Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 28th, 2026

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

That's correct. They're not recognized by the federal government to be Anishinabe, to be members of Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Thank you very much. That's the time, MP Morin.

Next we go to Jaime, please. You have six minutes.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso—Antigonish, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll direct my first question to Chief Sidney Peters.

Kwe. Weliegsitpu’g.

It's really good to see you this morning, Chief Peters, even virtually. Thank you for joining us at INAN.

Chief, you said something important there, and I want to pick up on it a bit. In your answer, you said that we should be the ones who choose who are and who aren't members of our community. As you know, for more than 10 years the Mi'kmaq have been trying to figure out who the beneficiaries of our rights should be.

You know that I was your Mi'kmaq citizenship coordinator for more than four years, going to communities and talking about what it is to be Mi'kmaq, what it is to belong and what it is around the identity, and a lot of the conversation that I heard wasn't just about ancestry; it was about belonging to a community. It was about connection to a community. It was about knowing who people's families are. In the Mi'kmaq language, we call that Tan Wetipeksin, which means, “Where are your roots?” An elder would sometimes ask you, if you're coming to their community, “Tan Wetipeksin?” They're asking you not just where you're from and which community you were raised in, but who your family is and all of these things.

When we look at this whole idea of the second generation cut-off, I fully agree, from a life of work, that this is overly restrictive and that it should be the communities that decide, but I'm wondering two things.

First, should we be looking only at ancestry when we have these conversations about being Mi'kmaq and belonging to a community to have status? The second question is, where have we gotten to in terms of what it means to be a beneficiary of the Mi'kmaq nation, which we've been working on for more than 10 years?

I submitted a draft document, and I know that your niece, Zabrina Whitman, also worked on this with great enthusiasm. I'm wondering if you could tell us where the Mi'kmaq have landed in terms of some of the important things that we look at when we're talking about who we are.

[Chief Sidney Peters]

Thank you very much, Jaime, for the questions.

On your first question, your last comment kind of broke up.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso—Antigonish, NS]

Should ancestry and parentage be the only factors that determine indigenous identity, or should there be other factors as well? In a broader context, should it not be up to the communities themselves, instead of Ottawa, to decide who the members of their communities are?

[Chief Sidney Peters]

It's really important to know what your identity is. When I was growing up, my father was chief, and my sister has been chief and my grandfather was chief of communities, but even though they were chiefs of communities, it's all about recognition of who your family is, who your kids are, who was who and where you come from. You're correct in saying that wherever you go, they always ask who your family is and where you come from. That's really important. The names are so important. That's why they asked traditionally who you were.

More importantly, it is about the culture. I must say that a lot of times some of us lost our status, so of course we weren't getting involved with community things or even participating in indigenous things, because not everybody really included everybody. I remember that when I was growing up, I lived off reserve. I'd go to communities, and they'd say, “Well, you must be an apple, maybe red on the outside but white on the inside”, thinking that I'm not native enough. Honestly, that's what used to happen to us.

I don't understand why, but people had to move off reserve in some cases because they had to find work, whatever it was, or there was no work because there was no employment within the communities.

I honestly think you're indigenous no matter where you live, whether you're on reserve or off reserve. The Indian Act has put us in these situations. That's where the problem occurs.

That said, there are things about money. There's always the money issue. They're always talking about how it's a money issue or whatever, and some of our communities have concerns about that, because we're not receiving enough money now to support our communities and what really, truly is needed. We're running into issues in regard to our land and the additions to the reserve. Our land base is too small.

Having said that, it's understanding who we are and what we are. I'm similar to our colleague who's presenting. My children are not going to be able to pass on their status. I married my wife 40 years ago, and my anniversary for 40-some years is this year. My kids won't be able to pass it on.

As I said, as far as leadership goes, my dad was a chief, my sister was chief, my grandfather was chief and I was chief. My kids might be interested in that, but if this continues, they won't be eligible to even participate, because that's the way it's set up. They won't be able to run for office, which is unfortunate. Their children won't even be able to recognize that.

Honestly, if I really think about being first nation, I often think about going back to reality. Do I go back to my grandparents or to my parents and say, “Oh yeah, mom and dad, our kids are no longer Indian.” What does that mean?

Unfortunately, they have both passed on now, but I can't imagine how I would address that to my parents and say my kids are no longer native.

What about everybody else? There are other people out there, as we've said and as we've seen, who have gained status and continue to grow on that, but ours don't. I think it's so discriminatory. It's not fair to our people. We know how important economic development is in own-source revenues.

Again, Jaime, I like these questions, but where are we on citizenship? You and Zabrina did an excellent job when you were here working on this. One of the biggest issues that we run into as first nation communities is identifying what the priority is. It seems as though every time we go to a meeting, something else pops up, whether it's a candidate's medical health, whether it's policing, whether it's reserve creation or whether it's mental health. Whatever it is, there are just so many, and it's a big thing. Even with AFN, there are so many issues and concerns. You guys would see that at the government level. There are so many concerns, and we're trying to address them all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Thank you.

Chief, happy anniversary to you and your wife. Forty years is a very special anniversary, so thank you.

Good morning, Mrs. Gill. You have the floor for six minutes.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Chief Peters and Deputy Chief Forbes, for your testimony.

I think you both agree that Bill S‑2 would have enormous negative repercussions.

Deputy Chief Forbes, I believe you mentioned the fact that, ultimately, a population is being wiped out. Obviously, the law remains very colonial in nature.

I get the impression not that we're repeating ourselves, but that everyone is making the same arguments and that everyone wants to see the bill passed quickly, without further consultation.

I'd like to let both of you respond, since we're fortunate to have you here. Could you tell us again, in a few words, what the repercussions are?

Mr. Forbes spoke of a system that has a great deal of power over identity. Identity is something we should decide, not the system.

So, Mr. Forbes, what are the repercussions and what should we do quickly? Meegwetch.

Afterwards, Chief Peters, I'll ask you the same question.

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

Meegwetch.

On the impacts, I'll speak only for the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation. We currently have 254 members. Removing the cut-off will allow us to steadily grow by 7% to 10% to 278 members in five years. It allows our members to be members of our community, to be accepted, to learn and to pass it on. In our hearts, we are Anishinabe. The federal government does not see us that way.

You're now again having a group of young children, after all the past that we can talk about.... We're doing it again to our children. We're telling them that they do not belong. We're telling them that they don't have access to their language. We're telling them that they shouldn't have access to their ceremonies.

That's what the federal government is telling them, not our home communities: Our home communities are doing everything we can to continue our traditions and our cultures. Our language is coming back in our young ones.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Forbes, if I may, what will be the impact on you and your community if the bill is not passed?

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

If the bill does not pass, we will drastically lose our membership. We are going through studies now. We're on our third study on when the actual extinction of Scugog members would be, and it's within this century. The Anishinabek Nation data shows that anywhere from 40% to 50% of the entire Anishinabek Nation is affected by the second generation cut-off. Many of those who are still eligible to pass on their status are past child-bearing ages. Not only are we getting older, but we can't have any more young ones.

Once that happens, it's permanent. There's no mechanism to restore their recognition under the current framework. We need to pass this now. Consultation on this has been going on since 1985. There is a 12-month consideration, if you pass this, to defer it, to allow us to get our ducks in a row. There's time to do this, and the time is now. Don't let another generation of children go unanswered and unwanted.

As in the chief's apple scenario, we're all Anishinabe in here, and because of colonialism and the way the system is set up—the way the Indian Act is set up—it doesn't allow everyone to get that out. We're not allowed to live on our first nations because of capacity issues. I personally can build a house on my first nation, but I can't pass it down to anyone, so it will go back.... My kids are not allowed to have a house at our first nation.

Meegwetch.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Meegwetch, Deputy Chief Forbes.

Chief Peters, I'll address you during my next speaking turn.

I have a few seconds left to go back to the fact that one nation decides for another and one nation commits genocide—I think we can call it that—by wiping out nations.

So thank you very much and talk to you later.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Thank you.

MP Schmale is next for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you again to our witnesses for this very important discussion.

Deputy Chief Forbes, we are somewhat geographical neighbours. It's nice to see you. I am over in Kawartha Lakes, and you are doing a great job over on Scugog Island.

You had said, a few moments ago, that this has been talked about for many decades now and consulted upon. It seems that there is no end to this. What have been the obstacles? What is the reason—that you know of—that this was never addressed since 1984, I believe you said?

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

It was 1985—

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

Yes, 1985....

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

—when the change to the Indian Act came into effect.

There have been many obstacles over the years, which have been brought forward by first nations, as well as by the federal government. I do not agree with the federal government when it comes down to dollars and cents.

Allow us to have our ATR process. Allow us to have our land to build economic certainty for our nations. Allow us to have our membership grow, because we are Anishinabe. We are the first peoples of these lands.

We have land sitting at Scugog, right now, that we cannot do anything on, and invasive species are taking over. How is that okay? We buy back land at fair market value. If you buy it, then it changes to your name tomorrow. We have to wait 20 years.

We know how to look after our lands environmentally. We know how to do the assessments. We know how to revitalize our lands. Allow it back so we can do that work and make our communities prosper.

Meegwetch.

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

In our area, where we both live, there are Rama, Hiawatha and Curve Lake first nations, as well as many more. Do you know if they are feeling the same pinch—that their nations could be extinct within the century? I believe that's what you said.

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

I'm not going to speak for our sister nations on that. We are unique, as we are a little smaller. Ironically, we have to go off Scugog. We're pretty much tied.... We're all family out there.

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

That's why I asked.

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

Yes.

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

I didn't know if you've been talking to them about this as well.

What I'm trying to say is that this needs to be fixed, and it hasn't been fixed for decades. Time is long past to take action.

We've done the consultation. I think we've talked about this for as long as possible. We have direction. We have a piece of legislation in front of us that we need to get done, get supported, get through and enacted into law to fix some of these errors. That's what I was building on.

To my knowledge, there has not been a nation, group or whatever that has been against this piece of legislation.

[Deputy Chief Jeff Forbes]

That's correct. The Anishinabek Nation has submitted their letters, sharing who and what nations have signed on, approved and supported ending the second generation cut-off rule. I strongly advise that we look at those and consider if all of the 39 nations have signed on with the Anishinabek Nation, which would include all those sister nations you just spoke about.

Meegwetch.

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

If this were to be enacted...you ramped up and said that there would be a bit of growth, so you would have that piece that gives more power back to the community, which is a good thing. It allows you to reinvigorate your culture. It gives you that ability to pass that on.

I'm still taken by the fact that you're the deputy chief of your nation, yet your children can't experience the same upbringing as you did.

If you were in question period right now and had the opportunity to ask any question you wanted of the government, what would you ask?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Unfortunately, that's all the time we have.