Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 7th, 2023

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Jamie, you can't call a quorum from here.

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

There's a first time for everything.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Colleagues, this is a new one. I need advice from the clerk on whether we can go through quorum bells, or if we need to suspend. Just give me a second to consult. I'm going to suspend here as we get clarification. We'll get back as soon as we can.

We're suspended.

We'll carry on with the discussion.

Mr. Carr, you have one minute left, and then we'll move to Madame Gill.

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Benoit, I will apologize on behalf of parliamentarians on this side of the House. Sometimes there are some shenanigans that take place that interfere with the important work we're undertaking here.

With the time I have remaining I will be glad to pass it back to you to finish your point.

[Al Benoit]

I wasn't clear. I said there was nothing written. What needs to be clear is that amendments are needed.

First, clarification is needed that section 35 land, natural resources, water and other rights are not to be included in treaties under this legislation, and that rights in these treaties will be limited to internal self-government matters only. There needs to be explicit clarity in the legislation.

Second, clarification is needed that the duty to consult is a prerequisite before treaty signing.

Third is that treaties need to be completed and signed before the treaty ratification legislation is brought to Parliament. Bring it back into the proper process.

Fourth is that section 5 should be rewritten to eliminate the ability of the Governor in Council to order a treaty to come into force before that treaty and its ratification legislation are approved by Parliament.

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thanks, Mr. Benoit.

I am out of time, but I would like to follow up on that. If the MMF could provide the committee in the next couple of days, if possible, with those recommended amendments in writing, that would be helpful for us to consider while we undertake our discussion in the near future about amendments.

I thank you for your perspective on this.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We're now going to move to Madame Gill, for six minutes.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Coates, Mr. Goodon and Mr. Benoit.

I would like to ask you a question about consultation, which you just talked about. The word “consultation” has been on everyone's lips since we started hearing from witnesses on this bill.

Mr. Coates, you used the word earlier when you were talking about identity and legitimacy.

I would have liked to hear all of you tell us more about the kind of consultation you have in mind. Earlier, Mr. Benoit, you talked about form and content, or, in other words, procedure, which is very different from what might be in the treaty.

I'd like to hear from Mr. Goodon first, then Mr. Benoit, and then Mr. Coates.

[William Goodon]

Mr. Benoit has been instrumental in the work with our self-government agreements and treaty. I'm going to let him express that. My understanding of the duty to consult is that when section 35 rights could be affected—not will be, or are—there is a trigger that happens for the duty to consult. I know that the Chiefs of Ontario are absolutely correct in that their section 35 treaty rights could be affected, so there needs to be some discussion with them.

Canada seems to have learned its lesson when it asked us to do our self-government agreement and treaty. We were literally on the road across the country, doing extensive consultations and talking to Red River Métis from Toronto to Vancouver, all over Manitoba and throughout the homeland. Not only that, but it was my understanding that there were some time periods that Canada needed in order to consult with the Métis Nation of Alberta, the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan and the first nation leadership in Manitoba. They were able to find time and the ability to consult on our treaty, but apparently there wasn't that same ability to consult on Bill C-53.

[Al Benoit]

Yes. All I'll add is that “duty to consult” is about the impacting of rights.

The unfortunate part about the way Bill C-53 is structured is that this consultation on a treaty happens at some unknown period of time in the future. That's why we think it's important that in the legislation it says that the duty to consult needs to be done when these treaties are being done.

Unfortunately, there's nothing that says there is going to be a duty to consult. People talk about it, but there's nothing in law or in the legislation that says it has to be done. We are doing duty to consult with the first nations and the Métis Nation of Alberta, Métis Nation-Saskatchewan and others.

I know that recently you had someone come to the committee and say that Canada is not doing any consultations with the first nations in Manitoba. There was a 45-day period, firstly, and then it was extended another 30 days for consultation in Manitoba. Someone saying the Manitoba Métis and Government of Canada are not consulting.... We've done it internally, and it's being done externally.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Coates, do you have anything to add that might provide another perspective on what we just heard?

[Dr. Ken Coates]

I'll be very brief. If you don't do appropriate consultations—and that question about “appropriate” is extremely important—you're going to be facing all sorts of conflicts and stuff down the line.

You have to get to a point, not with perfect resolution.... There will always be people having differences of opinion about everything from land and resources to rights and things of that sort, but you have to have a clear process whereby people have been allowed to speak their piece and you've heard what people had to say.

What I like about the Bill C-53 process—and there are some problems that people have identified—is that it actually transfers a lot of the responsibility for that consultation and, hopefully, the resources, to the Métis nations to let the individual groups do a lot of those discussions, because those are where the most important resolutions will actually occur.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

I don't have much time left, but I have another question.

Mr. Coates, you talked about consultation and the process. Do you think there's inequity in terms of what was done for the Manitoba Métis Federation and what was done for the other Métis nations?

[Dr. Ken Coates]

All four Métis nations, the initial governments, have actually dealt with this quite differently.

Obviously, you heard about the Manitoba situation. They've taken a very proactive and very engaging approach, and so has Saskatchewan, and Alberta a little bit less so because they have some specific community issues to deal with. Ontario has a very different pattern.

They have not followed a single pattern. I guess if I would resist anything, it would be the suggestion that the Government of Canada would impose rules on them. I think this is something that itself has to be done in consultation with the Métis nations.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

The six minutes goes fast. That's the end of that time.

Now we'll go to Ms. Idlout, who will have six minutes.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am happy to be here today to be able to ask my questions.

I am proud that it is our International Inuit Day today and that we are taking part in it.

First, I want to ask Ken this. You are super educators yourself and you have experienced being sent to school and colonialized. In reading all your material, this is what you have informed us of. Now, considering your knowledge and your education, when you are negotiating to have your self-government and when you state that Bill C-53 is not a bill to claim lands, what I'm asking is, if you were to get your self-government, would you be able to go forward without any lands?

[Dr. Ken Coates]

I should make it clear, if I didn't already, that I'm a non-indigenous person. I was raised in Yukon, so I have a northern orientation on the issues at hand, but I'm not an indigenous person and not a Métis person from Saskatchewan, but having done research on—

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I'm sorry to interrupt you. I don't know how it was interpreted, but what I was trying to ask was in your colonial academic experience as a non-indigenous person, is it possible to have a self-government agreement that has no attachments to land?

Because of who you are as an academic, I'm interested in your response.

[Dr. Ken Coates]

That's a really excellent question.

I mentioned at the very beginning that this is a very unique exercise on global terms because, in fact, the relationship with the land has been central to all of the other modern treaties. Certainly in Nunavut, Yukon, Northwest Territories, even in urban first nations like the Tsawwassen First Nation, the land element is absolutely central.

The Métis folks, through no fault of their own, have been dispersed very widely over western Canada, pushed out of Red River through processes that our Métis colleagues know very well, but also then pushed even further, from Saskatchewan into the Northwest Territories, so you end up with a Métis population that's widely distributed. There are some Métis communities with land issues right close at hand, but many of the Métis have been pushed into all sorts of different corners.

It is a strength of the Métis nation, and I'll use the collective word here, that this community has not only flourished but actually gotten stronger over the last 50 to 100 years. Even though they have been scattered without access to control of the land, they have actually done an excellent job of mounting a political representation and putting political demands forward.

I don't know exactly what it looks like as part of the education system. I know it is a really exciting experiment and in the 21st century we can figure this out. It doesn't mean there won't be land issues to be dealt with, as our colleagues from Manitoba have already said, but, boy, this is an important sort of initiative.

The whole business of that distributed population is one that's central to all indigenous peoples. The folks from Nunavut have moved down in large numbers to Ottawa and Montreal, and you figured out systems for incorporating those individuals in your governance and in your administration. I think this is a bold experiment and one we should find a way to embrace as best we can.

Thank you.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you.

Now I want to ask witnesses for MMF something.

You have stated that you are concerned that the Métis Nation of Ontario, as part of this panel, were studied last year, and after the study 25% were removed as relations.

I want to ask if you have been able to solve these problems. I want to ask the MMF if they could answer my question.

[William Goodon]

Yes, thank you very much. I'll do my best to address that.

The short answer is no. The 25% who were excluded were the very obvious ones who had little connection to anywhere, but what took place after that.... I'm not sure if the committee is aware of this, but back in 2017 the Province of Ontario and the Government of Canada all of a sudden recognized five, six or seven new communities in Ontario with no connection to the historic Métis Nation. The question we need to ask ourselves is, if they are not connected to the historic Métis Nation, and there is only one Métis Nation, who are these people?

We've seen the first nations chiefs talk about how the ancestors who are theirs are being hijacked in order to recreate Métis communities where there were none, so it is my supposition that this agreement between the MNO.... People keep saying it's an agreement between the Métis nation or Métis people of Ontario, but these people are not Métis. They are not Métis, because they are not connected to the historic Métis Nation.

There is an agreement between people who are calling themselves Métis and the Government of Canada, but there is no agreement now in Ontario, any type of agreement, between the Métis, so-called Métis, and Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

That's great. Thank you. That takes us to the end of the first round.

Colleagues, I'm going to look for direction now from the committee. We had a late start. I've heard from a number of members that you have commitments, as it often happens, around our regularly scheduled end time of 5:30. We have the resources to continue beyond that.

The next panel has three witnesses, so we need time to change over. It will be 15 minutes for opening statements and 24 minutes for a round of questions. That will take us well past 5:30. It will probably be closer to a quarter to six. We could either do a 15-minute extension to this panel—but that just pushes things later into the evening—or, regrettably, end it now and set up the second panel.

I'm looking for direction from the committee.

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

I thought the witness testimony was excellent. I thought they had some really good recommendations that they're going to submit to us in written form. As such, if we get them in written form, I think we can move to our second panel and finish on time with one condensed round for the other one.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Okay.

Mr. Goodon, I'll go back to you for a moment, and then I'll conclude.

[William Goodon]

Thank you.

I know it's probably not my place, and I'm not a member of the committee, but this is an extremely.... I was listening and watching the Chiefs of Ontario last week, and I saw their frustration when they were cut short on different items that they wanted to express.... It is the nature of the beast—I understand that—but at the same time, these issues.... We have only scratched the surface.

It is about Métis politics, but the reason it is about Métis politics is because the integrity of our nation is at stake, and to have to be pushed off to the side because of 15 minutes is hard for us to take.

I know we have the opportunity to make written submissions, and we will do that—there's no doubt in my mind. However, at the same time, if there is any opportunity for us to come back, I will stay here all week if need be and come back and speak to the committee. There's no doubt about that.

Really quickly, and I'll close after this, there are a couple of folks in your next session who both work for the Métis Nation of Ontario. There's past president Tony Belcourt, who is a consultant, and Jason Madden, who is the legal counsel for Ontario. It seems that there's a lot of leeway allowed for those voices, and I'm concerned that the actual, historic Métis nations have less of a voice.

Thank you.