Evidence of meeting #32 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 children.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Members speaking

Before the committee

Michèle Audette  Senator, Quebec (De Salaberry), PSG
Edwards  As an Individual
Chief Alvin Fiddler  Nishnawbe Aski Nation
Derek Epp  Tzeachten First Nation
Guilderson  Councillor, Tzeachten First Nation
Lapierre  As an Individual
Marsha Smoke  Southeast Regional Chief, Anishinabek Nation
Chief Cindy Woodhouse-Nepinak  Assembly of First Nations
Huneault  Civil Engineering, Regroupement citoyen : Les enfants d'Aataentsic
David  In-House Senior Legal Counsel, Assembly of First Nations

The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan

It's time to call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 32 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs. We recognize that we meet on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe peoples.

Pursuant to the order of the House, the committee is continuing its study of Bill S-2, an act to amend the Indian Act regarding new registration entitlements.

Before we continue, I recommend that all in-person participants begin the meeting with earpieces in and keep them in, because we will switch from French to English questions, and you'll miss some of the questions if you aren't bilingual.

Make sure your mic is off when you're not speaking. It's all about the health of our wonderful interpreters, so please adhere to that, as it really helps them out.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic when it's your turn, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. When you're answering questions, use the “raise hand” function, and the clerk and I will see you.

Thank you very much.

Today we have the Honourable Michèle Audette, senator. Welcome.

As an individual, we have Dalia Edwards by video conference. Hello, Dalia.

We have Nishnawbe Aski Nation Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler with us. It's good to see you again, Grand Chief.

By video conference, we have Chief Derek Epp of the Tzeachten First Nation. Accompanying the chief is Councillor Hayden Guilderson.

You have up to five minutes. I will tell you when you have 30 seconds left so you can wrap up, and then we will cut it at the five minutes.

First up is the honourable senator.

Please take it away.

Michèle Audette Senator, Quebec (De Salaberry), PSG

Tshinashkumitin, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before your committee.

I will now address the topic at hand.

In the Nicholas decision, the government itself admits that the Indian Act unjustifiably violates section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In other words, it acknowledges that it is discriminatory.

In reality, however, there are two distinct constitutional regimes. The first is a system in which rights are protected, and the second is a system in which rights are extinguished. I can attest to this because we are among those that are sought to be erased. Our rights are under attack. We know what we're talking about, because we've experienced it for a long time. We have been speaking out against this for a long time.

You will also understand, colleagues, that when Bill S‑2 came before our chamber, we had a real opportunity to correct several discriminatory provisions in the Indian Act. That is why the amendments proposed by the Senate are essential, particularly those aimed at eliminating exclusion after the second generation, a major source of inequality. I repeat: Canada, the government, has acknowledged that discrimination exists, so it should see this through to the end. It should not take half-measures or do the bare minimum—yet we are currently seeing attempts to do just that.

I would like to add that we see very concrete examples of this in our daily lives. These examples are unacceptable, and we are asked to be patient. Why, as an Innu woman, must I disclose the name of my child's father? If I do not, things become extremely complicated. Yet a Canadian or Quebec woman does not need to provide that information, and her child automatically becomes a Canadian citizen. What's more, recently, this government has widened the gap even further by telling second-generation individuals born outside the country that, if they have one Canadian parent, they are entitled to citizenship, whereas we—first nations women who have been living in these territories for millennia—are denied the one-parent rule. We are denied the ability to pass on our status to our children. If those are not two distinct constitutional systems or regimes, then please explain what they are. For us, the difference is real, and its impact is equally so.

The amendments brought forward by the Senate are not excessive. They are logical. They simply aim to ensure that the legislative response fully respects the right to equality. Most importantly, there are already solutions available. We have even drawn inspiration from different nations and communities that have their own membership rules. In some cases, such as the James Bay Agreement—Minister Gull‑Masty is from James Bay—inheritance is based on the one-parent rule. So it works in their case, but not in ours. That's hard to swallow and accept. We wonder why there is such reluctance.

We have shown you, and it has been shown to us, that solutions are available: This is not theoretical, nor is it unrealistic. Of course, to achieve this, nations need support through a parallel process, whether to build their capacity, document their practices, or develop their own approaches to membership. It is important to have a parallel process alongside Bill S‑2.

Finally, we must also remember an institutional reality: governments change—people who are here today will eventually move on—but laws remain. They remain for a long time. Their effects shape lives—the lives of many people—across several generations.

The Indian Act is imposed by Parliament. As such, it is our collective responsibility to address the discrimination it embodies. By maintaining these inconsistencies, a message is being sent.

The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan

You have 30 seconds left.

8:20 a.m.

Senator, Quebec (De Salaberry), PSG

Michèle Audette

To conclude, I want to say that we are in 2026. Let's change the Indian Act to make sure I have the same rights as Canadian women.

Thank you.

The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan

Thank you very much, Ms. Audette.

Next we have Dalia Edwards, by video conference.

You have up to five minutes.

Dalia Edwards As an Individual

Honourable Chair, members of the House and all my relations,

[Witness spoke in Ojibwa and provided the following text:]

Aanii boozhoo kina wiya. Dalia Edwards miinwa Gimiwan Niimikwe ndishnikaaz. Anishinaabe miinwa shaganash kwe ndaaw. Hamilton ndoonjibaa. Wiikwemkoong ndbendaagoz. Baker Creek British Columbia Lhtako Dene aki megwa ndidaa. Waabizheshi ndoodem.

[Witness provided the following translation:]

Hello, everyone. My name is Dalia Edwards, Gimiwan Niimikwe. I am of Anishinaabe and European descent. I'm originally from Hamilton and belong to Wiikwemkoong unceded territory. I currently live in Baker Creek, British Columbia, Lhtako Dene territory. I am Marten Clan.

[English]

It's an honour to rise today to speak to Bill S-2, not just as policy but as lived reality affecting my family, my children and many others like us.

On paper we speak of equality, rights and fairness, but in reality it's far more complicated and far more painful.

My children are proud to be indigenous. Elders I look up to say this next generation will heal, and I see it in my kids. They come from a proud lineage with deep roots, language, culture and identity, but because of how status and band membership rules intersect with legislation, they may not have the same access to their community as their cousins, just as I did not prior to legislation changes.

This is not because of culture, and it's not because of connection. It's because of colonially imposed policy that conflicts with Canadian laws and the charter, and denies our own pre-existing E'Dbendaagzijig Naaknigewin, our own Anishinabek citizenship laws. These policies continue to divide indigenous families, generation by generation. Cousins whose parents were raised under the same roof will have fundamentally different futures. My family history includes enfranchisement, and its impacts continue across generations.

I struggled in many ways in post-secondary, and ironically, I paid to learn Anishinaabemowin, the language that my nokomis-baa, my late grandma, was fluent in but too ashamed to speak. My aunties work with youth who are affected by the second-generation cut-off, and they see how access to physical, mental and academic supports could ease burdens on families.

We cannot speak of reconciliation while UNDA is treated as symbolic and indigenous children are excluded from their own communities through a bureaucratic system that attempts to extinguish us.

I have a three-year-old daughter and an 11-month-old son. When I was preparing to speak to an MP, my daughter asked what I was doing. I told her I was practising what to say to someone who used to be ogimaa, a chief. She asked, “Mama, what's a chief?” I told her an ogimaa is someone who helps their people and leads in a good way. She asked if she could be one someday, so I told her she would make a great ogimaakwe.

The reality is that my strong-willed, kind, spirited daughter may never have that opportunity unless this bill reaches royal assent. It is my hope that she can start school in Anishinaabemowin so we can reclaim our language as a family.

Children deserve to grow up knowing where they belong. They deserve equal access to their culture, community and language, regardless of when their parents were born, their gender or who they love. Are we creating unity or maintaining division? Are we strengthening communities or fragmenting families? We can do better. We must do better.

In closing, chi-meegwetch to the many who have fought for indigenous rights and paved the way for this moment, including people such as my distant relative Dr. Jeannette Corbiere Lavell, Keewednanung, who has challenged these discriminatory policies for over 50 years. As she has said, justice delayed is justice denied.

Indigenous people cannot wait another half-century for decisions to be made on our behalf. Let first nations implement the plans already in place. We know who belongs, and welcoming people home to our communities strengthens our communities. Work alongside indigenous people instead of imposing upon us.

In my culture, we speak of looking seven generations ahead, and I ask you to do the same. Be a good ancestor for my children, for all indigenous children and for the future we claim to be building together in reconciliation. Let's choose inclusion, not exclusion, and ensure that no one is left behind.

Chi-meegwetch bizindawiyeg. Thank you all so much for listening. All my relations.

The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan

Chi-meegwetch.

Next we have Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler for up to five minutes.

Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler Nishnawbe Aski Nation

Meegwetch.

Good morning. I want to acknowledge everyone in the room. I'm really honoured to be sitting here with my friend Senator Michèle Audette.

Five minutes isn't really a long time to speak to something that is so important to our people. I tried my very best to prepare for this—one minute here, two minutes there and one minute over there. I met with MP Idlout a couple of weeks ago and told her that I was really struggling with this, because what we are trying to do is address something or fix something within our most colonial and racist piece of legislation, which is the Indian Act. We're trying to figure out how we can make it less racist, less harmful or less discriminatory, especially to women—our mothers and sisters—and our children. We just had Red Dress Day.

I trust you, as members of this committee, to figure it out. You're surrounded by probably the top legal brains in the country. You have good technical staff. Why should I come 1,000 miles to Ottawa to tell you how to fix it? You should be able to figure it out yourselves.

Numerous presentations have been made in the past, including by the grand chief of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, Grand Chief Kyra Wilson. I echo the recommendations that have been put forward. Our responsibility is to put an end to the harms that have been created by this piece of legislation, the Indian Act. If we're really serious about addressing the historical wrongs and the injustices against our people, especially women, girls and children, then we need to start looking at actually dismantling the colonial structures that are being held up by things like the Indian Act.

Give the authority back to our people. Ultimately, the solution to this issue about Bill S-2 is to give the authority and jurisdiction back to our communities, for them to be able to determine who their people are. They're smart enough to figure that out. I think our responsibility, as leaders of this country, is to help in that process. That's why I came here today.

I have a written submission that I can leave with you. It talks more about the technical aspects of what we're talking about here. I just wanted to share with you my own feelings and thoughts. To me, that's the solution: Give that authority, that jurisdiction, back to our nations.

Meegwetch.

The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan

Thank you very much for your words. Please send your written submission to the clerk. He'll circulate it. The analysts will also look at it and incorporate it.

Thank you. Chi-meegwetch.

Next, from Tzeachten First Nation, we have Chief Derek Epp and Hayden Guilderson, in person.

Go ahead, Chief. You have five minutes.

Chief Derek Epp Tzeachten First Nation

Mr. Chair, we'll be splitting the time. I'll hand it over to Hayden as soon as I'm done.

Good morning, everybody. It's good to see you all again. Thank you for allowing me to come and be a witness at this committee in this important work.

Many of you know who we are and what Ch'íyáqtel does—our progressive economic development and how we've really flipped our script to become economically self-sufficient. A lot of that is our identity and who we are as a nation.

I'm really here to speak in support of the passage of Bill S-2, and I acknowledge the speakers before me in highlighting the importance of why we're here today. It's so important to continue on with this work and look at an opt-in nation-to-nation implementation agreement that includes fiscal planning, capacity support and respect for first nations' jurisdiction.

I'd be happy to dive into the details a bit further on with regard to the fiscal side and our identity as a nation, but I'll hand it over to Councillor Hayden to explain it in more detail.

The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan

Go ahead, Councillor. You have four minutes and 30 seconds.

Hayden Guilderson Councillor, Tzeachten First Nation

Thank you, Chief.

Good day, Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Hayden Guilderson, and I serve as a councillor for Ch'íyáqtel, or the Tzeachten First Nation. I am here as a representative of my nation, but also as a father, a community member and someone who has heard directly from our elders, parents and youth about what Indian Act registration means in real life.

I want to begin with a simple point. Ch'íyáqtel is currently facing a risk of legislative extinction, not because our people are disappearing but because of federal law narrowing who counts. We support the passage of Bill S-2 with the Senate amendments intact. We support addressing the second-generation cut-off. Reform is necessary and long overdue, but how that reform is implemented matters.

In 1992, Ch'íyáqtel progressively adopted a custom membership code under section 10 of the Indian Act. Our nation made a clear decision then. If you have a Tzeachten parent, you are Tzeachten. That means you belong to our nation. You are part of our community. You can participate in our ceremonies, hold land, access community supports and be recognized as one of our people, regardless of your status registration. This decision reflects kinship, cultural continuity, responsibility and nationhood.

In other words, Ch'íyáqtel already exercises self-determination by recognizing our own people. The problem is this: We recognize our people, and Canada often does not. Today, Ch'íyáqtel has approximately 750 members. Of those, 612 are registered under the Indian Act. About 190 of those registered members—approximately 31%—are registered under subsection 6(2). This matters because the second-generation cut-off means many of their children may not be eligible for registration if the other parent is not registered.

This is a personal scenario for me. My two children are recognized as Tzeachten members. They belong to our community, but under the current federal registration system, they are not eligible for Indian status because of the second-generation cut-off. That is the disconnect we are asking Parliament to address. The current federal system is creating a separate and shrinking definition of our people. Each generation, more of our members risk being recognized by Ch'íyáqtel but not by Canada.

This is already starting to affect families, housing, programs, services, funding, governance, land use decisions and long-term planning. At its core, this is a threat to Ch'íyáqtel's goal of self-determination. True self-determination requires the authority to define our own citizens. Ch'íyáqtel has already taken steps in that direction. Many first nations have, but federal systems have not kept pace with this.

That is why Bill S-2 matters. Passage alone is not enough. Ch'íyáqtel is recommending an opt-in, nation-to-nation implementation approach. Canada should pass Bill S-2 with the Senate amendments intact and collaborate with first nations on implementation agreements that address three key areas.

The first is the fiscal planning that the chief mentioned. This is essential to ensuring that funding and service arrangements reflect changes in recognition. If Canada is expecting first nations to support more members, the fiscal relationship must evolve accordingly and modernly.

Second, there should be capacity support so first nations are not left to handle administrative and governance pressures alone. This reform should not mean transferring responsibility without adequate resources in place.

Finally, respect for the jurisdiction of first nations is vital, allowing nations to define their own people based on their laws and customs.

This reform should not be delayed. It needs to be effective and adaptable. An opt-in approach enables nations to proceed at their own pace based on readiness and priorities. Ch'íyáqtel will continue to recognize our people. Canada must align with this reality, ensuring the registry reflects rather than limits our community.

Our message to this committee is clear: Pass Bill S-2 with the Senate amendments intact, address the second-generation cut-off and work with first nations on opt-in, nation-to-nation implementation agreements that include fiscal planning, capacity support and respect for our jurisdiction.

Thank you.

The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan

Thank you, Councillor.

I'll go right to questions.

MP Morin, you will have six minutes for questions and answers.

8:35 a.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Thank you, Chair.

I'm going to Senator Audette.

A lot of numbers have been done with this bill. I'm sure you guys went over them in the Senate. The implementation of it was 7,000 to 8,000 new people, with maybe an influx of 25,000 at the start. The ISC budget is $25 billion to $26 billion, give or take, and the implementation of this was about $50 million on average per year.

Did you guys go over those numbers, and do you see the numbers as an impediment to getting this done?

8:35 a.m.

Senator, Quebec (De Salaberry), PSG

Michèle Audette

I'm sorry, I didn’t understand the word “impediment”. I should have listened to the interpretation.

Steven Guilbeault Liberal Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

An impediment is an obstacle.

8:35 a.m.

Senator, Quebec (De Salaberry), PSG

Michèle Audette

When the government or an official brings numbers and funding, it brings a pressure to communities that are affected by the colonial system. Many generations are born under that culture, so they're not aware of or didn't live the former governance of their own nation.

If we play with words on how we bring concerns.... In my world, it's all about how we bring a message and how we speak to people. If we scare people, people will stay scared and will say they don't want it, but if we speak the truth and say, “We imposed that on you, and we will correct that with you”, and make sure that, as the councillor and the grand chief mentioned, we build with them—not tell them how—and support them, I believe nobody will be scared.

8:35 a.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

You also mentioned in your testimony that the James Bay Cree have a one-parent rule. It has lasted for generations now, and the government recognizes that. Can you confirm that?

8:35 a.m.

Senator, Quebec (De Salaberry), PSG

Michèle Audette

I can confirm that. When I met with the minister—because I'm an unusual sponsor for a bill coming from the government—I noted that we've looked for many years at how the Cree do citizenship and membership or how they recognize their people. It should be a good example. If it doesn't work well, they can teach us how to make it better.

Yes, she is aware, as I mentioned, that we had been looking for years at the way they do things with their nation.

8:35 a.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Is the minister from James Bay Cree?

8:35 a.m.

Senator, Quebec (De Salaberry), PSG

8:35 a.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Do they have a one-parent rule there?

8:35 a.m.

Senator, Quebec (De Salaberry), PSG

8:35 a.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Thank you.

Councillor Hayden Guilderson, you had an excellent example of how section 10 is a good step forward, but it's not the complete step forward for self-determination and recognition of your people. You said, along with Chief Epp, that your nation is doing well, at least in terms of economics, and that's based in identity.

You guys have your own one-parent rule, but it's not recognized, and that's hindering the future of your nation. Even for you, there's a fear that the nation could go extinct. Is that what you said?

8:35 a.m.

Councillor, Tzeachten First Nation

Hayden Guilderson

Definitely. There's a concern with the one-parent rule in our custom section 10 membership code. We have a one-parent rule. If a kid has a Tzeachten parent, they are entitled to Tzeachten membership. That enables certain benefits, but it doesn't qualify them for status registration.

The projection that we as a council and our governance model are looking at says that if the projection and legislation don't change, we are on a long-term track, statistically, for extinction. Year over year, as we take on more non-status members, that will impact a lot of governance decisions—land-use planning, housing targets and those types of things. That stresses the need for reform.