Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Dec. 10th, 2024

[Dr. Pamela Palmater]

Well, first of all, this is a very important question, because it relates to how we're viewing first nations. Are we governments? Are we nations? Are we political, cultural or legal groupings? Are we a race that is still being measured by a fictional notion of blood? As you know, we don't get 50% of our blood from our mom and dad. That's not how science works. However, that is still being ascribed to us in terms of legitimacy, and not just on a personal level. It has legal implications, economic implications and political implications.

This is why I think the federal government needs to work with first nations in particular and say, “Okay, how are we going to do this in a partnership way to make sure we're protecting your rights?” Go outside of what might be a consolidated funding agreement, or something that has to be attached to Indian status or band membership. Allow first nations to say, “Well, look, we have all of these members who live on reserve but are not registered because of discrimination, and we're working on it—can we still include them?” or, “There are members who live off reserve.” Then, there are a whole bunch of members on a general list who are registered as Indians but not band members. We have to allow first nations the flexibility to ultimately be the decision-makers in and alongside those who are excluded.

First nations women and their descendants need to have a voice in this, too. Sadly, I would say—it's not the majority—there are still a small number of communities that have internalized this idea that you can measure us by blood, somehow, as opposed to kinship and relationships, accounting for being cut off by these colonial laws and policies. That's something that is very pressing, for all the reasons I've said. I'm sure you're referencing what the Supreme Court of Canada said in Powley: We don't measure by blood.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to step in here, Doctor.

Thank you very much, Mr. Battiste.

Mr. Lemire now has the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Restoule, I have two quick questions. Feel free to answer them together.

You have a lot of experience in northeastern Ontario. Are you able to tell us about the Métis communities in that region and the phenomenon of self-reporting?

We also know that the government funds organizations such as the Canadian Council for Indigenous Business, where members of first nations are not fairly represented and where non-indigenous businesses are overrepresented and have a significant presence in decision-making circles. What is the effect of that?

[Karen Restoule]

In response to your first question, in my territory in and around Nipissing—I'm from Dokis First Nation—there are reports from those out on the land about coming across tiny homes or small structures being put up ad hoc by groups that claim to have indigenous lineage to that territory. When we sit down and talk to them, though, it's very clear there is no lineage. There's no connection to the families who have occupied those territories since time immemorial, if you will. I find that quite disruptive. Quite frankly, it's criminal. It's fraud. I'm thinking of the Gill family. The mother is serving a three-year sentence for it.

This is serious stuff. It's a misrepresentation and an appropriation. It's criminal.

Can you repeat the second question?

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I was talking about the Canadian Council for Indigenous Business, where there is no equitable representation of indigenous peoples, but where government funding gives financial power and political power to non-indigenous businesses. We do not get the impression that it is an organization by and for first nations.

[Karen Restoule]

In my experience, and from what I know about the CCIB, they have a representation of all indigenous groups. The root of the organization is one that came together with a business interest, so they're not a rights-holding organization, if you will. Nonetheless, they're positioned to advocate for the benefit of indigenous entrepreneurs across the country. From what I've observed, they've done it very well and with a great degree of integrity over the years.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire.

Our last questioner for this panel will be Ms. Gazan for two and a half minutes.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Chair.

I want to continue the discussion around membership lists and the impact of the Indian Act on first nations people having control over their membership lists.

We're dealing with a situation of pretendianism and procurement. We have people checking boxes and people who are distanced from our nations making decisions about who is indigenous and who is not. I think we need to get rid of the Indian Act and replace it with human rights.

However, why is it important to amend the Indian Act to give back rightful control of membership to nations?

[Dr. Pamela Palmater]

Is that a question for me?

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Yes, Pam.

[Dr. Pamela Palmater]

Okay. I'm sorry.

Right now, under the Indian Act, first nations have the option under section 10 to enact their own membership code if they draft it and have a community vote on it. It's approved by Indian Affairs, ISC or whomever, and then they have their own membership code. In Canada right now, it's about 60%, or maybe half and half. Some have done that and some have not. Bands that have not chosen to enact their own membership codes go by the Indian Act. If you're a status Indian, you're a member. If you have your own membership code, sometimes that means the same thing, but sometimes they might add other criteria to that.

The problem with this is that the federal government has told bands to enact their own membership codes in the hopes of transferring liability for all of the historic discrimination and exclusion of first nations women. They're trying to push it onto bands. Many bands that want to have their own membership code have said, “We are not assuming any of the federal government's liability. You need to fix your mess first. Bring our people back and compensate them. Then we will have our own membership code.”

There are a lot of different reasons, but that's one of them. It's to not assume the liability of the federal government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Gazan.

Go ahead on a point of order, Mr. Battiste.

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

I want to wait until Leah is done.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Okay. I'm making sure—

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Yes. The time is finished.

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

First, Mr. Chair, we had a condensed round in that second round, but I know we allow documents to be provided to this committee.

I think verification is something that.... If we look at a distinctions-based approach, there are certain questions Dr. Palmater suggested for each of the different levels of indigenous distinct groups. I'm wondering if she would share those with us as a guiding principle for what we should be asking about verification.

Lastly, I know Dr. Palmater has spent her life talking about discrimination within the Indian Act, especially in terms of the second-generation cut-off. Today, Minister Hajdu will be taking action on that, calling for proposals for indigenous-led options for solutions for the second-generation cut-off and section 10 voting thresholds. After a year of consultation with the AFN, we're now looking for processes to get rid of the second-generation cut-off. That will be announced today.

I just wanted to make sure you were aware of that, since you were here in person to talk about this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Battiste. That's not a point of order.

With that, I want to thank our witnesses for appearing, both by video conference and in person.

As Mr. Battiste mentioned, if there is any other information you would like to provide the committee for this study, please do it in writing at your earliest convenience, as we will be starting a report very soon on this.

With that, thank you again.

We're going to briefly suspend as we move to our next panel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I call this meeting back to order.

I would like to welcome Mr. Jacques T. Watso, adviser with the Abénakis band council of Odanak.

Welcome, Mr. Watso. You will have five minutes for your opening remarks, after which we will proceed with a question period.

The floor is yours.

[Jacques T. Watso, Advisor, Abénakis Band Council of Odanak]

[ Witness spoke in Aln8ba8dwaw8gan ]

[ French ]

Members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to share my perspective with you today. My name is Jacques Thériault Watso, I am a member of the Abenaki First Nation of Odanak and I have also been an elected member of the Abenaki Council of Odanak since 2005. I am in Louis Plamondon's riding and, like him, I am an old-timer.

I am an advocate for the rights of indigenous peoples and an entrepreneur involved in the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage. Odanak is one of 11 first nations in the province of Quebec. We are in southern Quebec. Our traditional territory lies between the Chaudière River, the St. Lawrence River and the Richelieu River.

By way of introduction, since context is important, I want to emphasize that we are at a critical moment for relations between Canada and the first peoples. The motion that brings us together underscores the importance of approaching the challenges we face with sincerity and commitment.

One of the priority issues for Abenaki people in Odanak is identity and cultural appropriation. Within the Abenaki nation, one of our greatest challenges is the theft and appropriation of our identity. The lack of robust mechanisms to protect indigenous identity exposes our communities to injustices, from fraudulent claims to the marginalization of our members. I recommend the creation of clear protocols, in partnership with communities, to better define and protect membership in our nations.

Second is the cultural and economic sovereignty of our nations, particularly the Abenaki of Odanak. The revitalization of our languages and traditions requires targeted investments in educational and cultural programming. At the same time, our economic initiatives, such as the one I personally lead as an entrepreneur, demonstrate how indigenous entrepreneurship is an economic lever that promotes our self-government. I am asking for increased support for indigenous businesses, not only in terms of funding, but also through partnerships focused on sustainability and respect for our traditional knowledge.

Now let us talk about relations with governments. I want to emphasize the need for meaningful consultation with first nations on all policies that affect us. Too often, our voices are absent from the decision-making process, and that needs to change. This committee will make it possible for real, concrete changes to take place. I propose that permanent mechanisms be put in place to include indigenous leaders in policy decision-making concerning our nations at the national level.

To conclude, I will present a vision for the future. I encourage you to look at our relationship as a fair partnership. The sun shines for everyone, both the Canadian people and first nations. Together, we have a responsibility to build a future where our children can be proud of their culture, be empowered in their choices and be fully respected as members of the first peoples.

Thank you for this opportunity to share the concerns of the Abenaki people of Odanak. I look forward to answering your questions. Let us open up the debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Watso.

We will now begin the first round of questions from committee members.

Mr. Schmale, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you very much.

Do we not have the second witness?

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

The second witness has some issues with her sound. Once she's able to log on to her computer—she was on an iPad—then we'll be able to welcome her.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Okay, sure.

Bob, I'll take the second place.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Can we switch?