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.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

We have heard from the Metis Settlements General Council in Alberta, who have their own government. Have you consulted with them in preparation for Bill C-53?

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Excuse me for interrupting again, but I'd like to clarify my question.

You're talking about Bill C‑ 53. I'm talking about what this bill—which will not be applied in a vacuum—could lead to. It could lead to something else.

My question is very simple. Is there a possibility of this happening, or no possibility at all? I'm not saying it could happen the very next day, but is it possible? So you can answer me yes or no, depending on whether there is a possibility or not.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Thank you, Marilène.

Look, there is no impact on other indigenous peoples' section 35 rights with Bill C-53. If it comes to a stage—

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Thank you.

I want to highlight article 4 of the UN declaration. It says:

Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.

Essentially, we're talking about an internal structure. Bill C-53 recognizes the three organizations, the Métis Nation of Ontario, Métis Nation— Saskatchewan and Métis Nation of Alberta, as self-governing authorities.

As a result, it is my considered opinion that—

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I'd like to thank you and, at the same time, publicly congratulate you on your appointment. I appreciate your comments at the outset that this committee is capable of working collaboratively. I hope it will always be so, because that's the way to move forward on all the issues on the table here, including Bill C‑ 53.

I'd now like to come back to what you said about the issue of consultations in discussing things with my colleague Mr. McLeod. You said that, from the perspective of reconciliation, things had to be done in a certain way. At the committee, several witnesses said that passing Bill C-53, or even introducing it, was a step backwards for reconciliation. They also argued that it did not comply with article 19 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

I'd like to know what your response would be to all the witnesses who raised these two arguments.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. I'll also call you Michael, if it's okay.

Look, I think Bill C-53 respects Métis self-determination, with citizenship decisions falling under the authority of the Métis government. This is aligned with the principles outlined in the Powley decision, which recognizes the significance of shaping the legal landscape for Métis rights. The tests, essentially as set out by the Supreme Court, are as follows.

The first is self-identification as a member of the Métis community. The second is evidence of an ancestral connection to a historic Métis community. The third is a demonstration of acceptance by the modern community, whose continuity with the historic community provides the legal foundation for the right being claimed.

Essentially, the registrars of the three provinces that we are talking about have gone through and reviewed their processes. In the case of Ontario, some 6,000 citizens who have incomplete records were removed from the list. As a starting point, we're in a very vigorously assessed system that has identified the citizens in each of the provinces and the membership of those who want to be part of these nations. I'm very comfortable in confirming today that this is the process that will continue.

There's also an audit process that's independently undertaken, as well as a cross-reference to registries that are held by the federal government. For example, if somebody is identified under the Indian Act, they would be cross-referenced.

There's a very rigorous process that does enable these governments to determine their citizenship and to ensure that there's continuous scrutiny of who is and who is not a member.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Again, I think, in terms of amendments, that my answer will be consistent in that respect, Jamie. We will look at every amendment that's before us and we will give it due consideration.

I do think it's important to underscore that the treaty process as contemplated within Bill C-53 is one that does go through an order in council process, so it's not a pro forma exercise. It is one that goes through scrutiny, so there is a cabinet process that would have to—

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to the 86th meeting of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs. We acknowledge that we meet on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Pursuant to the Standing Orders, today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format with members online but no witnesses.

I think everybody knows, now that we're in session, that there are no photos or screen shots allowed. That's for everybody at the table as well as anybody in the audience.

Today we're continuing our study of Bill C-53. We are delighted to have our minister with us. We have the Honourable Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations and officials. I understand, although we've had a late start, that the minister will be able to stay for an hour.

We'll get into the opening statements, and then for the second hour we'll invite the officials to remain with us and we'll continue on for the second hour.

We have secured extra resources, so we should be able to go the full two hours. In fact, I was able to get resources beyond that—we haven't received approval yet—but I did want to make sure, given all the testimony that we've heard, that we have the full two hours. I know many of us have flights booked for tonight, so we'll respect that.

Minister, I'm not sure if you're going to do opening remarks, but if you are, you have five minutes. I'm going to use my handy card system, with the yellow card meaning there are 30 seconds left on the clock; red means time's up. Don't stop; finish your thought, and then we'll move on to the next person.

Go ahead when you're ready.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

We are out of time. I would like to thank all of our witnesses for being here today. Again, your insights are very important as we undergo consideration of Bill C-53.

Colleagues, with that, we are now adjourned for today.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik.

My next question is for the AFN. I leave it to the AFN to decide who will answer my questions.

I know that we've heard, since we started studying this bill, that first nations haven't felt that their rights, as acknowledged in UNDRIP, have been recognized.

If you had the guidance to give this government about what FPIC means and why FPIC is so important, how would you make sure it had been followed to ensure that Bill C-53 could have been different from what we see today?

[Julie McGregor]

A non-derogation clause would not have the intended effect of remedying the issues with Bill C-53. It would also put a burden on first nations, because it would be the first nations who would then have to challenge the legislation in court. As you heard from the interim national chief, first nations already have the tremendous burden of having to prove their rights and get the recognition that this legislation already affords the Métis.

[Julie McGregor]

It's not a yes-or-no question.

If I'm allowed to elaborate on what I mean, the non-derogation clause alone would act as a reminder that first nations have rights in this case only because of the broad wording of clauses 8 and 9 under “Métis Governments” in Bill C-53. The rights described there are very broadly written, so a non-derogation clause would act only as a reminder that, “Oh yeah, first nations have rights too.”

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

It seems the federal government is a live player in Bill C-53, given the fact that it's putting money into determining who is the rights holder, essentially.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Many of these locals have millions of dollars in assets. What happens to those assets as Bill C-53 progresses?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Now, some folks from locals have been concerned about the fact that the locals are being dissolved with Bill C-53. Is that the case?