Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 26 - Evidence - November 6, 2012
OTTAWA, Tuesday, November 6, 2012
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 9:40 a.m. for the election of the chair; and to examine and report on the legal and political recognition of Metis identity in Canada.
[English]
Marcy Zlotnick, Clerk of the Committee: As honourable senators know, our long-standing chair and dear friend Senator St. Germain has retired. In fact, I believe today is his seventy-fifth birthday. On behalf of the committee, I would like to wish him a very happy birthday and a long and happy retirement.
Given the vacancy in the chair now due to the retirement, it is my duty as clerk of the committee to preside over the election of a new chair.
[Translation]
I am ready to receive a motion to that effect.
[English]
Senator Raine: I move that Senator Vernon White become the new chair.
Ms. Zlotnick: Are there any other nominations?
Given there are no other nominations, I will put the question: It is moved by the Honourable Senator Raine that the Honourable Senator White do take the chair of this committee.
[Translation]
Do you agree, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
[English]
I declare the motion carried and I invite Senator White to take the chair.
Senator Vernon White (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: If I may, I would like to wish Senator St. Germain a happy seventy-fifth birthday as well.
Senator Sibbeston: It is all in vain if he does not know. We need to send him a message; send him a little something.
The Chair: Yes.
Senator Dyck: I would like to make a comment before we proceed. If Senator Greene Raine had not spoken so quickly, I would have nominated you on your abilities, and I certainly welcome you as chair of the committee.
The Chair: I want to mention that of all the committees we have in the Senate, I think this committee has the opportunity to make the greatest difference in the lives of the people that each and every one of us here have in our hearts, the Aboriginal peoples of Canada. I do believe that in my short time — eight months — here in the Senate, I have seen tremendous work, camaraderie and consensus-building among those on both sides, and I do not see us as being partisan or bipartisan; it is more of a consensus opportunity to make a difference.
Therefore, I want to thank you very much for your support, in particular, Senator Dyck. I would also like to say how pleased I am to be working on this committee. It was the only committee I asked to be on. For a few months, I had to pretend and keep coming to steal someone's seat, so I am pleased to be a permanent member and now chair of this committee.
I would like to welcome all honourable senators and members of the public who are watching this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples on CPAC or the web. I am Vernon White, the newly-elected chair of the committee. The mandate of this committee is to examine legislation and matters relating to the Aboriginal peoples of Canada, generally.
Today we will continue to explore Metis issues, particularly those relating to the evolving legal and political recognition of the collective identity and rights of the Metis in Canada.
As part of our study on Metis identity, we recently travelled to Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia and the Northwest Territories where we held a series of public hearings and fact-finding meetings on the subject. The complexity of the issue became even more apparent during travel. We are impressed with the amount of engagement in the Metis community and appreciate the efforts of all the witnesses who gave of their time to help us grapple with the complicated question of identity.
Before hearing from our witnesses, I would like to take this opportunity to introduce the members of the committee who are present this morning. We have Senator Nick Sibbeston, from the Northwest Territories; Senator Lillian Dyck, the deputy chair, from Saskatchewan; Senator Charlie Watt, from Quebec, was here a few moments ago; Senator Jacques Demers, from Quebec; Senator Patrick Brazeau, from Quebec; Senator Dennis Patterson, from Nunavut; Senator Nancy Greene Raine, from British Columbia; and Senator Salma Ataullahjan, from Ontario.
Please help me welcome from the Sou'West Nova Metis Council, Ms. Daphne Williamson, a lawyer. Also at the table, representing Kespu'kwitk Metis Council of Yarmouth and District is Ronald Surette, Director of Economic Development, and Ms. Sheila Surette, elder.
Witnesses, we look forward to your presentations, which will be followed by questions from the senators. Please proceed.
Daphne Williamson, Lawyer, Sou'West Nova Metis Council (Nova Scotia Wampanoag of Cape Sable Island): Mr. Chair and committee members, thank you for extending me the opportunity to appear on behalf of the Sou'West Nova Metis Council to put forward our views on the issues of legal and political recognition of the Metis in Canada. We appreciate that the Senate is engaging with various Metis communities across the country and the territories to give careful consideration to these issues.
My name is Daphne Williamson. I am an elder and community member, and have been representing the community in various capacities as a spokesperson, researcher, consultant and legal counsel for over 10 years.
We have been working diligently, as resources allow, to document and research our history and heritage so that we can meaningfully engage with both provincial and federal governments in our efforts to gain recognition for our community as an Aboriginal community within the meaning of section 35 of the Constitution Act and therefore to obtain Aboriginal rights and recognition for our people.
The issue of recognition as an Aboriginal people is extremely important for us. In fact, it is our primary goal and takes precedence over any other rights or entitlements that may come with that recognition. Simply put, it is one thing to be denied entitlement to benefits that may be bestowed upon other Aboriginal people; it is entirely another to be denied your heritage and the right to proclaim your identity.
We are and always have been fully aware of who we are and where we come from. It is where we come from and how our community has developed that pose the biggest challenges for us in our struggle for recognition, but I will speak more to that later.
We have preserved and protected our blood lines as well as our tradition, customs, practices and beliefs over generations, even though we have been separated geographically from the land of our ancestors and others who have tried to separate us from our identity.
We have embraced the term "Metis" even though we otherwise know ourselves as Indian because that is the only option available to us under the Canadian Constitution in order to claim our heritage, because Canada has never adopted article 3 of the Jay Treaty of 1794 into law.
Our history is unique from those of other Aboriginal people in Canada as most of our Aboriginal ancestry comes from the Wampanoag Nation of Massachusetts, which was not only a sub-tribe of the Algonquin people but a political confederacy that included smaller tribes such as the Nauset, Piqua and Narragansett that our people can also be traced to.
Some of our notable ancestors include Grand Chief Massasoit Ousamequin, the Wampanoag grand chief who first greeted the Pilgrims and helped them survive those first winters by feeding them and teaching them how to harvest. This is the origin of the story of the first Thanksgiving. We also trace our lineage to Chief Iyannough, after whom Hyannis, Cape Cod and many other locations in the surrounding area have been named.
We have documentation to prove our ancestral links to Iyannough and manuscripts prepared by tribal elders and genealogists that document all our other tribal and ancestral connections. We do know who we are and how we got here.
When the eastern seaboard was still one large British colony and when the English governor in Nova Scotia was trying to quash French economic power in the mid-1700s, our ancestors were recruited to assist them because of our proficiency as fishers and whalers. In exchange, those ancestors were given grants of land on or around Cape Sable Island, which was an area we already knew because our people had been visiting those shores on fishing expeditions for many generations before.
Therefore, the first families to settle our community were our direct ancestors of the Massachusetts Wampanoag Nation, including Sarah Bearce and many others who were direct descendants of Chief Iyannough. Because of the persecution of our people in Massachusetts and other Aboriginals throughout the English colonies witnessed by our ancestors, they chose to keep their Aboriginal identity as a secret and were able to do so because of a lighter pigment resulting from early marriages with some of the first English settlers in Massachusetts.
However, since those early relations, and also as a result of ongoing persecution, subsequent marriages were between our mixed-blood ancestors, both prior to immigration to Nova Scotia and thereafter. In fact, historically it has been rare for anyone from Cape Sable Island to marry on outsider, partly to preserve our bloodlines, as we come from the nobility of our tribe, and partly because we have been wary of detection and persecution by outsiders because of what other Aboriginal communities have faced. Sometimes we did marry people from the Mi'kmaq or people who just happened to land on the island because of a shipwreck.
In the early years, after the English arrived, relations were good and intermarriage was fairly common, so our people lived wherever they wanted, whether it was among the English or in traditional communities. There were no distinctions and many of our people, including Grand Chief Massasoit Ousamequin, were among the first to convert to Christianity and became known as the praying Indians and formed praying Indian townships in Massachusetts.
Many taught in English schools and led services in English churches, at least until mass immigration by the English and the struggle for control of our lands forced our people to choose between loyalty to the English and loyalty to our own tribes. Many were killed and others fled, including our direct ancestors who concealed their identities and took the offer of free land in Nova Scotia to ensure the survival of their families. As a result, our identity, culture, practices, customs, traditions and beliefs have been a closely guarded secret within our community for many generations and those who lived on the island maintained a distance from mainstream society.
Among us they have been practised openly, and we have maintained traditional ways with a few modern modifications due to the incorporation of firearms and the unavoidable influence of European ways over time.
Unlike many others, we are neither of French Aboriginal ancestry nor do we originate from this country, but we are definitely and unquestionably Aboriginal.
However and even though we are recognized by the Wampanoag Nation of Massachusetts and by the Algonquin Confederacy, we are not recognized in Canada primarily because of article 3 of the Jay Treaty.
To us, this makes no sense for several reasons. First because this was a treaty between colonial states that neither involved negotiation with Aboriginal people nor limited our rights in any way, either explicitly or implicitly.
Second because it was made after Canada and the United States became separate countries. Third because our community on Cape Sable Island was established more than 30 years before the Jay Treaty was signed. Fourth because the Sioux, who were brought to Canada after the battle of Wounded Knee well after the creation of the international border and the signing of the Jay Treaty, are a recognized Aboriginal people in Canada even though they also originated from the U.S.
Finally because many who are considered status or non-status under the Indian Act have become eligible only through marriage, often without any Aboriginal ancestry whatsoever.
We do not understand how others who also come from elsewhere, and especially those who have no Indian blood, can be considered Aboriginal people when we are not. We also do not understand how a treaty that we were not involved in and which was entered into between European nations after our ancestors arrived in Canada can preclude our recognition. We were already here at that point.
Furthermore, we think that the definition of Metis and the requirements of the legal test are too narrow as they do not account for the unique history and culture of each community or how those communities have developed with consideration to the historical and political context, nor do they account for the traditional Aboriginal perspectives of community membership and land ownership. There is more on this in the written submission that I have provided.
Furthermore, we believe that the Government of Canada, which has a fiduciary obligation to all Aboriginal people, has a commensurate obligation to support these communities in substantiating their claims of Metis or other Aboriginal identity by providing support for research, community and cultural development and economic development opportunities, including funding, where needed, whether or not the group in question is formally recognized, so long as there is some credible evidence to the claim of Aboriginality.
Finally, we feel that government should honour the traditional harvesting rights and methods of all Aboriginal people as well as our ability to engage in our cultural practices. There is more on that in my written submission as well.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to my presentation. I will be glad to answer any questions you may have.
The Chair: We will listen to all three witnesses first and present questions after.
Ronald Surette, Director of Economic Development, Kespu'kwitk Metis Council of Yarmouth and District: My wife will read the statement on our behalf. She is an elder.
Sheila Surette, Elder, Kespu'kwitk Metis Council of Yarmouth and District: On behalf of the Kespu'kwitk Metis Council of Yarmouth and District and the executive, we wish to thank the committee for granting us the opportunity to speak.
The KMC was founded and incorporated under the Society Act, both provincially and federally, on November 24, 1999. Our constitution and bylaws incorporate the following: our purpose, our values, our vision and our people.
Should more information be desired, proceed to our website at swnmetis.webs.com, or Google "Kespu'kwitk Metis Council." We also have an office at 342 Main Street in Yarmouth, Nova Scotia.
We are Aboriginal Metis people as per the meaning of section 35 of the Constitution Act of Canada, 1982. At present, our membership is approximately 2,500 people. The executive board is totally comprised of volunteers. The sole exception is that one day per week we have a paid employee, paid by KMC, to update our database and fulfill office duties.
Until June 2009, we were obtaining funds from Service Canada for the Job Creation Partnerships program, JCP. Effective July 2009, when the provincial government assumed responsibility for the program, we have been unable to obtain funding. Presently, we have a youth skill link program employing an individual in order to gain training, confidence and personal development, which is totally funded by Service Canada. The programs our organization has received have been obtained not due to us being Metis/Aboriginal, but rather due to the fact that we are a non-profit organization.
The programs that we have obtained have all been written or prepared by me and another member of the executive. We are both retired from federal government services. Our organization has, on a number of occasions, applied for funding from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. To date, none have borne fruit. It has been a constant refusal.
As eastern Metis, our organization has not been recognized, either provincially or federally, as it pertains to rights. No tax exemptions, no hunting and fishing rights, no educational grants, bursaries or assistance for small businesses.
The date of the effective European control, as depicted in the ruling in our recent court case, varies among historians.
The date given in the ruling was 1670. The judge ruled that there was no Metis community in our area prior to European control in 1670. There is an appeal presently under way in this case. Our historians were Dr. Bill Wicken, Department of History, York University; and Dr. Janet Chute, Dalhousie University, Halifax. The genealogist was Elizabeth La Douceur, PLCGS.
This trial was enacted due to one of our members charged for fishing with one illegal net under the federal Fisheries Act. This court case has been ongoing since 2004. Since the Powley decision in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, the Sault area has hunting rights.
Incomprehensible is the statement that there are no Metis east of Ontario. Funds have been expended in an attempt at recognition; however, to date, no resolve in this matter has been attained in our area. We have been unable to obtain funding for various programs for youth development, business incentives and assisting seniors in need. This is despite being advised by Indian Affairs in Ottawa to obtain funding from Aboriginal organizations or First Nations.
Thank you for the opportunity to partake in this Senate hearing.
The Chair: Do you have further comments, Mr. Surette?
Mr. Surette: No.
The Chair: We will begin questions.
Senator Dyck: Thank you for your presentations this morning.
My first question is for both groups. When we were on our trip, we heard many people talking about how Metis identity had something to do with language, culture and the feeling one has that within your spirit or your soul you were Metis people. Would you consider that within your particular settings there is a specific language or culture that would set you up as distinct from other Aboriginal people in your community who may not identify as Metis?
Mr. Surette: Yes, there is. We are basically all French people. Most of us have French background. Those who cannot speak French have an English background. Most of them are from French communities in our area.
Ms. Williamson: We have spent a lot of time and money over the last four years or so engaging experts in the area of archaeology, anthropology, linguistics, history and genealogy. To date, the research on the linguistics aspect identifies some specific linguistic pidgins. All of our people speak English. The Wampanoag language has been preserved, almost in its entirety, in the home community in Massachusetts. There are distinct similarities in the way that Cape Sable Islanders speak — not me so much because I did not grow up on the island. There is a distinct dialect and some distinct linguistic pidgins that link us to the Wampanoag community in Massachusetts. They are distinct from any other Aboriginal community in Canada.
In terms of culture and practices, most Aboriginal communities engage in similar, not identical, traditions and practices. There are clear and distinct similarities across cultures. The way that we engage in some of our traditions and practices is distinct, and we have some practices or traditions that are distinct from other groups. For example, in my written submission I refer to Easter huts, which have carried forward in our community for over 250 years. They originate from the whaling tradition in Massachusetts. There is more substantive information in the written brief, but yes.
Senator Dyck: Ms. Williamson, in your community, how many members do you have?
Ms. Williamson: There is a stable population of approximately 800 people who live on the island, but we have members all over Nova Scotia and across the country. Obviously, I am here. We have members who live in Alberta and B.C. who are descendants of people from the island and generally the younger generation.
Senator Dyck: Did you have something to add, Mr. Surette?
Mr. Surette: Yes. I want to add that most of our relatives are French. That originated with the settlers who first landed in the 1400s. That was where our heritage began and the intermarriage back when Jack Cartier and Christopher Columbus and other explorers landed on the eastern shores of North America. The settlers could not survive our strong winter and so they had to live with the Mi'kmaq; and there was intermarriage. That was when the Metis started way back.
Senator Ataullahjan: Part of my question was asked by Senator Dyck on community membership.
Regarding the culture and heritage, you have spoken about preserving the culture and heritage. I would like to know whether there are language schools and whether your initiatives have succeeded and your heritage and customs have been passed on to the younger generation.
Ms. Williamson: Many of our customs and traditions have been passed on over years; for example, the Easter huts. The children are taught to build them from a very young age. They are called "Easter huts" because they are normally built just prior to the Easter weekend. The hut resembles the temporary hunting weetu, the traditional home in the Massachusetts community. Everything has been carried on through generations and the ways have been passed down of making weirs, catching lobster, catching fish at high tide, and jigging the worms. We have significant archaeological features on the island that have been dated to 850 years ago, depending on the location. They are exactly the same as those found in the traditional Wampanoag community in the United States. The sacredness of those sites and the ceremonies that take place in those locations have been passed down through the generations. It is a way of life.
I do not come from the island; but my mother is from the island. It is kind of interesting because in the course of doing this work for them, for example, I asked many times: Tell me about some of the things that you do. They cannot tell me. It took my mother to stand between me and the people, who have lived on the island their entire lives, and point out the differences because things are so inherent for them that they do not even understand that not everyone does that. It is just who we are. It is just a way that people have lived for generations and generations. When I sit with the elders and the commissioners in the Massachusetts community, it is astonishing how well-preserved those ways of life and traditions are.
Senator Dyck: You were describing the culture that has been maintained. Would you say that the culture is more similar to your ancestors in Massachusetts or has it formed into something that is more specific and could be called "Metis" in Cape Sable Island?
Ms. Williamson: Obviously there has been a separation geographically and historically for 250 years. The culture has maintained the essence of the Wampanoag culture, but it has obviously adapted over the last 250 years to conditions on the island and to social and political conditions in Canada.
Again, the test of separate and distinct, in my opinion, from a legal perspective, is extremely narrow. If you look at the way that our community actually came to be, there were no separate and distinct communities. There were very good relations between our people and the English. Until mass immigration occurred and our people were forced into certain areas, we lived wherever we wanted. We taught in schools. We preached in churches. We educated each other. That whole notion of it having to be something completely separate and distinct, in my view, with all due respect, is completely arbitrary and does not give due consideration to each specific community and how it has evolved.
Senator Raine: Ms. Williamson, do you think that the Wampanoag are Metis or are they a First Nation?
Ms. Williamson: Therein lies the problem. We have adopted the term "Metis" because we self-identify as Aboriginal people. We have no other option under the Constitution Act. Since we hold onto our heritage and culture and identity, we have adopted the term "Metis" to describe who we are. If we were still in Massachusetts, senator, we would be part of the Wampanoag Nation from Mashpee, which is one of the federally recognized Wampanoag reserves, but in Canada we have no choice even though we were here 30 years before there was a border.
Senator Raine: Does the Wampanoag Nation in Massachusetts recognize you as citizens of their nation?
Ms. Williamson: Yes.
Senator Raine: Many First Nations straddle the border. If you compare the situations between all of those nations and yourself and the home community in Massachusetts, is that a better fit for you as a people?
Ms. Williamson: I am not sure that I understand the question. Could you please repeat it? Maybe I missed something.
Senator Raine: I am thinking of the other First Nations that do have members on both sides of the border. We recognize them in Canada as First Nations. Have you ever figured out why the Wampanoag are not recognized as a First Nation in Canada the way other border-straddling First Nations are?
Ms. Williamson: Part of the answer to that question is because of the fact that we kept our identity a very closely guarded secret for so long that no one even knew we were there.
The second part of the answer is that we do not live on a reservation and we are not regulated and subject to being identified or enumerated under the Indian Act. Earlier, I gave the example of the Sioux. After the battle of Wounded Knee, a bunch of those people were brought up to Canada and put on a reservation, I believe in Saskatchewan. They are considered First Nations people. Our land was given to us freehold. We are not living on a reservation, so we are not looked at the same way.
Part of the problem is the fact that the Jay treaty, Article III in particular, has never been recognized in Canada.
Senator Patterson: Can you expand on that a bit, please?
Ms. Williamson: Can I expand on Article III of the Jay treaty? First, there was no negotiation or consultation with the Aboriginal communities with the Jay treaty, so I do not understand why it is binding on us.
Let me see if I can paraphrase Article III of the Jay treaty accurately. It essentially says that the mobility and trade that was carried on by Aboriginal people prior to the creation of the Jay Treaty would go on. There was no implicit or explicit restriction on our rights.
What I am saying is that if I were Iroquois and went into the U.S., or if I were Mi'kmaq and I went into the U.S. to work or to stay, to do whatever I wanted to do, the United States government would respect my rights and acknowledge my rights as a Canadian Aboriginal person. It does not work the same way when American Indians come into Canada.
Senator Demers: This was a good presentation. I like the answers. You know what you are talking about, and I like that.
Is your organization engaged in activities to protect or promote Metis culture and heritage? If so, please provide the activities.
Ms. Williamson: Absolutely. Last year we did not, because of a lack of funding, but every year there has been a gathering. Traditionally, it was a very private gathering that would take place in very private locations on the island. Every year there has been a gathering, usually in late summer. We now call it a powwow. It usually takes place the first weekend of August. At the powwow, we pass on our culture to people who may come from outside the community so they can learn about who we are. We make drums and build huts. We have all kinds of different things going on. We eat traditional foods. There is a hunt that goes on to gather the food for the powwow and for the ceremonies.
Within the last couple of years, the community has created a cultural education centre. It is not funded for the same reasons that Ms. Surette spoke to in her presentation. It is completely reliant on donations and volunteerism from the community, but we do have a cultural centre that is there to essentially speak to our culture and our traditions and who we are.
Senator Demers: When you were talking, something hit me. You are separated from your own identity. I know you are saying that, but how does that happen? Everyone has an identity, or everyone should have an identity.
Ms. Williamson: We do not feel that we are separated from our identity psychologically or emotionally. We know who we are, and we know what that means. What we are saying, or what I meant by that, is that the lack of recognition and, to be perfectly frank, outright ridicule and criticism that we have received from other Aboriginal communities in Nova Scotia and from government make us feel as though they are attempting to separate us from our identity.
Senator Raine: Ms. Williamson, what I am hearing is that you are very proud of your ancestral roots as Aboriginal Wampanoag people, and you seek recognition. Do you think there is a treaty obligation between the governments of Nova Scotia and/or Canada to provide you with entitlements as a First Nation, the way there are treaty obligations in other parts of Canada?
Ms. Williamson: Our people were signatories to the early treaty, the same treaties that were signed with the Mi'kmaq at Boston and at Halifax. Many of our ancestors were signatories to those treaties when it was one big colony, so strictly speaking, yes.
There is another side to that, however. The thing that we struggle with most as a people is the fact that, on the one hand, it would be great to be recognized as status or non-status First Nations people. On the other hand, that puts us at risk of losing any recognition that we may gain as an Aboriginal people with one or two generations because of the blood quotient or the lineage requirements. We have not held onto who we are for this long in order to have it taken away by a piece of paper, with all due respect.
Senator Raine: In other words, Indian status is not what you are looking for.
Ms. Williamson: No.
Senator Raine: You just want recognition of your status as Wampanoag people, do you not?
Ms. Williamson: That is right. Quite frankly, senator — again, with all due respect — we think those categories are arbitrary in any event. We think that Aboriginal people are Aboriginal people. It has nothing to do with generations, parentage, blood quotients or anything else. You are either Aboriginal or not.
Senator Raine: I have one other curiosity. When your ancestors arrived on Sable Island, coming from Massachusetts, and were given freehold land, did they keep that land and is the island still in the hands of the descendants of those people?
Ms. Williamson: Yes. I just want to make one distinction. There is Sable Island where the ponies are, which is down on the eastern shore of Nova Scotia, and there is Cape Sable Island, which is the southwest. I just wanted to make that distinction clear.
Regardless, yes, the land has been in the possession of the same families since the land grants were given. Again, though, we have archaeological evidence indicating that our people were there as much as 850 years ago, in temporary settlements during fishing expeditions.
Senator Raine: In a sense, you have a homeland.
Ms. Williamson: Yes.
Senator Raine: And you have a nation.
Ms. Williamson: Yes.
Senator Raine: And you are strong.
Ms. Williamson: Yes.
Senator Raine: My last big question is: Why would you want to get into being categorized as Metis?
Ms. Williamson: It is all we have got. As long as the categories exist and as long as the only identity we have is the identity that we can give ourselves, it is all we have got.
Senator Raine: And that is not enough?
Ms. Williamson: It is one thing to call yourself Metis or Aboriginal, but, as Ms. Surette said, if no one else recognizes you as such, then you are being separated from the essence of who you really are.
Senator Patterson: I found your presentation most interesting and compelling. We are studying the identity of Metis in this committee, as you know. I will ask a simple question. First, do you believe you fit in the Powley definition?
Ms. Williamson: I believe so.
Senator Patterson: Maybe you could explain why. Second, did you refer to a long-standing lawsuit over a fishing charge?
Ms. Williamson: No.
Senator Patterson: I am sorry. Ms. Surette referred to that.
Do you believe that lawsuit may form the basis for resolving this mysterious question of why Canada seems to give a different interpretation of Aboriginal people than the U.S.? Is there a possibility this question will be ruled on in connection with this case?
Ms. Williamson: The question about that specific lawsuit I think could be better addressed by Mr. and Ms. Surette. Again, our history and our culture are very distinct from any other Aboriginal group in Canada, including the group that Mr. Surette represents. Therefore, does it affect us? No, not at all. Does it affect the perception of whether there could be any Metis community east of Ontario? Absolutely.
To be perfectly honest, I was sitting down with Aboriginal Affairs in Nova Scotia five or six years ago, and I had that very same statement made: There are no Metis east of Ontario. I said, "That is right: There were spaceships that took those boats right into Ontario and plopped them down in the middle of the country." Where did the fur trade start? It makes no sense. We were not involved in that.
We had our own lawsuit. I litigated on behalf of the community about four years ago. The primary defendant went off on his own little road show and I do not represent him anymore. I represent the community. I do not think his particular case will have any bearing on the community because he does not have representation, he does not have the evidence that we have gathered over the last four years — he does not have anything. That does not affect us at all.
Senator Patterson: Can you give us some details of those two cases, please? It does not necessarily have to be now. Second, did you say yes, you fit with the Powley definition?
Ms. Williamson: We do, but some branches of the test are extremely narrow and do not properly account for the origins and development of each community. The "separate and distinct," for example, has nothing to do with half of the communities that have developed.
Senator Sibbeston: It appears you are a fledgling and struggling group of people trying to be identified and recognized. You say that both the provincial and federal governments do not recognize you as Aboriginal people. What is your hope of eventually being recognized? What avenues or what will change to have you eventually recognized?
I appreciate you coming before us as a body, as the Senate. This is the first time I had heard of your people, so I think it is a positive thing. I can see that the more that your issue is exposed, the greater the possibility that you can advance your cause, as it were.
What is the hope in our country of your being recognized as Aboriginal people by governments and other Aboriginal peoples?
Ms. Williamson: The only way I can answer that is to give you an analogy. If I were of mixed European heritage, for example — say Irish-Italian or German-Polish — I could be a member of either community; I could participate in the ceremonies of either community. Neither would question me, nor would governments. No one would ever say, "You are not who you say you are, and you do not have the right to be who you are or to embrace your heritage."
It is different as Aboriginal people, and it is not just us. Rather, every Aboriginal community that is not yet formally recognized and every Aboriginal person who will lose their status or has not been given status under the Indian Act, for example, has to justify their very existence. That onus is on a culture that has no written history and no written tradition of recordkeeping. Not only is it often an impossible burden to meet because of lack of funding, because we are not recognized, but quite frankly it is an insult to who we are. If we were anything else, we would never have to go through that.
Senator Sibbeston: I am wondering whether Mr. Surette or Ms. Surette would respond to that question.
Mr. Surette: Yes, I would like to respond. I agree with Ms. Williamson. The Metis in Nova Scotia are living like our forefathers, but nobody wants to identify us as a group. We have to prove in order to identify ourselves.
The Province of Nova Scotia wants us to have site-specific information to prove to them before they will say, yes, they are Metis, and the same for the federal government. For example, somebody has to break the law and we have to have a court case to prove that there are Metis in our area.
I will read a statement. The Metis existed in Nova Scotia and North America since the French landed on our shore late in the 1400s and early 1500s, and even Champlain landed in 1604. The French could not survive in the hard winters. The Mi'kmaq had to take them in to protect them and they married Mi'kmaq women.
Since then that culture has continued. I live like my forefathers. We go in the woods, gather our wood, do our own fishing and plant our own gardens. We go to shore to gather seaweed. Everything is organic. That is how our forefathers lived and we still live today. That is how many of our people in different communities all live.
To me, we should not have to go to a court to prove our identity or our recognition. We have nothing. What we have, we have to work and do it all ourselves on our own. It costs our organization lots of money to hire Dr. Wickens, Dr. Chute and our genealogists that all came from Ontario. No one wanted to touch us in our community because we are Metis, because it would give them a bad identity. Even our lawyer — I am glad we could find a lawyer in the town of Yarmouth to help us.
If the committee is interested in Dr. Wickens and Dr. Chute, both historians, we have the work. If you want the document of our court case, we would be willing to supply it to you. All you have to do is give us your address and we will forward the research. Dr. Wickens did the research for the Powley case and Dr. Chute did the research for the Marshall case in Nova Scotia. They are recognized historians. We have to pay everything and today we do not owe a cent on our court case.
Ms. Williamson: I absolutely agree with Mr. Surette. We could not find an archaeologist, a historian or a genealogist anywhere in Nova Scotia who would go against the grain to support us in any way whatsoever. I hired experts from the U.S. who have worked with the American Wampanoag community. First, they know who we are. Second, they were the only ones who would dare to speak against the conventional view. It is shocking.
Like Mr. Surette, we have a transcript from the first week of the trial, the part I was involved in. The rest of it, as far as I am concerned, is not helpful, what happened from there after I stopped representing them.
I am more than willing to provide my personal genealogy. I have my ancestral records for the last 400 years, going back to Chief Iyannough. I have a manuscript written by a tribal elder in Massachusetts that documents our ancestral and tribal connections. I am more than happy to provide anything that the committee requires, including expert reports, anything that you need in order to investigate further our history and the justification we have for our claims.
Senator Sibbeston: That would be interesting. If you could provide that to our committee maybe we could get the information after our meeting here.
One of the findings that we recognize, and also I am a Metis by nature, and one of the characteristics of Metis is they are very independent and very proud and do not want any help from governments.
I think there was a period of time in our history where there was a movement away from being native. Native people did not want to be recognized as native people. There was a period of time, because there was a bad connotation with being native. Also, if you were merging and going into mainstream society, they did not think well of you. There was a period of time where native people did not want to admit they were native and did everything, as it were, to not be native in many ways.
I am wondering, in your case, whether in hindsight that was a hindrance or held against you. For hundreds and hundreds of years maybe you did not want to be recognized or known as native people, and suddenly you change your view. You want to be recognized as Aboriginal people and now you are having a difficult time. Do you want to comment on that?
Ms. Williamson: I think we will take turns on that one.
In our particular case, Cape Sable Island was physically separated from the mainland until the causeway was built in 1949.
Our people in Massachusetts have traditionally been coastal people and island people. Our people in Cape Sable Island have been island people.
It is not a very well-educated or sophisticated community in terms of the mainstream perceptions of what that means, but incredibly resilient, intelligent, adaptive and independent. It is just an amazing community when you think about how little they survived on and how independent they have been from everyone else. I say "they" because I am not from the island.
Over 250 years they relied only on themselves and made do with what they had. There is more on that in the written submissions, some examples of how they have survived, adjusted and adapted over the years.
Why now? As you said, senator, for a long time it was a bad thing to be Indian and there are people in our community who will tell stories of how they were treated when teachers or officials suspected for any reason whatsoever that they may have native blood, and that is why everyone stayed quiet.
Our people were here in the 1700s. Around 1761 was the first documented presence, although if you look at the stone features it is way before that. In the 1800s there was a lot of very open persecution of Aboriginal people: residential schools, reserves and things that have been going on for centuries. If our people came here because of the persecution in the United States that they were facing and genocide and everything else, why, in the name of God, would they want to come forward, when all that was going on, and self-identify as native people? It makes no sense whatsoever.
The Chair: I will ask a supplementary, if I may, and then I will let Mr. Surette answer.
That is one of my questions. I have been to Cape Sable Island on the South Shore, and I see a resilient and proud community. Why would you suggest that it is Metis that you are and not First Nations? Your brothers and sisters in the south will be identified as First Nations people. Why would you not select that instead or say you are First Nations rather than Metis?
Ms. Williamson: Again, Mr. Chair, we have always called ourselves Indian. We have recorded interviews with elders that we have transcripts of, which I will be happy to provide.
The Chair: Please do.
Ms. Williamson: The people on the island have always referred to themselves as Indian. I know that is not the politically correct term any more, but that is how they identify themselves; it goes way back.
We are precluded from automatic recognition in this country by virtue of the non-recognition of Article III of the Jay Treaty. We are not Canadian First Nations people. For all the reasons that I gave before, we do not want to be wiped out within one or two generations by going under the Indian Act.
The Chair: It is the 25 per cent blood rule.
Ms. Williamson: That is it. Many of us are way more than 25 per cent; however, our children will not be and their children will not be. We are not about to lose who we are or our heritage because of a definition that had nothing to do with us and that we did not create. That is why, for all of those reasons I gave earlier, we are not all that concerned about being First Nations in Canada. As well, we do not really fit the traditional or the official definition of "First Nations in Canada." We self-identify as Aboriginal people. We are Metis.
The Chair: Thank you.
Mr. Surette: You hit the nail right on the head, senator. Hiding it or denying it — or everything else under the sun — that you are not Aboriginal or Metis in my day would have been slaughter. Even being French, in my day, was taboo. I went to an English school. The first guy took me by the shoulders, threw me against a wall and said, "You are a Frenchman. You do not belong here."
Today, it is a different story. Everyone tries to be bilingual, and everyone wants to be recognized as being Metis in our area. We have very successful communities. The chair of this committee knows the area well and the community of Wedgeport. We have very successful Metis communities but still some people hesitate to be identified Metis. Even though the genealogy proves it, they still deny it; but it is improving all the time. We are simply looking to be recognized by our governments. We have to work too hard to be recognized. They do not even want to talk to us. That is the problem we have today. They think we do not exist.
Senator Watt: Thank you for your presentations.
At the early stages of our development in relation to what we have in section 35 of the Constitution Act, the Metis have been recognized, from what I understand. You have said that you are recognized under section 35 but, in reality, the provincial and federal governments do not recognize you as a Metis. Do I understand correctly?
Ms. Williamson: Essentially, yes. There is a definition that sort of describes who we are, and we know who we are. We have spent a lot of time documenting it, just for the sake of trying to gain recognition, but we still do not have that recognition.
Senator Watt: Would it be helpful to know that the Métis National Council have been working on the membership for a number of years leading up to 1982? Are you working with the Métis National Council in terms of identifying who and what you are and straightening out your membership?
Ms. Williamson: We have had some dealings with the Métis National Council. I have friends who are part of that organization, but that is a personal relationship. We have had discussions with OMAA and the Native Council of Nova Scotia.
Organizations that are more centrally located in Canada unfortunately lack consensus, to some extent. I think that is the most diplomatic way to say whether any of the groups from Eastern Canada have a legitimate basis for being involved with them. We have had discussions but have not officially come under the umbrella, so to speak.
Mr. Surette: Yes, we have had discussions with the Native Council of Nova Scotia, but we have been totally ignored. In my opinion, all the money goes to the Native Council of Nova Scotia. They oppose giving money to us or any other Aboriginal groups in Nova Scotia. They include our council members in their count to get more funding. We try to get some money out of them but there is no way — we do not count. They do not give us anything and they do not even reply to us. In my opinion, the government should set up a group to apply for funding based on the membership by sending a copy of the database membership to show who is registered in good standing with that organization. That is how the funding should be awarded — not just to one group. I understand that there are bigger Metis groups than our two little ones here that are trying to control the whole show so that they get the funding to dish out however they want. They do not want us to have even a small piece of the pie. They want the whole pie. We would like to have a piece of the pie, just like everyone else.
Senator Watt: How many groups in this country do you think might be in the same predicament as you are in, knowing that they are Metis but receiving no recognition in practice or in reality?
Mr. Surette: I am not sure. I cannot answer that question fully. I presume most of the Metis groups are in the same situation that we are in
Senator Watt: What are you looking for from senators? What kind of recommendation should we make to rectify this matter? Should there be an inquiry? Should a unified approach be taken by someone?
Mr. Surette: Probably an inquiry or a unified system would help. Everyone should be treated equally.
Senator Watt: I have been involved in trying to help out the Metis national organizations to identify who is Metis and who is not Metis in terms of getting the membership straightened out. You do not seem to have a working relationship with that organization. My recommendation to you would be that you meet with them and try to get this matter straightened out; otherwise the government will make a decision one way or the other down the road, and it might not be in your favour.
Mr. Surette: I will reply to that. We have been trying to meet with these other groups, but they do not want to have anything to do with us. We try, but they tell us we do not exist.
Ms. Williamson: If I may comment, we have had a different experience than Mr. Surette's group with the Native Council of Nova Scotia and several of the Mi'kmaq bands in Nova Scotia, including Todd Labrador, son of Chief Charlie Labrador, who is well respected. We engage in their powwows. The native council will work with us. They will invite us to their meetings. They will count us among their membership in order to get more funding. However, I have cautioned the council and the membership to be very wary. They are terrified that, if we are recognized, then we will take something away from them. In my opinion, based on what I have seen over the last 10 years, they want to know what we are up to so that they know how to contain us.
The fact of the matter is that we do not want anything. We own our lands. We are not looking for land. Everyone has a job. Everyone works in the fishery or a related industry. We do not need money to sustain ourselves and our families. What we need, if anything, is an acknowledgment that we exist, because it is like living like a ghost.
Senator Watt: Got you.
Ms. Williamson: What we need is some support in making sure that we can complete the research and maintain our cultural centre so that we can pass on our knowledge and our heritage to not only our own children and grandchildren and future generations but to anyone who really wants to know.
There is a list of nine recommendations in my written submission. That is among them. To answer your question directly, that is what I would say.
Senator Watt: When will that report be available?
Ms. Williamson: I have already provided copies to the clerk.
Senator Watt: We do have access to that information, then. Thank you.
Senator Dyck: Thank you once again for your presentation. You have provided the committee with some interesting answers.
My first question is directed to Mr. and Ms. Surette. I heard you say that at one time your group was eligible for the job creation program in the federal government, but you are no longer. Could you tell us when that happened and, in your opinion, why you were denied further eligibility?
Mr. Surette: That is simple to answer. Service Canada changed the programming and gave it to the Province of Nova Scotia. Since the Province of Nova Scotia took it with an NDP government, we have not been able to obtain any funding or anything from them. That is why we have to deal with the federal government. We went to the youth Skills Link Program. At the present time, as I said, we have somebody already being trained with us, a young Metis, who needed more personal training. That is what we do in our office.
Senator Dyck: My second question is for both groups. A few weeks ago, we heard from witnesses from the Northwest Territories who mentioned to us that there was a research program conducted by the Department of Justice. It was studying various Metis communities across Canada. Looking on the web, it does indicate that they went to southern Nova Scotia and conducted a study there. Apparently, the results of this study have not been made public. Were you aware of this study? Were you part of it? Have you heard anything back with regard to what they determined?
Mr. Surette: Never heard of it.
Ms. Surette: Never heard of it.
Mr. Surette: It is all news to us.
Ms. Williamson: I do not believe so. I know there have been some conversations with different levels of government. There was a conversation with — and I am sorry that I do not recall — a senator at some point not so long ago. I have been out of Nova Scotia for almost four years now, so I cannot possibly monitor every single thing that goes on. As far as I know, we were never enumerated, consulted or otherwise contacted by that committee.
Senator Dyck: Do you think the results of that study should be released and made public?
Ms. Williamson: From an academic perspective, if you release research results, you should make sure that the research has actually accounted for all of the perspectives and as much of the information available as possible, so the short answer is no.
Senator Dyck: No, okay.
Mr. Surette: It did not involve us, so no, they should not give us the result. We did not know anything about it, so the short answer is no, senator.
Senator Ataullahjan: Thank you for the very impressive presentation. My question is slightly different from the one that I ask all the witnesses that come here. I would like to know about the state of the health in your community. We have heard that diabetes is almost epidemic. I have kind of become a maternal expert. I have been doing presentations, travelling to Africa and Geneva. I would like to know the state of maternal health as well. When we look at Canada's figures, we are lacking when it comes to Aboriginal people.
Ms. Williamson: Our people are actually quite healthy. Again, we have our own land. Everyone has been working and taking care of themselves for years and years. We are not reliant on anyone to take care of us. Our diet, for the most part, has still been very much a traditional diet in terms of roots and plants and things that are taken from the sea and things that are taken from the land. In terms of maternal health, everyone is okay.
The only thing that really has changed in the last 50 years or so that we know of has been a slight increase in diabetes. From a common sense perspective, since the causeway now connects us to the mainland and there is a Sobeys and a Tim Horton's and a McDonalds there and no one is relying only on things that we catch any more, it makes perfect sense. We have come off the traditional diet, so to speak, and it has had some effect on the health of the community.
Mr. Surette: Other than a little bit of obesity and a few cancer cases, which is normal across the board, everyone else is healthy. They are living off the sea and off the land and living very well.
Senator Demers: Ms. Williamson, there is a major lockout in the NHL right now, and it started with a lack of trust. When you do not have trust, you cannot get together and work to come to an agreement, which I think they will do eventually.
Your explanation has been very clear, but there also may be someone who has negotiated or tried to negotiate and has not been totally fair, on both sides. Has there ever been a thought of having an arbitrator, someone neutral, come in to try to get both parties together?
You were very clear. Most of the time we hear about money. You are not asking for money. You have land. Your health, as just mentioned, seems to be very good, not different from anyone else in Canada or the States. However, there seems to be a lack of trust because you have more to offer than to ask for. Have you thought about an arbitrator coming in to get both parties together and get something done?
Ms. Williamson: The problem has not been that we have not been willing to sit down and have the discussions and present the information that we have had.
As I mentioned earlier, we sat down with Aboriginal Affairs Nova Scotia six years ago. I was involved in that round table. Six years ago, we did not have the experts in archaeology and anthropology and all those things that I have retained on behalf of the community in the last four years. We did not have that information. We did not have all the hard genealogical evidence that we have now in terms of birth and marriage records, et cetera. However, it is not that we have not been willing to come to the table; it is that we have never actually been let through the door. The one time that we were let through the door, they said, "We thought you were someone else. Go away."
Senator Demers: What about the arbitrator?
Ms. Williamson: Of course, but I do not even know if that is necessary. I do not even know if it is necessary for an arbitrator to be involved, because, quite frankly, we are perfectly capable of presenting the information and the evidence and having a civilized and reasonable conversation. I do not think we need any help doing that, quite frankly.
The Chair: I have one follow-up question for you both. I am trying to understand, as self-identified Métis Nations, what you would accept or demand for membership into your organizations. I will ask Mr. Surette to respond first. Is there documentation, for example, genealogical? Would there be affidavits or more or less?
Mr. Surette: Yes, Mr. Chair. To be a member of our organization, you have to have a complete genealogy and it has to go to our genealogist. If you meet all the proper criteria, that somewhere along the line you were married to a Mi'kmaq, there is Aboriginal blood somewhere along the line, you can qualify for a card.
The Chair: Would that be someone who married a Mi'kmaq in your community or could it be someone who married a Mi'kmaq in another community?
Mr. Surette: It could be in other communities, but your genealogy has to have the straight line, down the line somewhere; my great-grandfather, grandmother, somewhere along the line someone was married to a Mi'kmaq.
The Chair: If it was someone from Chéticamp who married a Mi'kmaq in Cape Breton Island and moved to your community five years ago, they could join your organization?
Mr. Surette: Yes. It does not matter where they live, as long as their genealogy is perfect. We have membership right across Nova Scotia. We have many people from Chéticamp because there is no organization up there. Most of them belong to the Kespu'kwitk Metis Council.
The Chair: Correct me if I am wrong; yours is more of a mixed blood definition than it is a land-based definition. Would that be correct?
Mr. Surette: I am not sure; as long as you have your genealogy, your ancestry is of mixed blood somewhere along the line, yes.
The Chair: Ms. Williamson, do you have a response as well?
Ms. Williamson: Absolutely. As I stated earlier, our bloodlines have been maintained over many generations. Although I offer to provide my personal genealogy, I can tell you that my genealogy, especially prior to the first settlers of the island, is almost exactly identical to everyone else from the community. When you compare my genealogy from that point forward to me with everyone else's, you will see the same people and family names over and over again. Our bloodlines have remained very much clear or pure or whatever you want to call it. Everyone on the island knows everyone on the island. When we go to Massachusetts, they say, "Who are you?" I have to say, "I am Daphne, daughter of Belinda," and I have to go way back to Iyannough. I have to know that before they will even talk to me.
We know who everyone is. However, for someone who has been separated from the community, say their parent moved away 30, 40 years ago and is no longer in contact with the community and that person wants to become a member of the Sou'West Nova Metis Council, they would have to provide documentation to link themselves to a known member of that community and provide their ancestral documents back to a certain point so that our council and our membership coordinator know that they come from the same bloodlines that we do.
Senator Raine: Mr. Surette, if a Metis or mixed-blood person from British Columbia moved to your area and could trace their ancestral lines to a First Nation, would your organization still accept them?
I see your organization as having not so much geographic limitations but limitations based on the common heritage of an Aboriginal person. Maybe you would limit it to French-Canadian; maybe not. It is not someone whose Aboriginal ancestors were not necessarily from southern Nova Scotia?
Mr. Surette: At the present time, that is the way it works. It is all French ancestry. We have not gone to B.C.
Senator Raine: There are many French ancestry Metis people in British Columbia.
Mr. Surette: If the genealogy would work and if it is a proper genealogy and there is evidence that there was intermarriage, and they are Metis, yes, they would qualify to be a member.
Senator Raine: The genealogy does not have to be traced back to people who were actually located in the geographic area where you are?
Mr. Surette: No.
Senator Ataullahjan: You require documents to determine ancestry, but what about individuals who self-identify and who feel as though they belong to the Metis community but do not necessarily have the lineage or the documentation? Have you had instances such as this arise?
Ms. Williamson: Again, Cape Sable Island is a very insular community, so to speak, and the families know the families. Everyone knows everyone. I know of people who have left the island — not left the island, so to speak, but have moved their families just off-island, into surrounding areas, within the last, say, hundred years. We know who those families are, but for the most part it has only been within the last 50 years that many people have moved off- island. We still have the main core of the community, but there are people like my mother and others who have moved off-island and have not gone back there to live.
It is not so much a question of having to provide 200, 300 years' worth of genealogical documents. We know who everyone is. As long as you can produce a birth record, a death certificate, a baptismal certificate, to connect yourself to a known member of the community, you are good. We know who everyone is.
The Chair: I want to thank you very much for your presentation. It was an excellent opportunity for us to hear from another segment of this country as to Metis issues and Metis heritage. I thank all of you for being here.
I would ask the committee members to stay after we close the public session for a couple of minutes in camera.
(The committee continued in camera.)