Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 28th, 2023

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

First of all, thank you to all the witnesses for appearing today. I appreciate all of the testimony I've heard. What has been shared is all very important.

I'd like to ask my first set of questions to Adam onscreen.

I noted your concerns about who is authorized to represent Métis in Alberta. Since you weren't consulted on this important piece of legislation, I wonder what kind of guidance you can provide to parliamentarians, in order to make sure we understand who is authorized and how that must be measured.

[Dr. Adam Browning]

In terms of Métis identity, we're complex and unique. I believe that, in section 35 of the Constitution, our rights are recognized at the historic level within the Métis homeland. That should be fairly specific. I don't think having a provincial corporation meets that threshold. That's my first concern.

The second thing is about the threshold of recognition and how it is done. That's the process. There were millions of dollars spent in Alberta on an advertising campaign. I had single parents with signs paid for by the federal government that said, “Vote yes for a constitution”. I don't think that meets the threshold for recognition. That wasn't our process in having a constitution adopted. We put in a request to the Auditor General to see the funding agreement on how that was paid for. We got redacted pages.

Coming back to what a fair process looks like for recognition, I think it means starting with a constitution. Then I think we need to go right back to the beginning and talk about how we meaningfully consult with these historic communities, which are the rights bearers.

That's if I understood the question.

Thank you.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

The second paragraph of the preamble, subclause 4(b) and clause 8, as you've mentioned as well—specifically clause 8—legislate that, for example, the MNA is authorized to act on behalf of the Métis in Alberta.

My question to you is this: How do we know if the MNA is the authorized Métis group that should be making decisions about Métis laws and Métis governance in Alberta, for example?

[Dr. Adam Browning]

I think that, in that example, the recognition of the Métis as a representative for our historic rights-bearing communities needs to come expressly. That needs to be written; it needs to be stated. What we have, to the contrary and very much in the public, are Métis local communities that have been fighting in Alberta courts to have timely elections. With concerns about the funding we have available, it really makes it difficult for a community like mine. We don't have lawyers at our table. We have a large community, and it makes it difficult for us to make sure we're fairly represented. I think Canada needs to ensure that this process is transparent and accurate, and to make sure we have democratically elected them to represent our rights and have consented to such. No such consent was given by my community, regardless of a statement made by Cassidy Caron of the Métis National Council, I think, to this committee that 97% of the people had voted. With respect, that is not correct. I think they had about 16,000 out of 60,000-plus Métis consent to this after a really problematic process. That is not a democratic endorsement from my community.

My community leaders stand unanimously with me on this on behalf of my community—that we oppose that.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik.

My next question is for the AFN. I leave it to the AFN to decide who will answer my questions.

I know that we've heard, since we started studying this bill, that first nations haven't felt that their rights, as acknowledged in UNDRIP, have been recognized.

If you had the guidance to give this government about what FPIC means and why FPIC is so important, how would you make sure it had been followed to ensure that Bill C-53 could have been different from what we see today?

[Joanna Bernard]

I would like to answer that.

As mentioned by Ms. McGregor, it's “nothing about us without us”.

One senator asked me at one point, “What would codevelopment look like?” I'm going to tell you now: It's from the concept, from the beginning of an idea of a policy, a bill or legislation. We should be involved from the very beginning. This is where the problem lies with this legislation and with many others. They develop the legislation, and they present it and say, “This is what we've come up with.” That has to stop. We need to be at the beginning of any idea of a bill or legislation. We need to codevelop, with consultation done with all indigenous groups.

Thank you.

[Julie McGregor]

I think the interim national chief has adequately stated that.

Also, we're calling for the establishment of a national consultation process with first nations to enable the Government of Canada to develop a respectful process to recognize Métis inherent rights and jurisdiction while ensuring adequate safeguards to address overlapping claims and infringement of first nations rights, to ensure that those safeguards are in place.

Meegwetch.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

That's the end of the six minutes.

Colleagues, we have resources until 5:36 today. As all of the panels have been very important, and we did lose a bit of time in our switchover between panels, I'm going to suggest that we do a rapid-fire round of 90 seconds per group. It will probably be one question with nice, tight answers from the witnesses, if that's possible. I just want to give you one more chance to get in there.

With that, we'll go over to Mr. Schmale for the first 90 seconds.

The floor is yours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have 90 seconds, so I have time for one question in three parts.

This is for the Métis Nation of Alberta. Can you tell me the line of text, either in the agreement or in the legislation, that points to any potential forfeiture or seizure of property, or anything that imposes on your ability to work within your members?

Second, is there anything preventing you from entering into your own self-governance agreement with the Government of Canada?

Finally—and this is for the AFN—is there any amendment or anything that could be done in this piece of legislation that would ease your concerns about potential membership?

Thank you.

[Dr. Adam Browning]

I believe the first two questions were for me.

In terms of the concern about forfeiture, that was developed in the constating documents that the Métis Nation of Alberta have in their constitution, which were developed in consultation with Canada for their funding agreement. We understand that they would be enacted fully should this bill come into effect. It is stated plainly and specifically that there would be a forfeiture of assets and, frankly, gerrymandering carried out in our local communities, and they would redefine their areas.

The second specific concern with this bill is that it takes away our representation. That's in clause 8, where it refers to who the rights holder is and specifically that the rights are for the MNA to represent us, the Métis within Alberta. That is inclusive. There is no definition within there of Métis communities, and by default that prevents us as a community from seeking that recognition directly with Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

We're going to our next 90-second question.

Mr. McLeod, the floor is yours.

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

She didn't respond.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

You're out of time.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to everybody who presented today.

I'm from the Northwest Territories, so I'm quite familiar with indigenous governments having challenges with other indigenous governments. We have situations in which the Métis and the Dene don't agree. We have situations in which the Inuvialuit and the Dene or the Métis don't agree. We have situations in which one land claim government will not agree with another land claim government.

I think we've all realized that good communication is the key. I don't think anybody is questioning that consultation should take place, especially if the rights of one indigenous government potentially impact those of another indigenous government. This legislation is establishing a framework and recognizing the rights of three Métis governments.

I want to ask both Adam Browning and Joanna Bernard, and the legal people too, whether they feel there's a duty to consult and to simply recognize that another indigenous government has the right to govern itself.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I'm sorry, but we have only 20 seconds before I need to go to Madame Gill. Whoever would like to....

Ms. McGregor, do you want to take it?

[Julie McGregor]

I want to be sure that I understand the question.

You're asking if the duty to consult should be limited to recognizing other indigenous groups' rights?

Is that what you said?

I'm sorry, Mr. McLeod, but I missed the last point of your question.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Do I have time to ask?

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Very, very briefly summarize and get a quick response. We do need to move on.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

My question is whether you feel there's a duty to consult, to simply recognize that another indigenous government has the right to govern itself.

[Julie McGregor]

If there are existing treaty rights, first nations rights or inherent rights or section 35 rights, then, yes, absolutely, I do think there is a duty to consult.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

Madame Gill, the floor is yours for 90 seconds.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

I'll be very brief, Mr. Chair.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Assembly of First Nations has mentioned several times that the bill simply shouldn't be considered. Something else should be done, particularly following the consultations.

Mr. Browning, should we improve the bill or should we reject it and start all over again?

[Dr. Adam Browning]

With respect, I'm not in your position. Were I to be in the perfect world, yes, I think under the duty to consult that inherently our section 35 rights for the historic communities, should they meet that threshold, should be acknowledged. That would be a simple amendment, in my view, inside this bill. I think that could replace pieces of clause 8 that recognize at least the Métis Nation of Alberta—I won't speak for the other provinces—as the affiliate that represents our collective rights within Alberta. I think that needs to be simple and that the recognition at the historic community level needs to be in there, because that's where our section 35 rights are. I think we could work with this bill if that were a starting point.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Madame Gill, there's just five seconds left.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Chair, I think Ms. Bernard wanted to speak.