Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 21st, 2016

[Candice St-Aubin]

That's a good question. At this point, though, what we've seen from the demographic trends of the last 30 years is that there isn't a massive influx of people moving back on reserve. That said, as Joëlle has mentioned, it is something that we are going to monitor. Because we don't see this influx of newly entitled or newly registered status Indians moving onto reserves, the impact of on-reserve residency-based programming is not anticipated to be very much—quite minimal in fact. We will continue to monitor. If there is a massive influx of people who do choose to move back onto reserve, then that is obviously something that we will need to revisit.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

In my riding of Fort McMurray—Cold Lake in Alberta, we have a Métis settlement. They have cousins and relatives on both sides. Obviously some of these people in the Métis settlement will qualify for status. Will there be additional funding for the Métis settlement to provide programming for the first nations individuals who have decided to stay in the settlement?

[Candice St-Aubin]

If they are registered and they choose to stay within the settlement, as status Indians they would still be able to access non-insured health benefits, as we have indicated. But there will not be more money for the settlement itself—the actual geographical location—for their programming. Residency-based programming is provided to those who move onto the reserve, so housing, infrastructure, and so on would remain for those on the reserve.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

I have another question regarding the numbers we've seen here. There are 28,000 to 35,000 people who are anticipated to register for Indian status. How did you arrive at this number? That might be a little low from my perspective. Was there a scientific method used to achieve these numbers?

[Candice St-Aubin]

Yes. They use criteria such as rates of entitlement from previous amendments that we saw in the McIvor case, as well as in 1985. There were also specific cohorts based on age. We have a breakdown by amendment. Siblings would see approximately 3,000 potential new registrants. Cousins would see approximately 26,000 registrants. Omitted minors, which is the third one, would see approximately 500 people.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

The next question is from Don Rusnak, please.

[Don Rusnak, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thank you for coming.

I've travelled around my riding quite a bit and had been involved in Grand Council Treaty 3, in the southern part of northwestern Ontario, which abuts Minnesota and Manitoba. The Indian Act band first nation community of Buffalo Point has come up several times in my dealings with Treaty 3, in particular, the legitimacy of some of their members, and their duly elected chief and council.

I don't know what history has gotten the community into its current situation, but it would seem that if that's the leadership the government's responding to—and I don't know if the chief has the power or his council has the power to add members—it would seem they could essentially add voters.

Has there been any discussion in the department regarding problem communities, such as Buffalo Point? I only mention Buffalo Point because it's something that came up when I worked at Grand Council Treaty 3 and now it's coming up on my radar again as the member of Parliament for the adjacent area.

[Nathalie Nepton]

Regarding the issue of Buffalo Point and the history around elections and its membership, in the past, the department has reached out to offer support to the community in maintaining its membership list. The registration list and the membership list are two different things, as my colleague has explained.

In terms of the elections, as you pointed out, the election list is based upon the membership. The community itself doesn't conduct its elections under the Indian Act, if I'm not mistaken. They have their own election code, which further determines who has the right to participate in the election as a voter as well as a candidate. Those rules are definitely within the purview of the band to determine, but the department is always available to provide support when it's sought by the leadership.

I don't know if that answers your question in full.

[Don Rusnak, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

It would seem to me that it's a mixed-up system. I don't know for sure what is going on there. I know there have been complaints by people from the community that their votes are being subverted and sometimes their membership is not being recognized because an individual or a group of individuals are purposely making sure they don't have an effect on the outcome of the election.

I know there were criminal charges against the current chief. I don't know how that ended. I've been told that perhaps they have been dealt with, but there are questionable things going on with regard to registration in that community. I know there are other communities across the country, but it seems the answer we get from the department is, "We're going to wash our hands of it. They have their own traditional system and they make the decisions.” There may be really problematic inequities, in terms of who controls the finances coming from your department and how they use that to influence voters and influence power within the communities.

[Nathalie Nepton]

I understand what you're saying. When I look at my work when I was in governance and my work as registrar for communities that do control their membership under section 10, as well as those that have their own election codes, for anyone who feels that their rights are not being protected or not being valued, the courts are generally their best avenue for recourse.

[Don Rusnak, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

On that, it's an—

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

We're out of time, Don.

[Don Rusnak, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

—expensive proposition, and a lot of the people who are in desperate need don't have the ability to do that.

I'll leave it at that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Arnold Viersen, please.

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

Thank you to our guests for being here today.

Staying on the registration, you said that with the McIvor case, about 38,000 have been registered so far. What is the backlog from the McIvor case? Are there still more cases to come through with that one?

[Nathalie Nepton]

I'm sorry, a backlog for Bill C-3?

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

Bill C-3, yes.

[Nathalie Nepton]

Okay. For registrants seeking to be registered under Bill C-3, the process, as far as I know, hasn't signalled that there is a sufficient or a significant backlog. I can confirm that in writing to the committee later and provide you with an exact statistic.

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

Okay. How many people are you anticipating registering through the Daniels case?

[Nathalie Nepton]

With CAP-Daniels, as my assistant deputy minister indicated, it deals with jurisdiction, so anyone can apply to be registered today, regardless of whether the CAP-Daniels decision came with issue. Registration is there under the Indian Act to register within the legal parameters of the act.

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

Okay. What is the current backlog right now? How many cases are you working on right now?

[Nathalie Nepton]

Active?

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

Yes, active.

[Nathalie Nepton]

I'm sorry, I don't have that statistic, but we can definitely report back on it.

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

Okay. We're anticipating 25,000 to 38,000 people applying. Are we going to be able to manage that coming through the office?