Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 28th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Good morning, everyone.

Welcome to meeting number 34 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 on new registration entitlements.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. Members may be attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

Before we begin, I ask all in-person participants to consult the guidelines written on the card on the table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio and feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including our wonderful interpreters. You will also notice a QR code on the card, which links to a short awareness video.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone to activate your mic, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. For those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen, you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

I would like to remind witnesses that committee members may ask questions in either French or English. If you need interpretation, please take a moment now to prepare your earpiece and select the listening channel you will need in advance in order to take full advantage of the time allotted for questions and answers. If you need interpretation and you're in the room, it's best to leave the earpiece in. If not, though, please place it on the little sticky so that there's no feedback. It's on your desk.

I remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

I would now like to welcome our witnesses.

From the Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi'kmaw Chiefs, we have Chief Sidney Peters, by video conference.

Good morning.

Here in the room, we have, from Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation, Jeff Forbes, deputy chief.

You each will have five minutes. I'll let you know when there's about 30 seconds left so you can wrap up and finish your thoughts. There's going to be a big exchange of questions and comments with the members, so you should have plenty of time to say more.

Let's start online, please.

Chief Peters, welcome, and go ahead.

[Chief Sidney Peters, Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaw Chiefs]

Kwe and good morning, members of the committee and invited guests.

My name is Sidney Peters. I am the chief of Glooscap First Nation, as well as the co-chair of the Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi'kmaw Chiefs.

Today I am appearing on behalf of the assembly, which is made up of 13 Mi'kmaq chiefs in Nova Scotia, members of the Mi'kmaq Grand Council, the district chiefs and the Assembly of First Nations regional chief. Thank you for this opportunity to be here today.

When Parliament passed Bill C-31 in 1985, it introduced a cut-off for status registration based on the number of consecutive generations in which one parent was a non-status Indian. The resulting loss of status is not only discriminatory but also deeply rooted in the colonial and racist policy of assimilation. Canadians have a one-parent rule, yet the citizens of our nations do not.

For our communities, the second generation cut-off is real and is a constant challenge. Across the country, we have community members who are falling in love with and having children with people who are not members of the first nations community. Many of us have family members who fall into this second generation cut-off. We are the parents, the aunts, the uncles, the grandparents and so forth of these children, who are treated as less than or not Indian enough. They are not nameless faces or just people listed on federal documents. They're our blood relatives.

When discussing the merits of Bill S-2, one of the chiefs in Nova Scotia spoke about his niece, who is classified by Canadian rule as a subsection 6(2) Indian. She has grown up in the community, and she knows no other culture than her own Mi'kmaq culture, but because of the 6(2) status, her children will grow up without the help and support others received. They will have no medical support and no educational support, and they will be deemed a burden on our system because Canada has limits on who we can take care of.

This is not our way. The Mi'kmaq take care of our own. Our process allows us to give recognition to individuals who are culturally connected to our nation but are not band members or status Indians because of arbitrary rules put in place by the federal government.

This act of self-government does not provide us with the opportunity to provide housing, programs and services to these individuals. This is because the government has ensured that these basic rights and services are limited to whomever they legally recognize as Indian. That is what status is.

Before 1985, non-indigenous spouses of indigenous men were given status, and so were their children, yet indigenous women who married out lost their Indian status, and so did their children. Because of this, descendants of the first nations women are disproportionately impacted by the second generation cut-off.

Bill S-2 is the opportunity to rectify that. We understand that the federal government is worried about the dollars and cents. We are too. Some communities are worried about how Canada will support us in welcoming back individuals to our community. They want to know if Canada will meet the fiduciary responsibilities for the influx of status individuals. Despite these concerns, we know that this is about supporting our children and our future generations. This is about real reconciliation, and this is why we are calling for the passage of Bill S-2 as amended by the Senate.

Wela'lioq. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Thank you, Chief Peters.

Now we will go to Deputy Chief Forbes for five minutes, please.

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes, Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation]

[Witness spoke in Anishinaabemowin and provided the following translation:]

Hello. My name is Jeff Forbes. I am Bear Clan, and I am from the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation.

[English]

Good morning, Chair and members of the committee. My name is Jeff Forbes, and I'm deputy chief of the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation.

I speak today on behalf of our chief and council to express their strong support for the removal of the second generation cut-off.

Since 1985, the second generation cut-off in the Indian Act has imposed an artificial and externally defined limit on the ability of first nations peoples to pass on our identity and legal recognition to our children. This provision has resulted in a gradual legislative elimination of many of our citizens and contributed to the erosion of our communities, families and cultures.

This is not an administrative issue; it's about identity, continuity and the survival of our nations.

It's important to recognize that first nations are not treated the same as other groups in Canada when it comes to citizenship and identity. Recent changes to the Citizenship Act have removed generational limits for many Canadians, allowing them to pass on citizenship to children born outside the country. In contrast, first nations people remain subject to the Indian Act, which continues to control our citizenship and restrict the transmission of identity across generations. This unequal treatment goes against the principles of fairness and reconciliation.

Removing the second generation cut-off is an important and necessary step towards addressing long-standing discrimination in the Indian Act. It will help restore recognition to thousands of people who have been excluded through policies that are not compatible with our own systems of kinship, belonging and nationhood. We urge the Government of Canada to move forward with amendments that eliminate the second generation cut-off.

I want to speak to you not only as the deputy chief of my nation but also as a parent. I have three young children: Millie, eight; Stanley, six; and Bowen, five. I've been with my wife for 17 years. My children have been denied status due to the second generation cut-off. When I asked ISC staff what I could do, I was told to put my children up for adoption to a family member or apply for Métis status.

We are Anishinabe. We are not Métis.

That moment stays with you, because it tells you very clearly how much power the system still has over our identities and our families.

My father was part of the sixties scoop. He was taken away from his family when he was only two months old. He grew up without knowing who he was, without his language, without his community, without his identity. As an adult, he went back to Scugog to try to find answers. When he walked into our original band office, three family members were sitting there. They said, “What took you so long?”

My dad later applied for status. He was turned down twice. On his third try, he was lucky enough to find somebody who actually cared. He was registered since birth. If he had given up the first or second time, we would have never known, and our family would have been denied our heritage.

This is how much power the government has over us: the power to deny, to redirect and even to hide the truth of who we are.

My father's generation was forced to hide who they were. My generation had to work to relearn it, and now my children are growing up proud and strong. They know how to make our medicines. They hunt and fish with me. They dance; they join our ceremonies, and they take leadership roles at their schools, celebrating the Anishinabe ways. They are confident in who they are.

We are Anishinabe. Their generation will bring us full circle, but under the second generation cut-off, the government does not recognize them. They're being told they don't belong.

We are Anishinabe. My kids won't be able to follow the same footsteps in leadership as I do. They will not have the same opportunities to exercise their role in their nation.

The minister has said more consultation is needed. Respectfully, we do not agree. There have been many decades of studies, engagement and consultation on the discriminatory impacts of the Indian Act's registration provisions. We don't need more consultation; we need action. Delaying further means more families will be cut off, more children like my children will be denied recognition and more damage will be done that cannot be undone.

We stand with the Anishinabek Nation and others calling for this reform. This is about fairness and about recognition, and it's about ensuring that future generations are not legislated out of existence.

Meegwetch.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Chi-meegwetch, Deputy Chief Forbes.

We'll go to the Conservatives for the first round of questions of six minutes each.

We have MP Morin online. You have six minutes, please.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Thank you, Chair, and good morning to our guests today.

I want to go to Chief Peters online for my first question.

I have a clarification question, Chief. Did you mention that your nation has a self-government agreement?

[Chief Sidney Peters]

No. We are working on that with all 13 communities here in Nova Scotia. That is our future goal.

As the Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi'kmaw Chiefs, we all come together once a month and work on issues or concerns that impact all of Mi'kmaq here in Nova Scotia. Everybody's part of that in the assembly.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Thank you for that clarification, Chief.

It's my general awareness that other self-governments have a one-parent rule, even going back to the 1970s, for self-government agreements. Would it be your intention to negotiate a one-parent rule in the long run, if you guys get self-government?

[Chief Sidney Peters]

Yes. That's one of the things that we want to do as well. Trying to identify exactly who we are was one thing, because we know we need to work on that. We shouldn't have somebody else tell us who we are.

[Lori Idlout, Liberal, Nunavut, NU]

I have a point of order.

I'm sorry. Can we ask the witness to speak louder?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Put the boom right beside your mouth and then speak louder, please.

[Chief Sidney Peters]

How is that? Is that better?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Lori is giving you the thumbs-up.

[Chief Sidney Peters]

I was always told, “Sid, you need to speak a bit louder.” I apologize for that.

Each community here in Nova Scotia is working on having their own identification of who they are and who they're going to identify in their communities, but as an assembly, we are working on that here under the citizenship thing we've been working on. It's just a matter of getting everybody in the room to agree.

As we know, we should be the ones who identify who we are. We shouldn't have the federal government identifying who we are. That's what we're working on.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Thanks, Chief.

The government has talked about reconciliation for the better part of 10 or 11 years now. Under this current government, they've decided to endorse the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. They have spoken about “nation to nation”. Are they living up to their words if they keep the second generation cut-off there?

[Chief Sidney Peters]

What was the end of it? I'm sorry.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

If they say all these things about UNDRIP, reconciliation and nation to nation but keep the second generation cut-off, are they staying by their words?

[Chief Sidney Peters]

We're not confident in that. That's for sure. I know that they talk about reconciliation, but is it really, truly reconciliation in regard to consulting with us? I think that's really important.

On some of the issues and concerns that we've seen, even when Bill C-5 went through, not much consulting even took place there. Having said that, I'm not 100% confident that this is what happened. We've been around for many years. As you said, it's been a while since they adopted UNDRIP, and where are we now? In regard to the change, how many changes have actually taken place? With the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that took place, how many things have actually been approved to date? How many have been worked on?

Even on this, with regard to how long consultation has taken, I understand that about 240 sessions took place in the discussion of Bill S-2 and they still want to talk more about it, but today the amendments that the Senate has put forward should be considered for sure.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Thanks, Chief.

I'll go to Deputy Chief Forbes.

One of the great injustices that we've heard in this discussion is that leaders of their own communities.... We've heard from a number of chiefs of their own communities. At least one or two have said that their children are not recognized as a part of their communities because the second generation cut-off affects them. Can you clarify if that's your current position with your own children, Deputy Chief?

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

That's correct. My mother is non-status and my wife is non-status, which means that my kids are affected by the second generation cut-off rule and are not eligible for status.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

You are the deputy chief of your nation.

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

That's correct.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

You had some great words when you mentioned that your father was part of a generation of discovery and that you're a generation of relearning, and now your kids are.... How did you put it, Deputy Chief? How did you refer to your children as the new generation?

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

My father's generation was forced to hide who they were. My generation had to work to relearn it, and now my children are growing up proud and strong. They will be the generation that brings us full circle—ones that can be proud, ones that can openly hold ceremony and openly and actively use their traditional areas.

Meegwetch.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

I can hear the pride in your voice when you say that, Chief. Still, this second generation cut-off for your children would cast some shadow of a doubt on fully implementing their rights as a part of the community. Is that fair to say?