SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Cassidy Caron

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 23, 2023
  • 03:38:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Thank you for this opportunity to address Bill C-53, which is a critical piece of legislation for the Métis. I am a very proud Métis woman from Batoche and St. Louis, Saskatchewan. My ancestors fought in the 1885 resistance with a goal to preserve, protect and defend the Métis way of life. They were fighting for many of the same ideals the Métis nation continues to fight for today. I am the president of the Métis National Council. The MNC comprises and receives its mandate from the democratically elected leadership of the governments of the provinces of Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. For generations, the Métis nation has been organizing, advocating, negotiating and litigating to advance Métis rights. For the past 40 years, the Métis National Council has been at the forefront of this struggle, supporting Métis governments' fight for respect and rights recognition and working together to advance the Métis nation's cultural, social, economic and political interests. Bill C-53 is the next step forward. It will help what RCAP called the “inexcusable governmental handling of Métis...rights over the years”. We must all be clear: The promise of Métis self-government legislation is not new. To believe that it is new is yet another example of Canada's systemic amnesia. Time and time again, your governments, your processes, your special representatives, your royal commissions and your courts have recommended the negotiation of agreements that will legislatively recognize Métis self-government. In 1982, your federation agreed to amend your Constitution to recognize and affirm the Métis nation's inherent rights in section 35, which includes the right to self-government. However, the failure of the late 1980s' constitutional conferences left section 35's promise to the Métis unfulfilled. In 1992, Canada came close to formally recognizing Métis self-government through the Charlottetown accord, which included the Métis nation accord, which would have committed the federal and provincial governments to negotiate the implementation of Métis self-government. Also in 1992, Joe Clark, as minister for federal constitutional affairs, introduced a historic resolution in Parliament supporting the constitutional rights of the Métis. It passed unanimously. Through it, the House of Commons supported by its actions the true attainment, both in principle and practice, of the constitutional rights of the Métis people. In 1996, your Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples recommended that the governments of Canada and of relevant provinces and territories be prepared to negotiate immediately with the appropriate Métis representative on the manner in which Métis self-government will be recognized. When successive Canadian governments failed to uphold their promises and their commitments, Métis turned their focus to the courts to prove that section 35 was not an empty promise to Métis. In 2003—20 years ago—the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously confirmed in Powley that Métis are full-fledged rights bearers and that Métis rights are not derivative from first nation rights or less than Inuit or first nation rights. In Powley, Canada's highest court urged your governments to finally negotiate with the Métis and support section 35's constitutional guarantee to the Métis for the recognition and affirmation of our distinct rights. In 2016, in Daniels v. Canada, your Supreme Court unanimously confirmed that Canada has a constitutional responsibility to advance relationships with Métis in the same way it does for first nations and Inuit. There are even more examples where your processes have repeatedly led to the same recommendations calling for the full recognition of Métis rights. In 2016, Canada's ministerial special representative, Tom Isaac, released his report, which included many of these same recommendations. He reminded Canada of its duty to reconcile with Métis and adhere to the honour of the Crown, which demands full implementation of its obligations to all aboriginal peoples under section 35. Even just this past June 2023, Canada committed in the UNDRIP action plan that, “Consistent with the commitment to co-develop approaches for the implementation of the right to self-determination, Canada will introduce federal legislation to implement the co-developed Métis Self-Government Recognition and Implementation Agreements”. Again, none of these conversations are new. Métis rights are not new. Métis self-government is not new. What is new is that Canada is finally taking action on what it has long promised. For 40 years, the Métis National Council has been the national voice for our Métis governments to advance the interests and priorities of the section 35 rights-holding Métis citizens that they represent. These are the section 35 rights holders that Canada owes a duty to. Bill C-53 is a step to ensuring Canada's now 40-year-old promise of section 35 to the Métis is finally fulfilled. Simply put, it's time.
875 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:45:56 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Thank you for the question. First and foremost, what is really important to focus on—and we've had these conversations—is what is in this legislation and what is not in this legislation. That's what we're here to study. The bill does not touch on the negotiation of lands. It does talk about future negotiations of treaties, but this bill fundamentally does two things. It recognizes the status quo that's existed for the last 100-plus years that these are Métis governments and they represent Métis collectivities. When treaties are negotiated, they also don't necessarily need to be land treaties. Member Battiste has spoken about this in previous hearings. Treaties can also refer to peace and friendship treaties. They don't always necessarily lead to land. When the treaties are negotiated, if they are to impact first nations' rights, then there will be a duty to consult triggered and they will be consulted. At this point in time, this piece of legislation does not speak to that. It's simply about the internal governance of these three Métis governments.
192 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:47:13 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I can't predict the future there.
7 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:48:09 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
However, if the treaty negotiations result in something that would impact first nations' rights, that would trigger the duty to consult with that first nation prior to the conclusion of the treaty.
32 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:49:06 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Because this piece of legislation is not the Métis National Council's legislation—it is the legislation that was codeveloped with these Métis governments—any amendments would need to be reviewed and approved by those three Métis governments. The Métis National Council would then support the position put forward by those three Métis governments. When we're talking about the order in council process for these pieces, there's a precedent that's already been set. Consistently throughout history, Canada has created double standards for the Métis, and that's exactly what this would be doing. Again, I think it's important to know that there's a precedent and there's a process. If rights will be impacted, that will trigger a duty to consult. Those processes will be followed, and if there are amendments that are going to be made to this legislation, they have to go back in consultation and codevelopment with the partners who codeveloped this piece of legislation.
177 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:50:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I can't do it justice in one sentence, other than pointing to the fact that our Métis governments have objectively verifiable Métis registries. I'm happy to build on that if a future question arises.
40 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:52:10 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Thank you for the question. There have been many. What I can say is that we know that the citizenship registries of each of our Métis governments, like I have said, are objectively verifiable. They have been audited by third parties. Each of our Métis governments applies that 2002 definition of a Métis citizen that was passed by the Métis National Council. If I may, I'll read something that Métis lawyer Jean Teillet wrote recently for a report for the University of Saskatchewan, which emphasizes the strength of our Métis government registries. She wrote: The Métis Nation has five regional/provincial members—Métis Nation-BC; Métis Nation of Alberta; Métis Nation-Saskatchewan, the Manitoba Metis Federation, and Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO). Each of these provincial organizations have a reliable registry that the University of Saskatchewan can utilize. Because these registries require objective evidence for citizenship to be granted, cards that are up to date and issued by them can be accepted with no further quest for information. That was written by Métis lawyer Jean Teillet for the University of Saskatchewan. That we're all working to fight identity fraud in these institutions, individuals taking opportunities from Métis people, again, speaks volumes to the strength of our Métis registries.
239 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:53:50 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
There is an internal process that the Métis National Council has been mandated to implement. That is through a 2021 resolution from our general assembly. Again, I just want to make it clear that it has nothing to do with what's in this piece of legislation—that's really important. Who belongs to the Métis nation is for the Métis nation to decide. Therefore, we have implemented our own process that has been directed through our own democratic institutions, and we will be following that direction from our general assembly and from our democratic institutions, because Métis people are self-determining. That's what I'll say about that.
119 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:55:15 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Citizenship is for section 35 Métis rights holders. Yes, communities that meet the definition or criteria of a historical Métis community have section 35.... That's correct.
31 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:55:49 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
“Métis” does not mean “mixed”.
11 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:56:02 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Sure. I'll even talk more about the strength of our Métis registries, in that you have to be distinct from.... Many of our Métis registries use a system that audits our registries against INAC's registry for status first nations in order to make sure there is no overlap and that it is separate and beyond. When we say they are objectively verifiable or have been audited.... There are a number of processes that can show you the strength of our Métis registry. Once again, it's so important for us to say here that, as an indigenous nation, we have the right to determine who our citizens are. We have the right to determine who belongs. That is a right the Métis nation holds.
134 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:57:32 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I'm going to ask for clarification on the question. Are you saying first nations are trying to move away from reconciliation? I'm sorry. I'm just seeking clarification.
30 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:57:52 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
That's a very interesting question. I know reconciliation means many different things to many different people. It means different things to different communities. It means different things to each one of our citizens. There are different processes that people consider to be part of reconciliation. It has, of course, been a buzzword of recent governments. It presents the opportunity to build a relationship and move forward in a good way. Bill C-53 can be interpreted as reconciliation in action, since we are moving towards the recognition and implementation of Métis rights. That's something our communities, people, leaders and citizens have been working towards for generations. Some would say it fits within the box of reconciliation. Others would say it is just the right thing to do. Whether or not to label it “reconciliation” is up to the individual. For first nations to decide they want to move away from using the term “reconciliation”.... It's up to them to do that as well. I wouldn't force anybody to use a word they are uncomfortable using.
185 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 03:59:25 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Absolutely. Métis people have the right to choose. Again, this bill is only about the three Métis governments that are named in it, and Métis citizens have the right to choose who represents them. I think it is something that is very important to say. Métis people really do value democracy. We know that Métis people have the right to choose that. In our instance, for the four Métis governments that comprise the Métis National Council, they total about 160,000 registered Métis citizens who chose those governments to represent them. We know, of course, there is opposition in certain provinces, say perhaps in Alberta, but it's important to recognize that 65,000 registered Métis citizens chose the Métis Nation of Alberta to represent them as their government. We stand firm that everybody has the right to choose, and this is the pathway that our Métis governments are taking to implement this. We hope to see this piece of legislation fulfill that promise that has been promised to us for the past 40 years and talked about for generations before.
203 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 04:01:00 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I would love to. As I said in my introduction, my family comes from St. Louis and Batoche, Saskatchewan. I live in Ontario right now. I cannot be represented by the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan. Once the self-government agreements are fully implemented, I would then have the right to choose the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan to represent me as my government because those are my homelands. My family comes from a really historic part of the Métis nation homeland. My family contributed to so much history. The chair mentioned the Batoche National Historic Site. The one homestead that still stands on those protected grounds is the homestead of my great-great-grandfather. Those lands are so sacred to the Métis because those are the lands where our ancestors fought for, as I said in my introduction, what we are still fighting for today: to preserve the Métis way of life, to govern our people in the way that we know they want to be governed, to take care of our people in the way that we can take care of them and to take care of our children in the ways that we know how to take care of our children. This piece of legislation is moving us forward in a way that we have not yet been able to, and it would be making history. It would be setting things right, and it would be truly meaningful to me as a Métis woman and, I know, to my family and my ancestors as well.
266 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 04:04:17 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I'm sure I have. I just don't know them by heart, but I have it right here with me.
21 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 04:05:05 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I absolutely do, because what's really important about article 19 is that “States shall consult and cooperate in good faith” on “measures that will affect them”. This piece of legislation only affects Métis governments that are named within this piece of legislation. Since Bill C-53 does not impact or affect other indigenous peoples, there was no trigger that required Canada to consult with anybody else on it. It's really important to know that it only affects those three Métis governments and the collectivities that those three Métis governments are comprised of, and that's exactly what article 19 does. I do think that this bill has met article 19 of UNDRIP.
124 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 04:06:05 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I would say, first and foremost, that I hope that those individuals saying those things have read the legislation and have read the self-government agreements that were signed by our Métis governments and Canada, because not only within the legislation does it say that it affects only those three Métis governments, but within the self-government agreements as well there are clauses that say that these agreements will have no affect on anybody except these Métis governments. For example, even within the Métis Nation of Alberta self-government agreement, there is a clause that says that the title has no affect on Alberta Métis settlements. There are clauses within these agreements already that state that these will have no effect on them, so essentially what I say is that there has been, unfortunately, a lot of misinformation that has been shared throughout this committee process. Qujannamiik for always asking the hard questions about showing in the legislation where it will have an effect on people who are not in this legislation, because that's what's really important here. This legislation only impacts those three Métis governments, and there are clauses that say it will not affect anybody else.
212 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 04:08:15 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Citizens have the right to choose who represents them. Once again, if I were a Métis person living in Alberta and I didn't chose the Métis Nation of Alberta to represent me, then I wouldn't register for citizenship within that. The self-government agreements, this piece of legislation, only affect the Métis governments and the collectivities, those who choose to be a part of those collectivities. The individuals, the communities, that choose to be outside are not affected. Qujannamiik.
87 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 04:09:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Absolutely. I come back to the democratic right to choose. It's the democratic right to choose who represents you, to vote for who represents you and to be a part of a collectivity that represents you. It's always the right to choose. That is our democratic right. Again, Métis people value democracy. As the president of the Métis National Council, I believe what's really important here is to recognize that the Métis National Council is not a Métis government. We are comprised of Métis governments. Those Métis governments have been comprised of citizens and leaders who have been organizing for generations, who have been doing this work for generations, for so long. They have been acting as governments for our people up until this point. Those governments were the ones who came together in 1983, 40 years ago, to say that we need a national voice at the national level and at the international level. They created the Métis National Council. I get my direct mandate from them. It's really important for me to explain that, once again, the Métis National Council is not a Métis government. We are comprised of Métis governments, and those Métis governments are the ones who represent the section 35 rights of Métis citizens. Again, we always have the right to choose.
245 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border