Honourable senators, I rise today to voice my support for Senator McCallum’s proposed study into Indigenous identity and the implications of false claims of such identity. Considering the complexities of Indigenous identity and its impact on policy, representation and the rights of Indigenous peoples in Canada, the importance of moving forward with this study cannot be overstated.

Further, never has something been more crystallized to me than has been the need for this study by the recent events surrounding the now former minister Randy Boissonnault. Learning that someone in as high a position in this country as a federal cabinet minister can lie about being Indigenous to further his career and personal business dealings, including attempting to fraudulently secure funding from his own government, perfectly brought into focus what Senator McCallum described when she moved this motion.

As Senator McCallum said:

Playing Indian is the increasingly common practice of non‑Indigenous . . . people making especially public claims to Indigenous identity, sometimes for great financial gain and career advancement.

It is vital to recognize that these claims carry real consequences. Individuals who falsely claim Indigenous identity may benefit from opportunities intended for those with legitimate claims to Indigenous status. These benefits could include funding, as we’ve seen in the example of former Minister Boissonnault, recognition in educational or employment initiatives or a position in public policy discussions where Indigenous perspectives are crucial, again, as we saw with MP Boissonnault.

This not only distorts the truth but further perpetuates systemic inequities. False or unsubstantiated claims of Indigenous identity erode the legitimacy of Indigenous communities and diminish the voices of those who genuinely carry the heritage, culture and lived experiences of Indigenous people. Such false claims, especially from individuals in positions of power or influence, can also distort public perception of what it means to be Indigenous. This is not a minor issue, colleagues. It is a matter of representation, rights and access to resources that have historically been denied to Indigenous people.

I’d also like to draw your attention to something else Senator McCallum said in her speech, quoting the Indigenous Women’s Collective. She stated:

. . . the most insidious harm caused by “pretendianism” is how it most hurts Indigenous people who are reconnecting to their culture and identity. . . .

She continued, saying:

“Pretendians” perversely claim the vulnerability and violence experienced by Indigenous peoples as their own and then use it to their own callous and self-centred purposes.

In adopting this motion, the committee would be required to examine social, cultural and legal implications of false claims to Indigenous heritage in what would be an essential step forward for ensuring the integrity and authenticity of Indigenous representation in our national discourse.

I think that MP Boissonnault’s case highlights the need to ensure that any claims of Indigenous identity are not used to exploit or marginalize those who have long created the burdens of such marginalization. Indigenous people in Canada have faced centuries of dispossession, erasure and discrimination. Their voices, experiences and rights must be safeguarded.

Second, the study is essential for establishing clear and fair guidelines around Indigenous identity. There are existing criteria for membership in many Indigenous communities, whether defined by descent, culture or family connection. However, these criteria can sometimes be misunderstood, misused or deliberately manipulated for personal gain. This is something Senator LaBoucane-Benson spoke about as a Métis in her remarks on this motion:

. . . Métis identity is not something you can claim simply by vaguely pointing in the direction of an Indigenous ancestor. Rather, it’s something very specific.

A study would clarify this criterion and establish guidelines for identifying Indigenous people in a way that is transparent and consistent with Indigenous community standards, and not based on self-identification alone.

Third, such a study would allow us to address narratives that seek to define or dilute Indigenous identity for political and economic purposes. By providing a forum for robust evidence-based discussion, we can move beyond stereotypes and misconceptions and take steps towards real reconciliation.

Finally, we cannot overlook the ethical considerations that come with Indigenous identity claims. For many Indigenous people, their identity is not a mere label or a symbol. It is a living, breathing experience rooted in culture, community, history and resistance. To treat this identity as something that can be claimed without consequence undermines the very foundation of Indigenous culture.

In light of recent developments, colleagues, I believe it is critical that we begin this study by hearing from Randy Boissonnault himself, as the individual currently and so visibly at the centre of this conversation. His testimony could provide crucial insight into why he made these claims and the broader implications of doing so. Considering that his stated reason for resigning his cabinet post was to allow him to focus on addressing these troubling allegations against him, I would argue that we would be providing him the opportunity and platform to do just that. Moreover, inviting Mr. Boissonnault would underscore the seriousness of the study. It would demonstrate that we’re not simply interested in engaging in a theoretical discussion, but are committed to addressing real-world cases and the impact that false claims have on the lives of the Indigenous community.

In conclusion, the call for a study into Indigenous identity, as championed by Senator Mary Jane McCallum, is not just timely but essential, colleagues. False claims of Indigenous identity, such as those made by Randy Boissonnault, undermine the efforts of those who have long fought for Indigenous rights, recognition and justice. The study is not about singling out individuals, but rather about ensuring the integrity and authenticity of Indigenous identity within Canada’s legal, political and social fabric.

By moving forward with this study and inviting Randy Boissonnault as the first witness, we can start a much-needed conversation that will have long-lasting implications for the way we view Indigenous identity in this country. It is a conversation that must be rooted in respect, accountability and, above all, truth.

With that in mind, I want to address something that was said in this chamber yesterday on this matter, in a response I received in regard to the case of Mr. Boissonnault from the government itself.

Honourable colleagues, we have a case of a minister of the Crown, a minister who represents our government, who decided to claim to be Indigenous when he is not Indigenous. We have a prime minister who refused, for days and almost weeks, to fire him for this egregious behaviour, to basically hold him to account, which is the role of the prime minister.

Instead of firing someone who did something as egregious as this or asking him to resign, we received a statement yesterday from the Prime Minister saying that they’ve agreed for him to step aside for a period of time. That is just not enough, colleagues. Politics cannot seep into things that so egregiously attack the fabric of who we are as Canadians. There comes a point at which even in this institution we have to stand up, and, of course, what has happened over the past few days and weeks has crystallized even more the fact that this motion from Senator McCallum is so necessary.

To be honest, I’m a little surprised that more of us aren’t standing up in outrage with what has transpired over the past few weeks. When I asked the government leader a legitimate question in regard to Mr. Boissonnault, he said that I’m scraping the bottom of the barrel because I also pointed out something the Liberal Party of Canada has a hard time digesting: that we currently have a prime minister and a leader of that party, who, on a number of occasions in his life, was wearing blackface and pretending to be a person of colour when he wasn’t.

Senator Gold, I know that you roll your eyes about this, but, at the end of the day, that is a fact, and it is not any more acceptable than what Minister Boissonnault has done over the past few weeks. It is not enough to say that people have misinterpreted things or that this is a learning moment. There comes a point in time when you are in a position of authority and leadership in the country when you have to stand up, face the music and take authority. If you want things to change, you hold people to account. When you genuinely do not hold people to account, that is when things never change. We talk about national reconciliation all of the time. We talk about doing right by our Indigenous communities, but we never stand up and do what needs to be done.