MNC and the three organizations that we're talking about in this legislation?

[Cassidy Caron]

I absolutely do, because what's really important about article 19 is that “States shall consult and cooperate in good faith” on “measures that will affect them”.

This piece of legislation only affects Métis governments that are named within this piece of legislation. Since Bill C-53 does not impact or affect other indigenous peoples, there was no trigger that required Canada to consult with anybody else on it.

It's really important to know that it only affects those three Métis governments and the collectivities that those three Métis governments are comprised of, and that's exactly what article 19 does. I do think that this bill has met article 19 of UNDRIP.