Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2023

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Go ahead, Francis.

[Grand Chief Francis Kavanaugh]

I don't really have anything against half-breeds or Métis. What I have difficulty understanding would be why we are being left out of these discussions. It seems to be that both levels of government are enabling the Métis moving forward with signing these agreements behind our backs without our consultation and stuff like that.

Also, I want to point out that rights acquired through section 35 are not the same as the rights that were confirmed at the signing of treaties. They're not the same. As well, when the Métis say that they are going to be acquiring treaty rights and they're going to call their agreements a “treaty”, to me that is not a treaty. It's basically a memorandum of agreement, and the memorandum of agreement is the least binding of all legal documents. That's the problem I see.

Every time we start an initiative in our territory, like, say, in terms of our economic development, our communities are unable to move forward at an expedited pace because the Métis jump in and say, “We need to be at the table.” But they don't have any rights. They don't have a land base and this and that. That's the problem I have.

Meegwetch.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you.

Alvin, can you also respond, please?

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I'm sorry, Ms. Idlout.

Colleagues, we started at 3:37 p.m., so what I'm going to suggest is that we do an abbreviated second round, which would be five minutes, five minutes, two and a half and two and a half, and then suspend and bring in our second panel, which has only two people. We can get their opening statements, and that will give us a chance for one full round of questions. That should work for today.

We'll jump right now to Mr. Schmale.

I'll start the clock for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, witnesses, for being here on this very important topic.

I'm just going to pick up on the conversation, Chief McLeod. I believe—and forgive me as we flesh this all out—you mentioned and listed a few examples, but this legislation, through the lines of text that we're reading, is about the governance organization that applies to members within the Métis of Ontario—specifically because you're from Ontario. In that, if I'm reading it correctly, it doesn't necessarily affect you right now. Are you saying that the next part, the treaty part...? I just want to clarify.

[Chief Scott McLeod]

I believe it's both. Looking for recognition will then lead to those other things down the road that will impact us, but it also impacts us now—giving them recognition—because they're already asserting those things. It's not about the future. This is happening now. They're getting money from the province for education. They're getting money for child welfare. They're getting housing dollars for social housing. All of that is earmarked for indigenous people.

What we're saying is that this further entrenches their position and their rights to section 35, without any due diligence, without making sure that the people who are given these rights are actually the people who deserve these rights. Some of them may, under our communities and first nations, and should be acknowledged, but to actually say “under the guise of Métis people” is really not the proper channel.

Even the Métis National Council is having difficulty in trying to find whom exactly they represent, as well as the Métis federations of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. None of these organizations, to my knowledge, recognize them as being the Métis people of Canada.

What we're saying is that it's now, and it's also down the road. The fight just gets harder for us down the road, because it will be recognized in Canadian law that these people, legitimate or not, are recognized as an indigenous group in our territory.

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

Could we not use Powley as one of the road maps here?

I'm sorry. I have only two minutes left and I have more questions.

[Chief Scott McLeod]

We certainly could use Powley as a road map, but the MNO is not even using the Powley test in their criteria for their membership. Let's take the time to look at the Powley criteria and see if they match the MNO criteria.

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

Are there any amendments that any of you at the table, including Chief McLeod, would be willing to accept to make this legislation more acceptable to the four of you?

[Chief Scott McLeod]

Remove MNO.

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

Regional Chief Hare, go ahead, please.

[Grand Chief Glen Hare]

I want to read the two that I need to share here in regard to it.

One thing the MNO conveniently failed to mention, which was not brought up while they were here last week, is that the MNO has been put on probation before the Métis National Council for not complying with the national definition of “Métis” used by MNC. It appears as though the MNC governing members also have serious concerns about whom the MNO is claiming to represent.

There are a lot of serious questions that we cannot.... We need to do our homework, too, to give you a concrete and honest answer. We can't do that in seven minutes.

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

Okay. I have about 40 seconds left.

[Grand Chief Glen Hare]

Oh, it's even shorter.

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

Chief Kavanaugh, would you like to comment?

[Grand Chief Francis Kavanaugh]

I guess I have to say that it must not pass. If it becomes legislation, it allows the government to recognize the claim of the Métis groups as having constitutional rights within our homelands, without having to first establish the existence of a distinct, historic Métis community there and without involving us.

We have lived here since time immemorial. In the words of one of our signatories to the treaty, the Creator planted us here.

For me, it must not pass. If they sign a treaty with them, it overlaps all of our treaties in Ontario. It will become the biggest treaty in Ontario and that's not right.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We're out of time on that.

Now I'll go over to Mr. Battiste, who will have his five minutes.

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

Thank you, chiefs, for your testimony today.

This is a complicated issue. Ancestry, as we know, is a complicated issue. There is no one way of determining things.

I can share your fear—I can hear it in your voice—as someone who is a Mi'kmaq and comes from the peace and friendship treaties. There are those in the Atlantic who claim they are Métis. They've gone to court and they've lost because they have been unable to show that there are distinct communities in the Atlantic for the Métis.

However, in Ontario, for more than 20 years.... The Powley decision came from the area of Sault Ste-Marie. Now, the amendment that you've asked for is for us to exclude MNO. Are you asking us to go against what the Supreme Court of Canada has determined is a Métis community in Ontario?

[Chief Scott McLeod]

The question that I answered was specific to what we could accept right now, as is, which is to remove that because the due diligence has not been done. I directly answered that question. I didn't say anything about the Supreme Court of Canada.

I also said that we can use the Powley test, but the MNO isn't currently using Powley in its own criteria of determining who is a citizen. Also, the Powley test was specific to a very small area and not all of Ontario.

To answer your question, yes, we can use the Powley test. My initial response was what I would accept right now, as is.

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

I appreciate that, Chief. I appreciate those comments.

The question that follows is this: Does Chiefs of Ontario accept that the Powley case was based out of Ontario and that there should be some reason for valid claims—I am not saying all claims—within the province of Ontario, based on the Powley test?

[Chief Scott McLeod]

You know, I think the Powley test was through a colonial process. We're not denying what was said. That doesn't negate our beliefs and our knowledge of our territories. My community, at least—I can't speak for every community in Ontario—was not consulted in the Powley case. We had no way of contributing to or arguing that.

I acknowledge that it happened. Do I agree with what was decided? We would have to review that, looking at the information and evidence presented. We can't comment on something done by Canada's court.

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

Thank you for that.

I've been looking at the purpose of this legislation. When we asked all the presidents of all the Métis organizations that are part of this, all of them agreed this was not about land and resources. All of them agreed this was not about mixed ancestry but a distinct community.

Can you show me where in the legislation you see it recognize Métis' ability to assert claims to a distinct community? Is it anywhere in that legislation?

[Chief Scott McLeod]

You're getting into semantics by asking us those questions. Those questions should have been asked in a forum we can actually participate in.

We already know the impacts of what is happening on the ground in our territories with regard to this illegitimate recognition. The fact that the entire legislation recognizes them as able to govern in our territories is problematic.

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

I would disagree. It's about internal governance, not governance of an area.

As a last question, chiefs, would you be satisfied if we were able to put a clause in here that says, “Nothing in this act would abrogate or derogate away from first nations treaties”?

[Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler]

I think we'd be satisfied if you killed the bill. If you proceed with this bill, it will make things even more complicated and messy.

I didn't ask to be part of this hearing today. I was asked to come here. Well, I should have been asked a year ago. I should have been asked six months ago. I talked about how colonial this exercise is. That's exactly what it is. The questions you're asking us.... Well, we didn't have time to prepare answers we can share with you on the fly here, in this moment.

That's why our regional chief referenced UNDRIP. Your government adopted it, but you're not following it. That's all we're asking. You need to do your own homework, as well. Do the due diligence all of us need to do. You also need to do it.