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

[Jason Batise]

Why is it so secret? What's the gig? Why is it secret? Let's talk.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We're going to have to end it there and go to Mr. McLeod, who is next on my list, for his six minutes.

Mr. McLeod, the floor is yours.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I need to ask if both witnesses are available for questioning.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Try, and we'll see what the sound quality is.

If we can't get a response from Grand Chief Merrick, we'll ask for a written statement.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Okay. I'll start with Mr. Batise.

I come from the Northwest Territories. I've worked with indigenous people my whole life. I'm indigenous. I'm part of the land claim process. I fully understand the treaties. I've heard all my life about how the treaties are peace and friendship agreements and are intended to allow us to coexist. I've heard about the Métis signing the Métis scrip. In fact, my grandfather signed the scrip. I know the challenges that all indigenous peoples face in trying to get justice and trying to get these agreements honoured.

Mr. Batise, I hear you saying that this is an illegitimate claim and that the Métis in the Ontario region are not legitimate. Can I ask you if you could tell us if you believe that the Métis have rights as nations across the country? I heard you mention the Métis in Manitoba not recognizing the Métis people in Ontario.

[Jason Batise]

As I said in my opening statement, we recognize and affirm that there are Métis nations, that there are Métis rights, section 35 rights. They have those in their homelands, in their places.

I'm here to tell you it's not in Ontario. I'm here to say it's not in Matachewan. I'm here to say it's not in Treaty No. 9. I'm here to tell you that it's not the Abitibi homeland. It's not the entire width and breadth of the province of Ontario, as the Métis Nation of Ontario would like it to be. It shouldn't be incumbent on me to tell you where they are or how they came to be. You should do that research yourself. We did. We filed it. We sent it. We begged folks to read it. We came to Parliament Hill and we pleaded, “Pay attention.”

I have no doubt that there are legitimate Métis people in this country, and I have no doubt that in the nations they're neighbouring in Manitoba they have peace and friendship agreements and they're getting along just fine, but that's not where I am. That's not the Métis Nation of Ontario. Don't be fooled. It's not.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thank you for that.

Is there any type of process that would satisfy you that these people in Ontario claiming to be Métis have a claim? Is there a process, like through the Powley case or if the due diligence was done? I know other regions where land claims are being negotiated with Métis. Land claims are being negotiated with the Dene and the Métis together. The enrolment process is very stringent. It takes years and tracking of family history and origins.

Is there anything that would satisfy you that there is a legitimate claim happening here in Ontario?

[Jason Batise]

I would like to think that I'm a reasonable person and that an avenue to a discussion on what's real and what's not real is a way forward, but it can't be this bill. It can't be just the open acceptance of a broad Métis nation in Ontario. It's not that. First, you have to do the homework. As Chief McLeod mentioned, find out who you're talking about first.

A lot of the people on that list—when you do your research—are former chiefs of our communities and their descendants. I'm not talking about a hundred years ago. I'm talking about people from 50 or 60 years ago. They're people I knew, who have passed on to the spirit world. They're claiming them as Métis people, yet they were chiefs of first nations communities.

How does this circle get squared? Do you want to talk about that first and then decide whether or not it's legitimate? Then, if it is, how do we deal with it? If the test is Powley, as my good friend Scott McLeod has said, let's deal with that. Let's talk about Powley. Let's talk about the small community in Sault Ste. Marie. Let's take that small community and suggest that it's all of Ontario. That's exactly what's happened. A tiny group of Métis people proved their rights in Sault Ste. Marie and all of a sudden it's everywhere. I don't get it.

My father, an 85-year-old elder from our community, was asked if he remembered if there were any Métis people. My dad speaks Ojibwa fluently. He has no clue what we're talking about—none at all. I wish you would ask him. He couldn't be here today, but he wanted to be.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

I have one more question, if I have time.

I heard you mention impact and benefit agreements and resource development.

How much does that whole concept of resource sharing or resource development and impact and benefit agreements play into what you're talking about?

[Jason Batise]

Listen, there's only so much indigenous pie—let's call it that—from the industry to go around. If you're giving it to illegitimate groups, then that takes it from me.

As the justice said in Quebec in a recent decision in Maniwaki and the one in Ontario, you can't take from one and give to another without a reduction. There is going to be an impact. If you take from the aboriginal pie and give it to an illegitimate group or some other group of folks claiming to be indigenous from my area, that means I get less. That's not okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

We're going to jump to Madame Gill, who has six minutes.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have several questions for Ms. Merrick and Mr. Batise. I'll start with Mr. Batise.

Thank you for being here. I'm going to ask you three questions. If we run out of time, maybe you can respond in writing later.

The word “illegitimacy” came up a lot in your remarks. It was also used earlier during the first hour of testimony. You also talked about the Powley decision and who gets to decide what's legitimate. That can be talked about in very general terms.

Then, and I'm being objective here, you say the government is making a mistake by introducing this bill. How did it make that mistake? Why did it introduce this bill?

I would also like you to talk to us about inequity, which you also mentioned several times, inequity for the Métis and the first nations with respect to concrete, tangible territorial rights.

Mr. Batise, please start with the question about legitimacy.

[Jason Batise]

Somebody in this room should have maybe done the work we did and not relied on the very nation that's trying to get forward. They're going to tell you whatever it takes to get where they need to go. You can't blame them for that; they're advocating for their own thing.

We did our own research on the Abitibi homeland. The little Wabun Tribal Council spent about a quarter of a million dollars with academic experts examining their own registry of where they're saying the Métis people in our area are from, and it turns out they're not from there. We did an examination of 22 of their executives and the ones who say they are from where the Abitibi homeland is—not one of them is from there. So how do they get rights there? They can have rights somewhere else, I suppose, if they're from Red River, but how do they become land-bearing rights holders in Timmins, in Matachewan, where I'm from? It makes no sense.

That's why I'm talking about legitimacy. I'm not talking about Métis folks who are the rights holders in Manitoba, where they're from. I'm talking about when they try to make connections of half-breeds through a twist and some fallacies about examining historical records and cherry-picking, absolutely cherry-picking. Half-breed me, even though it says Ojibwa underneath, half-breed must be Métis.

It's there for you. We provided that to the committee. I hope you read it, because it is absolutely a revealing read. I couldn't believe it when I read it myself. The Robinson-Huron work confirmed and actually goes into a little more depth than the work we did, so we know the claims are not legitimate.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

You said determining legitimacy is the government's job and it should be the one doing the work. I just want to check that that's what you're saying. The government should have done the work.

[Jason Batise]

Yes, government has no qualms about telling me about who I am. It has no qualms about creating an Indian Act and telling my grandkids two or three generations down the road, sorry, you don't belong anymore. You have no problem making that assumption or assessment, but with the Métis nation you say, you just go ahead. You decide whoever you are, whoever you want to be, and we'll take your word for it. How does that add up? Yes, Canada should look at it. You do it already; you do it to every first nation every day, all day. To me, this is a game-changer. You're giving something to somebody else that you're certainly not willing to give to us.

I'll finish with this. Minister Miller, before he left cabinet, told the Chiefs of Ontario that he knew the Indian Act was a racist document with respect to membership. He knew it, so I challenged him and said, change it. You're the minister; change it.

You were willing to change it for the Métis. You're willing to let them self-identify, whatever that means, but here we sit and I have grandkids who are not going to be able to be members of Matachewan because of that legislation Canada put forward. So I daresay you're good at assessing things.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

I have one last question for you. I didn't think of it until you were speaking, and I have to ask you.

You referred to documents that weren't public and that could be game-changers. I know nothing about that, so I'm speaking very objectively, but I'd like to know if that's what you were referring to. What did you want to say about those documents?

[Jason Batise]

My apologies. If we're referring to the research we did on the Abitibi homeland, it's absolutely public.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

No, you talked about other documents. You said information was withheld by the minister of the department, game-changing information. I'd like you to elaborate on that.

[Jason Batise]

Through our legal counsel, we sued under the Access to Information Act to understand what the background research was and to understand why MNO is what they claim. How did Canada come to that conclusion? What evidence did you rely on? What was presented to you? We did our own, so can we see it? The answer was no, you can't have it. It's cabinet privilege, so you can't see it.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Okay. Thank you.

Ms. Idlout, we'll go to you for your six minutes.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses.

It's unfortunate that there are some audio problems with the other witness.

Jason, I want to ask you about the 1990 royal commission for indigenous peoples. Were they also participants in the legitimization of rights? I'm sorry. I didn't mean rights.

Do you think the royal commission was involved in legitimizing indigenous peoples?

[Jason Batise]

I'm not familiar with the clause that you're referring to in the 1990 commission. All I can say is that I'm sure the commission was well intended in recognizing legitimate Métis, first nation and Inuit peoples. I'm sure that was the intent.

I'm here to tell you that what's going on in Ontario is not that. There are things in the commission that are very good. I'm sure it was well intended. I'm here to tell you that I respect legitimate rights holders—Métis, Inuit and first nations. I do.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

The royal commission that we are referring to has said that in Ontario, the Métis nations were legitimized as indigenous.

What do you think about that?

[Jason Batise]

I assume you're referring to Powley, because there were none that were recognized officially before Powley. That was done through the Supreme Court. Before Powley, there were no recognized Métis communities in Ontario that I'm aware of. Powley was the first and is still the only one. It's a small place near Sault Ste. Marie.

Since then, Powley has been abused, in my view, to legitimize MNO assertions over the rest of Ontario. They're not using Powley. They're simply not. I don't know what the benchmarks are, but it ain't Powley.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Could you please tell us what was determined at the Supreme Court of Canada and how that pertains to Powley? You mentioned Powley.