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

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you, Grand Chief.

Grand Chief Hare or Chief McLeod, do you want to respond to that question quickly as well?

[Chief Scott McLeod]

Yes.

As far as the impacts that are happening currently are concerned, the minister keeps telling us it's not going to impact us. But it already is. Some of those can be found as recently as several months ago.

We have the MNO releasing information that they have $4.5 million for social housing in Sault Ste. Marie, that they have money for child welfare and education. They're accepting an impact and benefits agreement from industry in our territories. If you're not aware of the policy of Ontario for hunting and fishing in this province, if some of these fine gentlemen to my far left here were to come into my territory, Ontario requires them to get a shipment letter that has my permission on the letter to allow them to hunt in my territory. The Métis can go anywhere in Ontario and hunt, and they don't require our permission with these shipment letters.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

That's the end of the six minutes, so I'm going to have to go to our next speaker.

We'll go over to Mr. Powlowski.

When you're ready, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thank you all for being here. I very much appreciate it.

Let me tell the others of the committee that much of my riding is the traditional territory of Treaty No. 3. NAN's headquarters are in my riding as well, and lots of people from NAN communities live either part time or full time in Thunder Bay. The only one missing is Fort William First Nation, which I'm pretty sure has the exact same perspective on this issue.

Let me say that my perspective on this bill will largely reflect what your positions and your viewpoints are on this, so I'm very eager to hear what you have to say on this.

With that in mind, I have a question for Grand Chief Kavanaugh.

I understand from your opening remarks that there's a concern within the Anishinabe nation of Treaty No. 3 that the Métis Nation of Ontario has gained momentum, at least in part, from the problem of non-status Indians created by the Indian Act, where essentially the non-status individuals have been able to take on the identity of Métis in order to access rights such as hunting and fishing.

Can you help me understand better how this relates to Bill C-53? You already kind of mentioned it. Am I wrong that you seem to be saying that if you could determine your own membership, you would rather have a lot of these people, who are claiming to be Métis, incorporated as part of Treaty No. 3 nation?

[Grand Chief Francis Kavanaugh]

Meegwetch for the question.

There's no clear historic evidence that there was a separate Métis nation in Manito Aki. That's Grand Council Treaty No. 3. We have never known a historic and separate Métis community within Manito Aki. We have never consented to the establishment of their narrative in the 1875 adhesion. We also never consented to the Indian Act and the creation of this group of non-status Anishinabe, some of whom found refuge in taking on a claimed Métis identity.

It is important to ensure that colonial laws stop acting as a means to cut off non-status individuals from rightful belonging, but Bill C-53 is not the right way to do it. In fact, it's a dangerous and unprincipled way forward. It is inconsistent with our treaty relationship, and I would say unconstitutional by Canada's standards. Those people are Anishinabe, and their hearts and their minds will tell them if they are truly indigenous and live within the indigenous law, like we do as Anishinabe.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

You are saying, then, that the people who have lost their status who still live within the community.... You are saying that you would rather they be recognized as part of Treaty No. 3 in your community than as Métis.

[Grand Chief Francis Kavanaugh]

I think so, yes. We have the adhesion that was signed in 1875, which came about because prior to the signing by the Grand Council Treaty No. 3, there were actual mixed-blood Anishinabe people living among us, and they were part of the communities. Then, after our treaty was signed, one of our chiefs asked them to become members of the community, and that's what happened. They were absorbed into one of our communities because they were truly Anishinabe. They had mixed blood, but they lived the way of our people, and they practised the way we practised our culture and traditions.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Maybe I could ask the same question of Grand Chief Fiddler.

Are there people in your community who've lost their status and who may have declared themselves part of the Métis Nation of Ontario? Do you think that the people you represent from the various first nations would prefer—rather than being recognized as Métis—to be able to have the power, themselves, in order to become citizens of your communities?

[Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler]

I don't know of any specific case, but I just want to say that our communities are very welcoming. When we talk about this issue, for example, we do have what has been historically called “half-breeds”. Because of a trader who came into our territory, there are half-breeds in our nation, but they are welcomed into our nation. They become part of our nation. We're not excluding them. We don't kick them out of our communities. They become part of our communities. That's always been our position.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Do you think that first nations communities should have the power to determine their own membership rather than be subject to the Indian Act in determining membership?

[Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler]

For sure.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Maybe I can ask the rest of you the same question.

[Chief Scott McLeod]

I'm sorry for being so eager, but I'm the only community chief here. These guys are leaders of the political territorial organizations, and they work for us.

To answer your question, yes, Nipissing is currently under the Anishinabe nation governance agreement, which was signed between Canada and our first nations and territories—five first nations, three more in the queue, and more coming. Literally, it speaks to what you're talking about here. It takes band membership out of the Indian Act and places it back into our hands so that we can determine who our citizens are.

We are a nation. We're not an organization. We have the right to determine who our people are, and that was taken away, which forced a lot of our people to go to these organizations to try to get some recognition of indigenous ancestry. What we're seeing is that there are some who can come to us and look for citizenship based on our laws and what we determine to be our citizens, not to have some foreign government bestow that upon us. It should, rather, work with us to be able to determine who our citizens rightfully are.

Meegwetch.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

We'll now move to Madame Gill.

Mrs. Gill, you have six minutes.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank all the witnesses, Mr. McLeod, Mr. Hare, Mr. Kavanaugh and Mr. Fiddler, for being with us today. I should say that I'm grateful to all the witnesses who have spoken to us since our study of this bill began. I want to emphasize that I think this discussion is very difficult for everyone involved.

Mr. Fiddler, earlier you talked about colonialism. As members of the Canadian Parliament, we're especially sensitive to that too. We're really in a place where we need to have those discussions, but all the witnesses said there hasn't been adequate discussion or consultation.

You raised many different issues. We play a little devil's advocate with all the witnesses and ask them what their position is and what recommendations they want to make. You mentioned consultations several times.

You said you weren't consulted, so what I want to know is, had there been consultations, how would that have changed the recommendations you want to make to this committee?

All the regional chiefs and Chief McLeod are of course welcome to answer my question.

[Chief Scott McLeod]

Meegwetch. Thank you for that question.

What we want is to be able to take the time to look at the facts and the evidence to actually determine whom we are actually speaking to. Currently, this whole approach has been “recognize first and verify later”. What we are saying is that we want to be at the table to look at whom exactly we're speaking to when we talk about this legislation, because from our standpoint, there's a facade of whom these people represent. Some of them are, in fact, our own people. They are using our own history to basically hijack the identity of a nation that never existed.

Yes, there are people with mixed ancestry. Yes, there are people connected to our nations, but that does not make them Métis. That makes them either part of the Canadian society, as they lived for generations, or part of ours, as they got disassociated from our nations. If they can show the evidence, we would gladly entertain the citizenship within our nations.

[Grand Chief Glen Hare]

It lies with the leadership and the rights holders. Those are the chiefs of our communities, who have to have the say of who belongs in our communities. I know for a fact that if there is one, it multiplies and it multiplies. I know of one who was born and raised in my community. Is that person a Métis today? No, that person is not a Métis. That person belongs in the M’Chigeeng First Nation. That just multiplies. You can imagine how many times it multiplies.

We support legitimate rights holders—first nations, Inuit, and Métis—but the groups that MNO represents are not legitimate. They are not.

I heard here about rights and hunting and that. It's a fact that they've asked to come into the community, and the chief said, “No. Our reserves are small. I have just enough.” Well, they said, “We're coming in anyway.” They are being forceful. That is not how you.... Whatever their vision is, that's not how you get there, being forceful like that.

The thing that really hurts me as past chief in my community, grand chief, and now Ontario regional chief, is that we need to consult. We have a problem right now in Ontario, a big problem, because there was no consultation. We don't want to go down that road here. Common sense has to lead here. Nation-to-nation means our first nations, our rights holders, sitting at the table with the government. I specifically asked a person from MNO, “Do you really believe that you need to sit when we sit with the government and talk about funding, compensation settlements or whatever it may be? Do you need to be at that table?” They said, “Absolutely”—wrong answer.

Our history is nation to nation. It's with the federal and provincial governments—no one else. There is no proof. All that we're asking, on behalf of the leadership across the country, coast to coast to coast, is to put this on pause. Let's sit at these tables like this, and see where we can go. We were not given that opportunity.

Meegwetch.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

I know Mr. Kavanaugh and Mr. Fiddler may not have time to respond. Maybe I can give them some time when it's my turn next round. I would also like to know how consultations can change what we have right now.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Unfortunately, we are at the end of this six-minute round.

We do invite written submissions of up to 10 pages—the committee has extended the page limit to 10 pages—if there was no time to speak and you have additional information you would like to submit. Written briefs need to be submitted by November 17.

We're going to go now to Ms. Idlout, who will have six minutes.

Ms. Idlout, the floor is yours.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To the witnesses, thank you for being here today.

What you're talking about is very important to all of us, because we are indigenous peoples. I feel what you feel, and I understand this is a struggle for all of us. If our lands were to be managed by people other than ourselves, it wouldn't be right, so it is good to hear what you have to say today.

As it is today, Bill C-53 proposes to recognize the rights of the Métis nation. The Métis nation wants to have its rights recognized. You, as first nations, and we Inuit have our rights. The Métis nation wants to have the same rights as first nations.

Can you tell us whether you believe the Métis nation has its own rights? Are they included among the indigenous people of Canada? Are they identified in UNDRIP? Can you please elaborate?

Thank you.

[Chief Scott McLeod]

We've always maintained that we believe Métis people in Canada.... We acknowledge their history and the fact that they have rights in their territories. We are saying that. However, we are also saying that they weren't in our territory. That is, we can't speak on behalf of the Manitoba nations. It's for them to speak about that.

What we're saying is that we recognize that Métis in Canada have rights and have a rich history in this country. It just didn't happen in our territories.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik.

Go ahead, Glen.

[Grand Chief Glen Hare]

Well, again, it is very troublesome when we hear the government wants to sit down and talk to the Métis about treaties. They have no land. We've asked this group of MNO people over the years to show us where their land is. Our treaties are already made. They're historical.

It is very troublesome when the government is opening the doors to them without even, again, consulting with all of us.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

I'm sorry, but can you please...? Do you think the Métis nation should be recognized as having rights under UNDRIP as indigenous people?

[Grand Chief Glen Hare]

As I keep repeating, we need to consult each other. We need to talk about this. UNDRIP says there must be “free, prior and informed consent” for legislation impacting us. UNDRIP should apply to legitimate aboriginal groups that exist historically as distinct nations. That is not MNO.