Evidence of meeting #20 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cut-off.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
We are consulting on solutions to the second-generation cut-off. We have solutions already coming into the department.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Cape Breton—Canso—Antigonish, NS
Have any of those solutions involved asking Parliament and the Senate to make a decision for them?
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
We are respecting the duty to consult on matters that impact nations. We certainly want to hear a range of perspectives on this. We want to engage not only on the solutions but how they would be implemented and what the impacts would be of making a change to the law.
We want to avoid unintended consequences, so we really need to allow space for consultation to unfold and conclude so that the remedy to this issue is well understood and will address the issues most appropriately.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Cape Breton—Canso—Antigonish, NS
Mr. Chair, they said that there were about 5,000 section 6(2)s remaining. I'm wondering if they could put in writing how many have lost their status as a result of this so that the committee can take a deeper dive into what the impacts are.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan
If you could do that for us, please send it in writing. Thank you.
Your time is up.
Mrs. Gill, you have the floor for six minutes.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I thank all the witnesses who are with us today.
I would like to ask a question about Bill S‑2 because today's study is closely related to that bill.
This is really about gender discrimination. One thing Quebec Native Women suggested adding to the Senate amendments is unstated paternity. We talked about consultations. The Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador and Quebec Native Women agreed to this addition. I see that as a partial consultation in itself. We're not talking about band councils or the general public.
Would it be possible for our side of the House to propose that once again?
We know that Bill S‑2 will soon be sent to the committee for study, and we could add that part. You talked about being careful, given that we want to hold consultations, but I'm guessing this isn't something new, and people may be familiar with the ins and outs of the issue.
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
As mentioned, unstated and unknown paternity was addressed in Bill S-3 going back to 2017. We have taken measures to ensure that applications where there is unknown and unstated paternity are assessed using the broadest range of evidence put forward and that the balance of probabilities in assessing the application is weighed to the applicant.
We are doing work to better promote and make clear the policies and procedures around applications in that regard. We have heard that there may still be some misunderstanding that needs to be addressed through more direct communication, and we're working on that.
We have heard already from a number of groups that are interested and are very engaged on solutions to inequities in the Indian Act. We are engaging women's groups and many diverse perspectives in order to ensure that we have a broad range of perspectives to consider, given that that there are many factors, individual and collective, to consider.
I'll turn to my colleagues.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC
I'm sorry to interrupt, but I want to ask two more questions. You can respond in writing. This will enlighten the committee.
The first question is from the Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador, the AFNQL, which would like information about repercussions. Of course, that isn't an outright rejection. I'm talking about Bill S‑2. This also ties in to what's before us today.
Which programs will be affected or are already affected by changes such as those being proposed to address gender-based inequity?
The AFNQL wants to know what the repercussions will be. Folks want people to be able to register, of course, but they also want everyone to be able to benefit from services just like the others. I know you won't be able to provide the committee with a complete list right now, but this is something the AFNQL requested and people want. If you can provide us with that information, it would be relevant for us, too.
I also wonder whether, based on your projections, you're able to see what the scale might be. I know support isn't what it should be, either. We're well aware of that. It's a fact in the riding. It's a fact for first nations.
Can you give us a sense of what's possible? We can make changes, but we don't want to do so at first nations' expense. It has to be backed by funding.
Sacha Senécal Director General and Chief Data Officer, Department of Indigenous Services
I can try to answer that question.
My unit works with the program to make population projections and try to figure out the impact. We want to know how many more people could be added to the Indian Register and thereby gain status, and we want to determine some of the impact in terms of program costs.
In its original form, Bill S‑2 had a relatively minimal impact. The original version didn't include any mention of a large number of additional registrations. In the version currently being considered, the removal of the second-generation cut-off increases the impact significantly. If we also want to consider the impact starting now, from 2026 on, but also going back to 1985, that means significant impact. We have numbers for these things. We are in the process of developing projections with Statistics Canada to get a clearer picture of the situation.
In terms of the impact on programs, I wanted to mention one thing first. Most of the registrations that could potentially be added to the Indian Register would happen in off-reserve communities. Approximately 90% of the registrations would happen off reserve.
Based on program eligibility criteria, impact will depend on whether a given program is for people living on or off reserve. For off-reserve programming, non-insured health benefits and post-secondary education are some areas that would be impacted. As we heard earlier with respect to application processing, there would also be an impact on administration generally.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan
We'll go to our second round.
For five minutes, we have MP Morin, please.
Conservative
Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB
Thank you, Chair.
The current collaborative process on second-generation cut-off and section 10 voting threshold started in November 2023. I think there was the individual feedback form that just closed. How involved was your department in that process?
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
Very involved. We worked to co-develop the whole approach with indigenous partners. There was a codesign, co-development phase where the consultation approach was developed, including the information-sharing phase, where we provided communities with community-specific data on their registered population. That was all codesigned and co-developed. We're now moving into the actual consultation with phase two of the approach.
We started with a call-out of solutions. Those are coming into the department. They will be reviewed by an external panel of experts for legal viability and other implementation considerations, then packaged into a guide on the viable solutions for first nations-led consultation, starting in the spring.
It's very purposeful and intentional. We wanted to meet the high threshold of the UNDA expectations around consultation. That has really guided the approach that we've taken.
Conservative
Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB
Do you have an end timeline on when consultation is done and you'll be able to say, “Here's what we found, and here are our next steps”?
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
We are moving through it as quickly as we can, respecting, though, that we need to give people time and space to participate. However, we are on track to have our legal review of the solutions done in the next month and a half, and then move into consultations over the spring and summer.
Conservative
Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB
At the conclusion of spring and summer, what's the next phase after that, after the consultations are done?
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
From that process will emerge a solution, or a range of solutions, that can then be considered in a subsequent legislative process.
Conservative
Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB
In Mikisew Cree Nation v. Canada, 2018, it says that the Crown has no legal duty to consult indigenous groups during the development of legislation. Would the position of ISC and the government, at this point, be that we're doing it despite that, like we just see this as a best practice but it's not actually a thing we need to do, it's just consulting?
Director of Registration Reform, Registration Reform and Policy, Procedures and Program Management, Department of Indigenous Services
While it may be true that there's no duty to consult specifically on the development of legislation, in the context of this work, since we're talking about the rights of individuals and their right to pass on status to the next generation, we feel it's prudent to consult since it impacts rights holders directly.
Conservative
Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB
Have you heard feedback from your consultation process that there have been multiple consultation processes and studies on this over the last number of decades? Is that a constant theme that you're hearing as well?
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
We have heard that people feel like there has been consultation on this issue, but there actually has not. There has been information gathered in terms of the demographic impacts and the impacts on communities, but we've actually not consulted on solutions to this issue, so that's what we're doing now.
The issue has been raised over the years as an inequity that needs to be addressed. The solution was never clearly determined. It required consultation with a broad range of perspectives in order to come up with the solution or range of solutions that would best address this issue.
There has been consultation on some of the other inequities that have been addressed through prior legislation, sex-based inequities, for example, and the remedy to enfranchisement, but the consultation on the actual remedy to the second-generation cut-off has not happened, and it is now.
Conservative
Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB
You've cited some numbers. A lot of this uptake is projected to be from a population of 85% off-reserve, mostly, probably upping costs for the department in terms of NIHB and things of that nature. Some of the numbers that came out of the Senate through APPA were, I think, 200,000 to 300,000 people over the next 30 to 40 years of uptake, as initial estimates. Are you aware of the Senate numbers of the projections of this?
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
We have projections. I can turn to my colleague.
February 10th, 2026 / 11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan
We're out of time, so you can provide that in writing, or maybe we can get that out in the subsequent question.
Thank you.
Ms. Lavack, you have the floor for five minutes.
Liberal
Ginette Lavack Liberal St. Boniface—St. Vital, MB
I thank the people who are here today for their testimony. We're very happy to have them here and to have this information. This may help us in our work.
I'd like to hear from Indigenous Services Canada on the following.
What are the main challenges involved in correcting the second-generation cut-off by ensuring that rights are restored without creating unintended consequences for first nations communities?
Director General, Individual Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
Yes, there are many factors to consider. We certainly do not want to go forward quickly with a solution that will have unintended consequences, so it's important that we take some time to consider the diversity of perspectives on this, including implementation and impacts.
While we are asking about solutions, we are also asking about implementation factors and impacts, so that the full picture is clearly documented and then assessed from an expert panel on legal viability and other considerations.
There are many factors to take into account. We want to look at this from a gender-based equality lens. We want to look at this from a demographic perspective. We want to look at this from a cultural connection. There are many aspects that are being considered.
I'll turn to colleagues for more on that.