Government Operations Committee on Sept. 24th, 2024

[Philip Ducharme]

Well, you look at me as representing the entire Métis. I am Métis myself, but I don't represent Métis people or organizations—

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

To your understanding, is there one uniform way in which we determine Métis across Canada?

[Philip Ducharme]

At the Manitoba Métis Federation, you need to have a family member, a descendant, attached to Métis scrip. All eight of my great-grandparents have Métis scrip applications. They have their X. They weren't able to read. You have to go through the Saint-Boniface Historical Society and provide all your genealogy documents to prove who your descendants are to qualify for Métis.

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

But there's no cut-off, correct? There's no second generation. They won't tell you that you have to marry within that.

[Philip Ducharme]

No.

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

Okay.

Would you say that the Manitoba Métis Federation has the same criteria as B.C. or Ontario?

[Philip Ducharme]

I have not applied to either one of those provinces, so I don't know their criteria. My understanding is that in the case of the Ontario Métis, they were supposed to be part of a historical Métis community.

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

In terms of being able to answer this question, do you think first nations, Métis and Inuit should all have a distinct way of determining who they are and should tell the government how to do this, instead of basically the government trying to find one box to lump everyone into “indigenous” and saying to check this box to show the determination, when you have various ways, across not just this country but across the world, of determining indigeneity?

[Philip Ducharme]

That should be the case, I think, for first nations people who are losing their status after two generations.

As Chief Bernard said, the community band members don't have the status, but I think that should be allowed. Just because you have married outside of indigenous, that still makes you indigenous. I think indigenous people are the ones who are the best to determine who's an indigenous person.

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

I guess the question is that instead of just saying “indigenous” in a blanket way, should we make it distinctions-based, with the first nations determining who's first nation, the Métis determining who's Métis and the Inuit determining who's Inuit, instead of trying to lump them all into one box?

[Philip Ducharme]

If you're going to distinguish between the three indigenous groups, yes.

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

Do you think that would be helpful?

[Philip Ducharme]

It would be helpful, but it could also cause challenges, I think. It seems as though we're being separated. We've always been separated as indigenous peoples. I have cousins who are first nation members and I consider them brothers or sisters, but I'm Métis. I feel that we're always being separated.

It feels like people are nervous that if we came together, we would be stronger as a collective. We seem to be—

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

I think that's one way of defining it, but if there are different criteria for different folks, don't you feel that it should be within those communities to determine it themselves instead of trying to make one program work for everyone?

As you said, there's no cut-off date for anyone involved in Métis in Manitoba who's related to scrip, but you have just heard from Regional Chief Bernard that after two generations, the Indian Act ensures that there's a cut-off date.

How can you be fair to both and say that this is what we'll put on the table for everyone when we know that one can pass their genes down for only two generations and one can do it in perpetuity?

[Philip Ducharme]

I think I did agree with what Chief Bernard was saying in that they do recognize those people as band members. I'm saying that just because the government deprives them of status with the two-generation cut-off.... They are still indigenous, in my view.

I think it was the community that has decided they're a member and they're part of the community. With the Métis, you have to be recognized by a community as being a member of that community as well.

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

I have a short question, Joanna.

Do you think it should be distinctions-based, so that first nations would determine the first nations, the Métis determine the Métis, and the Inuit determine the Inuit, instead of having a boxed approach to indigeneity?

[Joanna Bernard]

I do believe there's a problem there, as we only have a 5% procurement strategy.

If you look at the membership of almost a million first nations people across Canada and then the other national organizations, what are their populations? Their population list or their membership list is, to me, not really valid when we can't add a second generation and more, while they can.

The validity of the membership from Métis is questionable, in my opinion. There should be something across the board to verify it. It shouldn't be just saying that their great-great-grandfather or grandmother is indigenous, so that makes them Métis and then they become a member.

My concern with the 5% is that when you're looking at the AFN with its huge population compared to the other two smaller organizations, where is that going to be fair for the procurement strategy in making sure that indigenous first nations peoples are getting a chunk of that 5%?

I worry that the procurement will allow a Métis or first nation to take it all, or the majority of it. That's where we need to ensure that we're not being cut off when the 5% is reached, so that first nations communities or businesses.... Actually, it's not communities; it's businesses. It has nothing to do with the community. We can talk about that at another time, because there should be benefits to the community.

As I said, it's just not working, Jaime.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mrs. Vignola, please.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Ducharme and Ms. Bernard, thank you very much for being here today.

This is a very important topic. As you said, 5% of contracts is a tiny fraction of all government contracts. Unfortunately, it seems that companies are being used as window dressings. In other words, a non-indigenous company partners with an indigenous company and, at the end of the day, the work is done by people who are not indigenous. Of course, the person who runs the indigenous business will receive compensation, but in the end, the community isn't well served. This has the effect of diverting the real effect that this policy could have. In my humble opinion, the goal of this policy is to ensure better community autonomy and growth.

My first question is on that topic, but then I will talk about ways to prepare for autonomy. I will ask Mr. Ducharme to answer first, but Ms. Bernard will be able to answer afterwards.

How can we ensure that an indigenous business isn't used as a front so that a non-indigenous business can access a contract that was reserved for an indigenous business?

[Philip Ducharme]

I think that can be achieved through audits of the actual contracts.

When you look at the contracts, if it's a joint venture and you go through all the subcontracts and you see where the payments are going, look at how much of the money is actually staying with the indigenous community. That should be the amount that's reported.

Some of these big contracts could be up to $100 million, and they're JVs, joint ventures. That full $100 million is getting credit as indigenous spend, but in reality there's no way it's $100 million.

In a best-case scenario, if the indigenous partner has the 51%, they would be potentially getting $51 million of the value of that contract. That should be reported for these companies that are getting an advantage from this when they say that a $100-million contract will go to the 5%, when in reality only maybe 5% of that $100 million is going to the indigenous business. Only that 5% of the $100 million should be reported as indigenous spend, and that would bring the numbers down to be more realistic. It would show the true benefit of what is spent that's going to the indigenous communities, businesses or people.

I think there have to be post-award contract audits.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Ms. Bernard, the floor is yours.

[Joanna Bernard]

It definitely seems that there is a lot of work to do to ensure that this is done correctly and to ensure that over time immemorial, the government keeps giving us all this money under the indigenous file. However, if you look at whatever they are giving us, you see that a percentage of that money doesn't go to the communities; it's going to the organizations to administer the work to be done in indigenous affairs.

The numbers should reflect the money that is going to the communities and not the amount of money the government is putting up to pay non-natives to do a lot of this work and make it look like you've given all this money to indigenous people.

Whether it's procurement or anything else, there is a need to ensure.... As I mentioned, only 1% of the procurement was given out in 2015. If you look in your records, it's going to look like you've given way more than that. The numbers have been totalled at $93.5 million in 2015, but you're saying there were billions of dollars given, so there is a concern there. There is a lot of work to be done, not only on this issue but on other issues within procurement.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Ducharme, I'm going to turn to you, and I'm going to use your own story to paint a picture, and mine as well, because I'm not from an urban community. When you're in a remote community, with classes that are sometimes fewer than a dozen people, and you have to go and study outside, it can be complicated. Access to education isn't easy when you live in a remote community.

Can this difficulty in accessing education be an obstacle to a community's self-sufficiency and economic growth? Should we facilitate access to and support for education, which would promote the creation or idea of business creation among first nations, Métis and Inuit?

[Philip Ducharme]

I think that putting in tools that are going to help people who come from out of their communities to better equip themselves to be able to be successful is required.

When we look at indigenous procurement, we see that a lot of our urban-based businesses' stats show that we're hiring indigenous people. We're bringing them into a place where they're comfortable. We are providing different working conditions for them. In Saskatchewan, when an indigenous person comes in, some companies let them take time off in the fall to go goose hunting or take time off during the hunting season.

I think that by increasing opportunities for our indigenous businesses, we in turn are hiring our own people. I think this is similar to what you're talking about, which is creating a safe environment, an environment where they can grow.

Again, our indigenous businesses are proud. They bring someone in and they train them, and they get their certificate or their Red Seal. They may leave to another opportunity, but it has given success to a cousin, to a family member. I consider us all family members, as indigenous peoples.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much.

I'll save my other questions for later.