Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 22 - Evidence - June 20, 2012
OTTAWA, Wednesday, June 20, 2012
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 6:51 p.m. to examine and report on the legal and political recognition of Métis identity in Canada.
[Translation]
Marcy Zlotnick, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, there is a quorum. As clerk of your committee, it is my duty to inform you of the unavoidable absence of the chair and deputy chair, and to preside over the election of an acting chair.
[English]
I am ready to receive a motion to nominate an acting chair.
Senator Campbell: I move that Senator Patterson be our acting chair.
Ms. Zlotnick: Thank you, Senator Campbell. Are there any other nominations?
It is moved by the Honourable Senator Campbell that the Honourable Senator Patterson do take the chair of this committee.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Ms. Zlotnick: I declare the motion carried, and I invite the Honourable Senator Patterson to take the chair.
Senator Dennis Glen Patterson (Acting Chair) in the chair
The Acting Chair: Thank you, honourable senators. Once again, I am honoured by your trust in me. I would like to welcome you all and members of the public who are watching this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples on CPAC or on the World Wide Web.
My name is Dennis Patterson from Nunavut, and I am happy to serve as acting chair tonight in the absence of the chair and deputy chair.
Our committee's mandate is to examine legislation and matters relating to the Aboriginal peoples of Canada generally. In addition, we have a specific order of reference authorizing us 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.
The early meetings on this study have consisted of briefings from various government departments that have provided us with information, including facts on current federal programs and services; the status of Crown-Metis relations; general statistical information; and current legal issues, among other things.
We then heard from two lawyers who concentrate on Metis issues. We have also heard from national organizations that represent a Metis constituency.
Tonight we will hear from the Native Women's Association of Canada and from Carrie Bourassa, who is an academic.
[Translation]
Prior to hearing from our witnesses, I would like to introduce the committee members who are present this evening.
[English]
I would like to begin with, on my left, Senator Jim Munson from Ontario and Senator Larry Campbell from British Columbia. On my right, we have Senator Nancy Greene Raine from British Columbia, Senator Salma Ataullahjan from Ontario and Senator John Wallace from New Brunswick.
Members of the committee, please help me in welcoming our first witness, Elder Elize Hartley, member of the Executive Council of the Native Women's Association of Canada. Welcome, Ms. Hartley.
Elder Elize Hartley, Executive Council, Native Women's Association of Canada: Thank you. First, because of my age, I am a bit hard of hearing, so I may have to ask if you are speaking to me to perhaps speak a little louder.
I bring traditional greetings, and we acknowledge that we are in the Algonquin nation land as we gather here, but I was born and raised in Manitoba. The picture you see on the wall there is my third cousin. My great-grandmother was a Lagimodière. I think you know the Lagimodière family from history. She married a Nault, Amable Nault, and my grandmother was Veronique Nault. My mother married Joachim Huppé, and I carried the name of Huppé when I was a young girl.
Growing up in Manitoba was not an easy thing. I have to tell you that I am going to be 88 years old in a couple of months, so I have been around a long time. When I went to school, we were still very much second-class citizens in Manitoba as Metis people. We kind of grew up with that. Even though we went to work, got busy and looked after ourselves and our families, there was still that thing. When you are raised with something like that, it is very hard to discard. It was not until I married my husband that he asked, "Why is it that you feel and act that way?" I said, "I do not know. I just do." Anytime I would kind of belittle myself, he would say, "None of that." I thought, "Well, I guess I am okay."
I had to come to Ontario because there were no jobs. Remember, a long time ago, Manitoba was for White people only and we were told that when we went to look for jobs. They would say, "Sorry, you are a nice person and I know you might do a good job, but you would not last here because of the discrimination that you would encounter."
I was listening to the radio one day, doing housework — that was all we could get — and I heard that Toronto had so many jobs. I thought, "Guess who is going to Toronto?" A couple of months later, I packed my bags and I went to Toronto. I had no idea where I was when I got there.
I got a newspaper and it said "room for rent," so I went and rented myself a room. Then I looked for a job, and I got one, and I thought, "No one knows I am an Indian here; I can work." I had that feeling that I was okay there. That is how it started for me, and I never looked back.
My mother and father taught us that you get nothing for nothing. If you want something, you have to work for it. We worked hard. We worked in the gardens and picking berries. There was no such thing as a holiday. There were holidays from school, but we worked.
Here I am, to tell you my tale. I always felt interested in the native people, my people, and especially Metis, because even in our own people, some First Nations called us "wanna-be" Indians. Sometimes there is that discrimination between people. Most of the Aboriginal people are very accepting and very nice, but there are always some.
It makes it very hard for Metis people to be able to feel their identity. Identity is one of the things that we all need. If we do not have our identity, we just keep bumbling around because we do not know who we are. I found that out by going to high schools and talking with youth who want to quit at grade 10. They do not want to go to school anymore. By working with them and presenting them with the traditions and the ceremonies, I found that that is all they needed. They needed to identify themselves. "I am an Ojibwa." "I am a Mohawk." They were whatever they were. That made all the difference for them. Now they are going to carry on, finish their high school and feel that they can contribute something to the community. I felt that was a good thing to do.
I work as a volunteer. I have a group of Metis women. We work in the schools. We work with other women. We also belong to the Native Women's Association of Canada because they speak for all Aboriginal women. It is something to be able to hang on to.
When you are a Metis person, it is very hard to be able to say, for instance, "I belong to such and such." With the Native Women's Association, we do belong. We are accepted, and we come and work on committees and for the families, the children and our men. We found, as we were working in the community, that there were a lot of single families. The reason there were single families is because the husband had a problem with alcohol or drugs. The children and the families were removed, but that man stayed on the street. We started to look at that and said we have to help them, too.
In Hamilton, we have worked toward getting a place that will house those men as long as they are looking to rid themselves of their bad habits. A lot of them want to. They just need that extra help so they can be sober, away from drink and drugs, and look after their families. We try to do that with the help of the Native Women's Association.
The Native Women's Association is a nationally representative political organization. It is comprised of 12 provincial and territorial member associations from across Canada, so we can touch base with other provinces and other Metis groups for ourselves. Also, the NWAC is dedicated to improving the social, economic, health and political well-being of all people of Canada, but especially First Nations and Metis.
The Metis people, as you know, are a distinct people with a shared identity, cultural practice and language. I used to speak Michif when I was a kid but, when we went to school, we were not allowed to speak that language. It was put away in my mind where the things that you do not use very often go.
A couple of months ago, we had a person who came from Manitoba to present a workshop to our young men about how they should treat each other and the kind of attitude toward Aboriginal people they have among themselves. This man was Metis. When he spoke Michif, all of a sudden, a light went on in my head. "Oh, I remember that." Suddenly, I thought, "I bet I could speak that again, if I tried."
It is an interesting subject, because the Metis language is a mixture of Cree and French. The French word is kind of turned around. Unless you can speak French very well, you could say, "Yeah, I think that is a French word," but it is not quite right. It has the Cree intonation or it is sort of a rounded word. Instead of speaking outwards, they kind of speak towards and go through their brain or head or nose or something. It sounds different anyway. I was glad to hear that, because I thought, "Yeah." I didn't understand everything he said, because he spoke too fast, but I could pick out enough words to know what he was saying.
Those are the little things that make it worthwhile to volunteer, to give hours and hours and hours of your time to people, and especially to our youth. One of these days, our youth will be running this country and we had better be able to help them so that they will be able to look after their families.
As I say that, I want to talk about family support and child care. You know that there is a growing gap in the comparative funding and treatment of Metis children on welfare and service support for their families. So many of our little children are going into care. A staggering 30 per cent of foster care children are either Metis or First Nation. That makes it more complicated for the Metis, because there is a lack of census on the number of Metis kids. Without the knowledge of the total population, we cannot effectively do programs for them.
Aboriginal kids in foster care, like those who were placed in residential schools, are being raised without their language, without their culture and without their families. Sometimes they face abuse in those homes. We are all aware of and continue to experience the negative impact of the residential schools. The residential school system impacted the Aboriginal people so much that we say it takes seven generations before we can see a difference. I think we are getting close to the seventh generation, because we are more aware. The Native Women's Association of Canada is aware of the children and wants to address the situation at all levels of government for our children. I believe that by coming to speak to you about these problems out there, we can perhaps light a light where it is dark.
We also want to advocate for our children who are exposed to the inequality against them because of subjection to harassment and investigations. The Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development needs to determine the full cost of meeting the policy requirements of the Aboriginal family services and children programs. The full cost can only be determined after a thorough census to identify the Metis population and their children and their children's welfare. Skipping this step ensures that policy change will miss or continue to under-service indigenous children.
I would like to talk about public education. I believe that we have to bring into our school system more education and more traditional ways and ceremonies of the Aboriginal people. I speak at different schools to children in Grades 6, 7, 8, and 9, as well as high school. Those children know nothing about Aboriginal people, absolutely nothing. I feel very sad about that, because Aboriginal people have been on this land forever. We are not just newcomers who hear people say, "Oh, I do not know where you come from." We have been here.
Mr. John Ralston Saul wrote a book and said there should have been — and maybe there were — three pillars when Canada first started out. The French came and stayed in Quebec mostly, and then the British came. However, the Aboriginal indigenous people were always here. At the beginning, they might have been included because, if there was a war to be fought, then they were there fighting for either the French or the British; but they were there.
When Canada became a country in 1867, we dropped the indigenous people completely. We put up the Indian Act. That has caused so many problems for so many years that we are now saying, "Let's get rid of that. Let's work together as indigenous people who have so much to offer. Let's speak of belonging to the country, not just sitting on reserves and sort of decaying. Let's be people who love their land and want to see Canada succeed."
For that, we need public education. We need to be in the elementary schools. Yesterday, I attended an elementary school. The Mohawks from Six Nations came and showed the children. All the little kids came and sat in a circle. They watched when a man in all his regalia showed them a dance. A lady came out and did the hoop dance. How she can put those things in and out and then got out of them, I will never know, but she did it. The children were so quiet you could hear a pin drop because they loved it. They were hooting and hollering and having a good time. I thought: This is what they need to know. They do not need to know just that the Indians go "Woo-woo" somewhere. That was just in the movies.
If you do not remember anything else I have said after I leave here, please remember: Let us educate all of our people — all of us.
My last point is about the missing women. Our daughters, sisters and mothers have gone missing due to violence. The "sixties scoop" and children's welfare are connected to poverty and racism. These deplorable conditions have resulted in more than 600 missing or murdered women and children. Many of them are Metis women, because they have no identity. No one cares, really.
NWAC is strongly recommending funding allocated by all governments for a national inquiry on missing and murdered Aboriginal women and girls. We hope to have the support of all provinces and territories when we try to address this issue. A national inquiry will focus on missing and murdered Aboriginal women and girls across Canada and will work closely with NWAC, Aboriginal communities and all stakeholders to effectively examine and stop violence against Aboriginal women and girls. We encourage honourable senators to continue to engage with NWAC and our provincial-territorial member associations to work collaboratively and effectively with the Government of Canada to address the barriers that hinder the well-being of Aboriginal women and children and their families.
I thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I will answer any questions that I can, if you have any for me.
The Acting Chair: Thank you very much, Ms. Hartley, for sharing your personal story and for advocating on behalf of the Native Women's Association of Canada.
Senator Campbell: Can you hear through the earpiece?
Ms. Hartley: Yes, I can.
Senator Campbell: You do a better job of that than I do most of the time.
I am overwhelmed by the knowledge that you have from start to finish. This is not the finish, of course, but to this point. We are looking at Metis identity and trying to find out who the Metis are. We know the word "Metis," but we do not know who they are. I want to read something from the report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. It states:
It is primarily culture that sets the Métis apart from other Aboriginal peoples. Many Canadians have mixed Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal ancestry, but that does not make them Métis or even Aboriginal. Some of them identify themselves as First Nations persons or Inuit, some as Métis and some as non-Aboriginal. What distinguishes Métis people from everyone else is that they associate themselves with a culture that is distinctly Métis.
Would you agree with that?
Ms. Hartley: Yes and no. At least I can speak for Manitoba, because my people were there. From the time I was a little kid, I listened and heard. With Louis Riel, suddenly our people were always watching the borders and keeping the Americans out. The Americans knew that the Metis and the Indians would not have them come over our land. Our people were watching that.
When Canada decided to take over the Northwest Territories, they first said Manitoba. However, Manitoba had people living there who had their livelihoods: hunting, fishing and gardening. The French brought in the Catholic Church. The British brought in the Anglican Church. At the very beginning, some British married the Metis and they were Anglican. They were the half-breeds. The Indian women who married the Catholic French men were told, "The minute you walk into the church, you are no longer an Indian. You have become a Catholic Metis." You cannot erase part of you; you are brought up that way.
That made Anglican Metis half-breeds. They spoke English. The Catholic French spoke French.
That is not the only thing. Out west, there were all kinds of tribes. However, I can only speak about where I come from. Central Manitoba is Ojibwa, Saulteaux and Cree. If a White man marries an Ojibwa woman, she is Ojibwa Metis. If a Cree woman marries a White man, she is a Cree Metis. Do you see? It is not one-size-fits-all. You are Metis because you are half Aboriginal and half White, but your culture may be Cree, Mohawk or Assiniboine, which was my first people.
It is not just like you can see Mohawk people are Mohawk; they go Mohawk and that is all of them. Metis people are a mix, and they are mixed with all kinds of other tribes. Their identity is mixed. It is not easy to decipher.
My mixture is with Ojibwa Saulteaux. I know who I am. When I do my traditions, I will do the Ojibwa and the Saulteaux. That is who I bring as my Aboriginal part.
I can only speak for myself, but I do know that is how it happens. Whomever you marry into is what your family will be. If a mother is Ojibwa, she will teach her children Ojibwa. Even if you take the church, there are still some things that come through as identity — from being who you are.
Senator Munson: Thank you so much for your history. You are walking us through a beautiful history lesson again that we all have to pay attention to, and I am sure all senators here tonight appreciate that very much.
Our terms of reference are pretty simple: to examine and report on the legal and political recognition of Metis identity in Canada. In terms of what we do as senators, sometimes governments do pay attention to what we have to say. I give the example of the Mental Health Commission of Canada. Things have happened, done by Liberal and Conservative senators, and actions have been taken with the commission, and so on. Hopefully, we are moving forward in that regard.
What would you like to see, in simple terms and in terms of policy? What could we recommend coming out of this study in dealing with the legal and political recognition of Metis identity in this country? What would be your succinct message that we can move on and talk about and push?
Ms. Hartley: I think that Metis people recognize themselves as being the mix; it is the mix that makes the Metis. We call ourselves Metis. The Canadian government does not give Metis the same recognition — the reserves and things like that — it does First Nations. First Nations people have reserves. I think in Canada we are lucky if there might be two reserves for Metis — one for sure in Alberta. Other than that, no.
Metis are here, there and everywhere. Therefore, it is very hard to get a group of people who identify and live in the pretty well same area, or that are able to.
For instance, people come to me, because I volunteer and I am known. A lot of people ask me to come and speak. They come to me and say, "Well, my grandmother was" — whatever it might be — "but we were not supposed to talk about it in the family, so I do not know who I am."
That is part of what has happened. That is due to discrimination. Also, what good did it do them to identify as Metis? It only brought more discrimination, racism, "wanna-be" and that sort of thing. We hung on, because that is who we are. We are Metis.
Senator Munson: You did say that if there is one word that we take from your message tonight, it is "education."
Ms. Hartley: Education.
Senator Munson: In terms of education, what role or stronger role do you believe the federal government should play in the education of the Metis people?
Ms. Hartley: The history has never been written. The Canadian history has never really been written of why, what happened, and why were there Metis. Why was it that they could not all be First Nations? What made that distinction? Was it the church, or was it something else?
John A. Macdonald said, "Let them all howl and die. Metis are scruff." That was his idea. If you are mixed blood, especially mixed blood Indians, you are no good. When your prime minister says that, I think a lot of people might be listening.
Senator Munson: That is history; today is today.
Ms. Hartley: You have to know history to know today.
Senator Munson: You are saying there should be more federally funded programs.
Ms. Hartley: Absolutely.
Senator Munson: Provincial curricula and elsewhere; is that what you are demanding or asking for?
Ms. Hartley: People are asking for it.
For instance, I am a member of OCAP, the Ontario Coalition of Aboriginal Peoples, for the northern part of Ontario.
They struggle because they do not seem to be able to get funding, not even core funding. I know that for sure. I have been working with Metis women since 1995, and I must be a sucker for punishment because I keep on going. I know that it is helping; I know that we are doing good. However, we need more exposure or we need more programs or something that brings the Metis to the level of everybody else.
Senator Ataullahjan: Thank you for your presentation. We have been hearing about the high prevalence of diabetes in the Metis community. In your experience, is anything being done to mobilize the community on this issue, particularly the women? I am interested because women generally take care of meals and food.
Ms. Hartley: The women feed the family.
Senator Ataullahjan: Yes. Are they passing that knowledge on to their children?
Ms. Hartley: Yes, you are right. It is poverty. They cannot really feed their families properly to stop this disease from taking over. You have to be knowledgeable about the disease and eat healthily. Kraft Dinner will not do it. Many people eat that because they do not have money to buy other foods.
The programs are out there, but no one is saying to them, "Come and listen," or "We are having a gathering. Come, we are going to talk about diabetes." These people have been ignored for so long that you practically have to grab them and say, "Come and listen," and then they will.
I have a lot of comings and goings at my house because our office for the Metis women's circle is there. I pay for the phone and I pay for the fax because I feel the need is there, but there is no funding. We need to generate interest in health. If you educate, then health will come, because they are reading and will know how to do things the proper way. First they have to know and, if they do not know, then they will eat white bread and all that stuff. Instead of making a pot of stew, they go buy a couple of cans of soup with all that sodium and everything else. We have a lot of educating to do, but it is poverty that is the number one issue.
Senator Raine: Thank you very much, and thank you, Elder Hartley, for sharing your experience with us. You just told us about the challenges being faced today with poverty not only with Metis women, but Aboriginal women. However, if you go back — you are 88 years old — your parents taught you to work hard and to work in the gardens. You have never stopped working. Do you think that an expectation of having the government do things for you is healthy for cultures?
I know there is a need for education. I know that education is very important, but how did you get your education? How did you learn? How is it that you have been able to be so strong and work so hard still today and yet, when you look at people, you see people who seem hopeless?
Ms. Hartley: From the time I was a kid, I was always out there. I guess I was blessed with energy galore. My dad would always say, "You turn the corners before you get to them."
I firmly believe that if we educate our people they will not want to be on welfare. I am sure they will not. No one wants that. It is not even existing, I would say.
Also, there must be pride put in those people. My mother and father always said, "Be proud of who you are. Do not let anyone put you down." You grow up knowing that you are okay; you are fine. You have to work. We all knew that, but I think, as generations went on, we softened up. Now I think we have a "me" generation — me first. What about me? Who is looking after me? It never was like that when I was a kid. You would just go and do it.
Senator Raine: It is a big challenge.
Ms. Hartley: It is a big challenge, and we have to educate our people on how to meet it. Identity is one of the missing things.
Senator Raine: In terms of identity, the Metis are described as a people who relate to a very specific culture. There is a distinct Metis culture different from First Nation, different from other Aboriginal groups.
Ms. Hartley: I do not find that myself. I work with Metis, I work with First Nations, and we all have our ceremonies and our traditions, that is, if you carry on the indigenous part of you.
Senator Raine: Do you think there should be a registry of Metis people? Do you think they should go to that effort of determining, making a list or a registry? Do you think that would serve any useful purpose?
Ms. Hartley: If that is what needs to be done. You have to do what you have to do and, if one thing is broken, you have to fix it.
Senator Raine: If you were to allocate funding, would you rather it went to education or to building a registry?
Ms. Hartley: I would certainly sit down with my budget and see how much I could put in either one, because both of them are very important. We just cannot go all of a sudden like a tornado and clear up one place while the other one is still limping along. It is a matter of the whole.
Senator Raine: For instance, we have heard testimony that the federal government would benefit from a Metis registry system where only those who have Metis citizenship would be provided Metis-specific programs and services. This would assure that only those who have a real connection to a Metis nation, and not simply every party who self- identified, would be rightly funded.
Ms. Hartley: That, to me, does not sound right. There was the "sixties scoop." Those kids had no idea who they were. They still do not, but some of them come to me and say, "I swear I am Aboriginal; something is calling me." I say to them, "Then do the ceremonies and do the traditions. Live the way you want to live. Live the way you feel inside you, because that is your spirit, that is the little voice that tells you. You have to do what you have to do."
Just to have a registry and to maybe say only from this group and not from that side, I do not go for that, sorry.
Senator Raine: I think that you are a great example of someone who is very strongly in touch with your culture and roots and heritage, and you are passing it on to other people. I congratulate you, and I thank you for being here.
Ms. Hartley: Thank you very much.
Senator Munson: I am so curious, because you said that you moved to Ontario and you met this gentleman by the same of Hartley. What is your maiden name?
Ms. Hartley: Huppé.
[Translation]
We speak French, you know.
Senator Munson: I speak French too.
[English]
Senator Munson: That is interesting to know, because I have a friend named Bruce Hartley. He worked with me in the Prime Minister's Office, and he was the Executive Assistant to Jean Chrétien.
Ms. Hartley: Was his name Brian?
Senator Munson: Bruce.
I am just curious, because you pointed to the picture of Louis Riel on the wall.
Ms. Hartley: Yes, that is my family.
Senator Munson: We are in the Aboriginal Room, and the government — and rightly so — is paying a lot of attention to the War of 1812. Mr. Riel was hung —
Ms. Hartley: November 13, 1885.
Senator Munson: In the year 2015, it will be 125 years since his death.
Ms. Hartley: Yes.
Senator Munson: We are talking about money for education, and you are talking about money for recognition. There are two different histories of Mr. Riel, and we are now coming to understand a lot better what Mr. Riel meant to this country.
I am wondering if you think that the Government of Canada should recognize Louis Riel, in an anniversary in 2015, as one of the dominant forces in our history and an important face that we have to understand more about. Should there be an opportunity for this country to recognize Louis Riel on the one hundred and twenty-fifth anniversary of his death in the year 2015?
Ms. Hartley: I think so. He certainly put his life on the line. At his court case, he did not have a chance. He could not speak to defend himself. I think that the cards were stacked against him even then.
Senator Campbell: I have one question. Are you familiar with the names Joseph and Marguerite Marcelas Huppé?
Ms. Hartley: Oh yes, that is my family.
Senator Campbell: From 1900, give or take?
Ms. Hartley: Are we relatives?
Senator Campbell: No. Believe me, you do not want to be part of my family. I have been following genealogy through the Glenbow Museum in Calgary, and they have the census for 1900 for the Red River Valley. Huppé is certainly there.
Ms. Hartley: That is my dad's family. The Huppés, the Naults and the Lagimodières are my dad's side. My mom comes from another area where there are a lot of Aubins and Beausoleils, and that is her side.
Senator Campbell: I invite you to go to the Glenbow Museum archives, and it is all listed there.
Ms. Hartley: It is even listed who got scrip, and who did not.
Senator Munson: St. Germain is there too.
Senator Campbell: Many St. Germains.
Ms. Hartley: Yes, many, many St. Germains.
The Acting Chair: On that note, as we wrap this up, would you know the family of our esteemed Chair, Senator St. Germain?
Ms. Hartley: I am not sure.
The Acting Chair: He is from Manitoba originally.
Ms. Hartley: I know the St. Germains. I think that, if I were to meet them face to face, I would probably recognize them, but there have been so many people. The St. Germain name was very much Metis Manitoba. The old families are interconnected and married in and out. The St. Germains were there. I could not remember them, but it has been a long time since I have lived in Manitoba. I kind of got away. I am the one who got away.
The Acting Chair: Thank you very much for coming here. You are one of the eldest — if not the eldest — witnesses from whom we have heard. We are very honoured that you were willing to come all this way to share your experience with us.
Ms. Hartley: Thank you.
The Acting Chair: I will now excuse you and we will take a short break before we hear from Ms. Carrie Bourassa of the First Nations University of Canada.
Ms. Hartley: Thank you very much for listening. I am happy to be here.
The Acting Chair: Thank you.
I would like to welcome Professor Carrie Bourassa of the First Nations University of Canada.
Ms. Bourassa, welcome to the committee.
Carrie Bourassa, Associate Professor, Inter-Disciplinary Programs, First Nations University of Canada: Thank you very much. Meegwetch.
I would first like to acknowledge this Algonquin Nation territory.
I am honoured and humbled to be here today to have the opportunity to speak on this very important matter. I have prayed that I would be able to say things in a good way today.
The issues of Metis identity and definition are contentious, to say the least. I have spoken to my family and kin, friends and community, and asked them what messages I should bring to Ottawa, and I have many to share with you.
I would like to start with a discussion I often had with my late adopted Mushum, Clifford LaRocque. He was a well- respected leader in my community. He knew many of the Metis families. Even though many of us had gaps in our histories, he was able to help fill in those gaps with his immense historical and genealogical knowledge.
He remembered the days before Metis were officially recognized in section 35 of the Constitution, the days when Metis and non-status Indians had much in common and formed alliances in order to have a political voice. He reminded me that it was through the government's own legislation that many came to the Metis community seeking acceptance. While some Metis disagreed with this, many communities accepted non-status Indians into their communities.
Mushum Clifford would say, "We are all the forgotten ones. Who am I to say they are not Metis? Only they know what is in their heart. If they identify as Metis, contribute to our community, identify with our culture, and are accepted by our community, then they are Metis."
Indeed the Royal Commission on Aboriginal People reflected similar sentiments. They noted that ancestry is only one component of Metis identity. Cultural factors are significant. A people exist because of a common culture. When someone thinks of themselves as Metis, it is because they identify with the culture of a Metis people and, when a Metis people accepts someone as a member, it is because that person is considered to share in its culture.
Delbert Majer, a Metis from Saskatchewan, stated to the RCAP:
You know, it's not a biological issue. It's a cultural, historical issue, and it's a way of life issue; and it's not what you look like on the outside, it's how you carry yourself around on the inside that is important, both in your mind and your soul and your heart.
Scholars have tried to structure debate between the blurred lines of Metis identity and Metis definition. Identity is often viewed as more personal and often focuses on cultural identity. Ancestry is certainly part of this; however, it is more than just blood quantum, which is a colonial concept. Identity is central to one's health and well-being, and Metis identity has been in many ways and continues to be constructed by external forces.
For example, the Powley decision has had repercussions in Metis communities across Canada. Scholarship and community debate has now turned to definition. While Powley did not define "Metis," it suggested that they are distinct peoples of mixed ancestry who developed their own customs, practices, traditions and recognizable group identities separate from their Indian, Inuit and European ancestors and, further, they have collective identity and live together in the same geographic area.
Community acceptance has always been a key aspect of Metis identity, as you gain your strength from your community. Communities know their members and have methods of identifying and verifying their membership. Since the inclusion of Metis in the Constitution, there has been more of a focus on Metis definition. While community control over their membership has historically been important, that has slowly eroded since 1982, and particularly since the Powley decision when the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that Metis are a rights-bearing Aboriginal people as provincial and national definitions have become focused not only on collective identity, but also on geographical location, which is problematic as Metis people are often not defined by a fixed settlement and have historically been mobile.
The following Metis National Council definition was adopted in 2002:
"Métis" means a person who self-identifies as Métis, is distinct from other Aboriginal peoples, is of historic Métis Nation Ancestry and who is accepted by the Métis Nation.
Following Powley, they noted on their website that the components of a Metis definition for the purpose of claiming Aboriginal rights under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 include those listed in the Powley decision. They are: self- identification as a member of the Metis community; ancestral connection to the historic Metis community whose practices ground the right in question; and acceptance by the modern community with continuity to the historic Metis community.
Indeed, many communities already use some of these factors in determining their citizenship. Some had different or even additional criteria based on their traditional parameters of citizenship and identity. However, since Powley there has been a shift from community to provincial and even national control of membership. There has been a huge pressure on the provincial bodies to implement a registry and the definition of "Metis" has narrowed.
Individuals who have local memberships have been turned away when trying to register with their provincial organizations, often over what are perceived as criteria that are not relevant in their home communities. Again, an external definition was imposed on them.
While most Metis communities, including my own, the Regina Riel Métis Council, agree with a Metis registry, they do not agree with the process. In fact, many feel the process is flawed as there was not enough community input, engagement or support. The membership at my local feels that there is no community control in the membership and that it is the local communities who know their members, not a hired genealogist in a provincial office who does not understand our traditional parameters of citizenship and identity.
By taking away the community control we are seeing deep divisions within our local Metis community. As the late great Howard Adams said, we take on the cloak of our colonizer and the colonized become the colonizers — the oppressed become the oppressors.
I will end there. Thank you. I will now take questions.
The Acting Chair: Could you tell us a bit about yourself? You are a professor at the First Nations University. Where do you teach?
Ms. Bourassa: I teach indigenous health studies. I have been there for 10 years. I am an associate professor and I have my tenure. I have several associate professorships at the University of Regina in different faculties; women and gender studies, kinesiology and health studies, education and public policy. I am quite interdisciplinary.
I am also the nominated principal investigator for the Indigenous Peoples' Health Research Centre, which is one of nine network centres of excellence for Aboriginal health which are funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
I wrote my dissertation on Metis health and it has just been published into a book. It is entitled Métis Health: The "Invisible Problem." Invisible problem is in quotation marks because people seem to think that Metis people are healthy, but indeed I was able to prove — with very little quality data, I might add — that Metis people are not healthy and that we need to pay attention to that.
I have a chapter in my dissertation around the history of Metis. "Metis" is quite a contemporary term. Mixed ancestry people have been identified by many terms as we evolved through contact and through historic settlements.
A good historical friend of mine — I call him the Metis walking history book — reminds me that we often are referred to as Black Scots, Bois-Brûlés, half-breeds and country born. There are many different terms. We now have one term, really, trying to encompass very diverse populations. There are bound to be disagreements among ourselves and certainly among people who are not part of the communities.
Senator Meredith: Thank you very much, professor, for coming here today. I know you could have gone on a bit longer and I would have enjoyed listening to you. Congratulations on the book as well.
I think it is important that we recognize the issues facing Canadians. That is the way I look at it in terms of the Metis people. One of the things we began to study is the rights and the political rights of Metis centred on their identity. What role do you think the federal government should play in the legal and political recognition of Metis in Canada?
Ms. Bourassa: To be brutally honest with you, I wrote a paper with a colleague of mine with whom you may be familiar, Ian Peach. He is a lawyer and a professor of law at the University of New Brunswick.
I think that Canada, the federal government, needs to get out of the game of defining their indigenous population, period. First Nation, Metis, Inuit — I think we are one of the only countries in the world that continues to do this. If you look at New Zealand and Australia, you will see fine examples where they went to their indigenous populations and said: "Clearly you have an understanding of who you are. Clearly you know who your membership is. You tell us who your membership is and we will accept that and we will move from there."
The whole goal of this, let's face it, was assimilation, and that has failed. By continuing to try to define us and to have these external definitions, we are creating greater problems. We are creating not only external problems, but also internal problems.
The reason I used Howard Adams's quote is that in 1970, he predicted this. He predicted that we would continue to have these issues, so long as we continue to have these external definitions. Now it is happening in Metis communities as well.
I frankly think that the communities know who their membership is. Communities know they have their means. They understand. We have our genealogists in our communities. We have our means. Community control in Metis communities has always been there, but maybe it has not been recognized.
Senator Meredith: Let me interrupt you, professor. Others who have appeared before us talked about the language, the culture, being self-identified and so on. You believe in the parameter of saying that if you are a Metis and you feel you are a Metis, that should be a qualifier, and then there is having community acceptance. As the previous speaker indicated, the community should be the one that accepts a Metis.
As well, how are the youth responding to those who are having this identity crisis, so to speak, as to who they are and where they originated from? You talked about the severe stereotypes. You have been called half-breeds, and various other things, in terms of labeling put on you by the broader society. How are the young people coming to grips with that within the Metis community?
Ms. Bourassa: I want to be clear that I do not think there should be no parameters, because I have been misquoted before. You cannot just have anyone say, "Oh, I am Metis. Here I am." That does not work. I understand why this whole discussion is happening. I understand that many people have taken advantage of identifying as Metis, Inuit, First Nations — whatever it might be. I understand why the discussion is taking place, but I am saying that there have always been controls and, particularly, community controls. Community acceptance has always been a key factor.
Prior to Powley, prior to being recognized in the Constitution, there were generally three criteria. The royal commission has thoroughly investigated this. The three criteria for most Metis communities across Canada were that you self-identified, because there was a time in Canadian history when it was a danger to self-identify and that is why that is a criterion. You show your ancestry and you do your genealogy; that is a criterion. You also have to be accepted by the Metis community. Those were the criteria. However, we have moved away from that community criteria being important or being as important. I am saying that we need to start going back to some of those community controls that were there, because that is what is causing the splintering. That is where I am coming from.
I think for sure having these external forces and the Indian Act does not just affect First Nations people; it affects Metis people, too. The youth are in crisis. I will be honest. It is very confusing to them. When I go through in my class and try to explain Bill C-31 and 6(1) and 6(2), I have students in my class say, "Oh, my God. Now I understand. Oh, I get why my sibling is a 6(2) and I am a 6(1). I get why my sibling is a non-status and I am 6(2). She cannot get rights and I can." It is craziness. We have families who have Metis, non-status and First Nations.
Who else has to think about these things? Who else has to try to figure this out and fit into the boxes of legal parameters and then think about who I am really? What does "identity" mean? Is it something legal and political, or is it something very personal, as Elder Hartley was saying. She was talking about personal, cultural things, which is what we are trying to instill in our youth, because that is where the pride is. It is not about ticking the right box.
We have youth who are very confused. Where do I fit? There is no box for many of us where we really fit. I think it is causing a huge crisis in our communities. I have a 13-year-old daughter who practices Anishinabe traditional ways and she is a proud Metis young woman. I am raising her that way, but one day she will have to be faced with ticking a box. In doing that, she is legitimizing these colonial forces, but, in not doing it, she will be denied things that are her birth right.
My opinion is that this is snowballing, and all because of a failure of an assimilation policy that was supposed to be abandoned in 1973.
The Acting Chair: Professor, you have addressed one of the core issues on which we will have to make recommendations in this study. We do have to consider eligibility for government programs. Accepting, as I do, your criticism of the current method of defining Metis, if not other Aboriginal people, particularly the disconnecting with communities, I have to ask you this question: What do you think of the idea, provided identification was done respectfully, with a registry of some kind, particularly with regard to the Metis? What do you think of that concept?
Ms. Bourassa: I am pragmatic. I am pretty sure you will not go and throw the Indian Act out and change everything just because of what I said. I have talked about this with our Metis leadership. I have very good relationships. I do research with the Métis Nation in Saskatchewan and we have had frank discussions about this.
I do not think that registry necessarily needs to be tied to both citizenship and access to rights. I think that you can have registries. I guess I should back up. First, when my Mushum was alive, we were able to get our local memberships through our communities. Those local memberships were then passed on to the provincial bodies and they were accepted. That is not happening any longer, so now we have to go through two separate processes. I can have my local membership, but I know I am not eligible for that provincial registry, right off the bat. My husband is from Red River, so my daughter is covered. Both my girls will be covered, but I know I am not. I do not have the Métis Nation homeland ancestry.
Even though I am accepted in the community, I have my membership at my local and I meet all those criteria, I know I will not make the registry. There are many like me. I am not the only one. There are many people like me.
If we go back to having more community control and we are able then to have our membership lists recognized by the provincial bodies, instead of having to go through two processes to have our names on the registry, I think that is a positive step. That is how it used to be.
I think some of the provinces are going down the wrong path in combining the registry. I understand why they are being so firm on some of the requirements, because now you have access. It is about Aboriginal rights: hunting, fishing and trapping. However, I think for some people, primarily many of us who are urban dwellers, with respect to access to hunting, fishing and trapping, we will not be able to meet the Powley requirements anyway.
For many of us, we want to access programs and services as a citizen. We may not access harvesting rights. You could separate the harvesting rights and the citizenship rights very easily, and people could then apply for those. If I want to apply for harvesting rights, then I have to meet the Powley criteria, particularly around historic geographical location. I understand that, but I should not be excluded from accessing services and programs based on that. That has been my argument.
If we are going down this path, I do not think it needs to be combined, because you will exclude — I am estimating — 40 per cent of the Metis population right now, maybe more, basically that were non-status and were adopted into the community, for generations. It is not just one or two people. Does this make sense?
The Acting Chair: Yes. Thank you.
Senator Meredith: Professor, you have identified that provinces are going down the wrong path. Have you made recommendations in your capacity as to how this can be rectified? What has been the response, if any?
Ms. Bourassa: I think they are in a tough position. I have talked to our president in Saskatchewan and he is very understanding. He understands this issue. He knows it is splintering our communities. Much of the leadership knows that. I know our local regional director knows that for sure.
Senator Meredith: Their hands are tied?
Ms. Bourassa: Dollars are tied to this, and it is on a timeline. This is why, as I said, our communities are frustrated. The process has been rushed. There has been a lack of consultation. Our voices have not been heard. They did this round of quick consultations last summer when hardly anyone could even come out and, when people did come out, the process was already in place. It was not really a consultation, in many people's eyes. It was, "Oh, by the way, we have this money, we have to spend it, we have to get the registry up and running; this is what we are doing."
I think, again, it is the external pressures on our political bodies in many ways that are forcing their hand, and we see this a lot with Metis communities because we get so much less than First Nations communities get in terms of dollar amount. That is not a criticism. It is not anything like us versus them. I am not trying to say that, but the resources are much scarcer for us.
I find that when we get resources thrown our way, we clamour to make sure that we use them and to meet those criteria so we get more. That has had huge implications for the registry in some of the provinces — not all. I think British Columbia is actually going down a different path so they can meet the needs of their Metis citizens. I could be wrong, but I think they are doing it separately. Not every province is doing it like that.
The Acting Chair: We had some evidence from our last witness about the registry process in Ontario, and it rings true with what you have said.
Senator Ataullahjan: Thank you, Professor Bourassa. I will ask you a straightforward question. What is the state of maternal and child health in the Metis community?
Ms. Bourassa: I really wish I could give you accurate numbers. This is the problem and I am so glad you asked me that question. We are the only community that does not have accurate data for birth rates, death rates or infant mortality. No one collects data on us.
This will sound awful, but I was elated when Statistics Canada did a 10-year mortality study on us because that was some data on us. We are one of the most under-studied populations. Coming from an Aboriginal person, you might think: You want to be studied? There is power in data to be able to say, "Hey, we are not doing well over here." I know we are not. Poverty is endemic in our communities.
I can tell you from what I see working in the communities. All I do is community-based research. I do not do anything else, with both First Nations and Metis communities. I am not excluding Inuit communities; it is just that I have not had the opportunity to work with them. It is terrible.
We just recently did the first known community-based provincial health survey in Saskatchewan with a colleague of mine, Dr. Vivian Ramsden, and the Métis Nation of Saskatchewan. We released it last year. We found incredibly high rates of obesity and diabetes, high rates of high blood pressure, cholesterol, tobacco and alcohol usage. However, we did not want it to be a deficit approach because these are things our community already knows. We knew this, but we needed that data to demonstrate to government that we need services and programs.
I appreciated the comment earlier that government cannot do everything. It is very true. I want to tell you that we went out and took an asset-based approach and said, "Okay, this is some bad news, but what do we want to work on first?" We wanted to celebrate something, if we could. We found that a lot of people who smoked did not smoke in their homes. We said, "Let us be creative here." Dr. Ramsden came up with the idea of a green light program, so we handed out green light bulbs to Metis families who had smoke-free homes, and they went like wildfire. We sold out every time we had these events and, with it, we handed out information about tobacco cessation.
Our second phase, which has just been funded, is peer-to-peer community-based tobacco cessation. All of the data collection in the survey was done by Metis community members whom we trained, the same with the handing out of the light bulbs. This will happen with the peer-to-peer training. It is mobilizing our communities in a good way. They are proud of the fact that they are not smoking in their homes, and now we will try to work on the issue of tobacco, instead of being overwhelmed by the negativity.
Also, the Métis Nation has a report wherein they can go with this much-needed data, but we do not have accurate data.
This is a very long answer to your question, but I am trying to make the point that we do not have accurate data, such as child health data, particularly for Metis. It just does not exist.
Senator Ataullahjan: That brings me to my next question. Your research interests include culturally competent care and health service delivery. What does that mean with regard to the Metis community? Would it be different from the care provided in Canadian towns and cities?
Ms. Bourassa: When I think about culturally competent care, I think primarily about the systemic racism that is endemic in our health care system. I will not shy away from it, because it exists.
I have done extensive research, with both First Nations and Metis communities, and the number one issue they bring up is that they feel — again, I feel perception is reality — that they experience racism in the health care system and that it affects them. It affects the care they get, attending their appointments, going to the hospital, having a regular physician and all of those things that many people take for granted. Culturally safe care, for me, is First Nation, Metis and Inuit people being able to access care in a safe manner and not feeling like they will be discriminated against at their point of contact, wherever that may be.
Senator Raine: Thank you very much, Ms. Bourassa. You have given us a really interesting perspective. I can see that you are very passionate about the subject and have a lot of experience.
I am interested in two things. One is that if you are saying that going through a provincial organization is not the way to go in terms of strengthening Metis identity, but it should be community based, then is it not true that there are a lot of Metis people who are not geographically located as part of a community? How do you see this would work if you said: Okay, let us take the provincial and federal registries out of it and do it at a community level? How would you go about doing that?
Ms. Bourassa: I do not necessarily see that they would be out of it. I see it more respecting the communities, as they used to. Those provincial and federal bodies are born of the community. The communities used to hold them accountable. They try to hold them accountable. What needs to happen is that we remember that those organizations are community organizations. It has gotten lost since there has been this intense pressure, particularly since the Powley decision.
I think there is pressure to narrow the Metis definition so that the government does not have to be responsible for as many Metis people. That is how I feel.
Senator Raine: Mark that quote. I think you have put it very well. Of course, you can appreciate that budgets are limited everywhere.
Ms. Bourassa: Of course.
Senator Raine: If you are looking at services and programs with limited financial resources, should access to them be controlled at the community or provincial level?
Ms. Bourassa: I think it can be controlled at the provincial level, with community input. I just think the community piece has been lost. I would like to see that strengthened. I think most of the provincial organizations would like that, too. I am not trying to blame them in any way. They are under immense pressure and they have to meet targets and deadlines. In many ways they do not have a lot of choice. I talked to a lot of the regional directors, who understand, and they know. We do not have pleasant conversations. It is all about the pressures that they are facing. I really feel for them.
I would not want to run for a political office in a million years. They understand that they serve the communities, but the community voice is being lost and it is no fault of their own. I really feel this is coming from a federal push to narrow Metis definition, and their hands are a bit tied.
Senator Raine: We had a very interesting session in this room several months ago with the Sami people from Norway. Are you familiar with the Sami and how their community is defined and organized?
Ms. Bourassa: Yes. I cannot say I am an expert, but they visited our campus and we had some conversations with them.
Senator Raine: It seemed to me that was a very positive way. I asked them how you determine if you are a Sami person. They said, if you feel like you are Sami, you can declare yourself as a Sami person. They have some Aboriginal rights for reindeer herding and fishing.
When I asked them about other entitlements, they were a bit surprised because they said Norwegians have a good social system and everyone should be the same, whether you are Sami or non-Sami. The access to social services should not be any different. I found that quite interesting.
Ms. Bourassa: You make a good point. In a perfect world, if we had an equitable system, that would be the case. I do not think the assimilation and colonization process was as fierce in Norway. I do not want to diminish it in any way.
Unfortunately, in Canada we are seeing intergenerational effects of colonization, so we are constantly playing catch- up. We have these huge gaps in education and employment. We still have these massive poverty levels and that translates into poor health. The problem here is that it is very hard to achieve that equity when we are so far behind.
Senator Raine: If you are poor and you are non-native, or you are Metis or Aboriginal, you are still poor and the programs should be available to everyone.
Ms. Bourassa: You are right. They should be available to everyone. The problem is when you are poor, a Metis and a woman, sometimes it is referred to as "triple jeopardy," because we have intense systemic discrimination here. People do not like to talk about it. We always like to say in Canada that we are a great nation and surely we do not have racism here, but we do.
I have to tell you, over and over again, even the professionals and medical doctors I work with will acknowledge that systemic racism exists and they do not know how to deal with it. They do not know how to deconstruct it.
Senator Raine: I often think that in education we have two problems. One is to get the education levels of Aboriginal and Metis people up to national standards, but we have a huge education job to do with non-natives to the native culture and heritage, which we should be so proud of. It is really relatively unknown to many Canadians.
Ms. Bourassa: I am so glad you said that. I just taught 300 nurses last fall in my Indigenous Health Studies 100, which is the first time it has been a mandatory course in a nursing program.
I have been teaching 13 years and I never like to lay blame or guilt. We cannot change the past. No one can go back, wave a magic wand and change the past. I am firm believer that we are all here on Turtle Island to stay. We need to learn to live together, mend fences and move forward. We also have to know our history and where we came from, so we all can understand the context of what we are talking about.
I talk about this with the nurses and I would bet at least 70 per cent of my nursing class had not heard of a residential school and did not know what treaties were. It blew me away. Part of it was this anger and push-back that you get when you feel cheated that you did not learn something. Who am I to be standing there telling them some of these things?
Over time, over the course of the semester, as they digested it, I show them the grief wheel and how you go through emotions. It is almost like grief. Most of them were able to come to terms with it and said, "I understand why we need to learn this now, why it will help in my profession." However, it was initially difficult for them and there was a lot of anger. They asked, "Why am I in first-year university and only learning about this now?"
Senator Raine: You come from Saskatchewan, and I would say Saskatchewan is well ahead of the rest of the country in terms of "we are all treaty people."
Ms. Bourassa: I agree. We are supposed to have mandatory treaty education. One of my students actually went back to her hometown and challenged her principal and said, "Why did we not get treaty education?" He did not know why, so he went to the board and found out. Her little brother is going to the same high school and they are getting treaty education this year.
Senator Raine: Thank you very much. You have a big job to do, but I can see you are up to it.
The Acting Chair: Professor, I think you have been extremely helpful in assisting us with really what is one of the core issues that we have to deal with as a committee. Thank you very much. We are also aware of the publications that you have mentioned, and they will be very helpful to our researchers as we do our work.
Ms. Bourassa: Thank you.
The Acting Chair: There being no further questions, I will thank everyone and call the meeting to a close.
(The committee adjourned.)