They also, and to a lesser extent, drag the composite indigenous statistics towards the non-indigenous statistic.
With respect to economic development, the source of the barriers that Métis face can be traced to the latter recognition of Métis rights when compared to first nations and Inuit rights. Noticeably, too, are the seminal cases with respect to Métis rights, Powley in 2003 and Daniels in 2016. The effect of those have seen a later start-up of Métis institutions or no Métis institution equivalent to institutions that serve first nations and Inuit.
How do the barriers manifest? How do they translate? In terms of business development, the lower socio-economic stance leads to lower equity through lower intergenerational wealth transfer, lower income levels, etc. Lower equity in business development is high risk, and high risk, in turn, leads to higher costs. Money is a good, bought and sold like any other—the higher the cost, the lower the volume. The initial conditions affect opportunity. There will be fewer Métis business start-ups, and less Métis business expansion, because of the lower level of equity that Métis entrepreneurs can bring compared to non-indigenous Canadians.
The Métis capital corporations are the principal Métis institutions operating in business development. They seek to equalize access for Métis entrepreneurs by taking on higher debt-to-equity financing and accepting the higher costs that come with that. They also seek to drive volume by charging at, or below, market rates, so they're not taking into account the higher cost.
This is not lending that the commercial financial sector can take on. It's high cost and low return. Nonetheless the Métis capital corporations experience default and arrear rates that are comparable to the commercial financial sector, to the banks and to the credit unions.