Honourable senators, this item stands adjourned in the name of the Honourable Senator Housakos, and after my intervention today I ask for leave that it remain adjourned in his name.

Is leave granted, honourable senators?

Honourable senators, I rise today to address Motion 96, which was introduced last year by Senator McCallum. The motion would have the Indigenous Peoples Committee examine the issue of misrepresentations of Indigenous ancestry and identity.

I thank Senator McCallum for bringing this matter to the attention of our chamber, and I’m grateful for the opportunity to discuss it, particularly from a Métis perspective.

Overall, Canadians’ knowledge of the diversity of First Nations, Métis and Inuit culture and history is not what it should it be. It’s getting better, but there’s a long way to go.

Like many Métis people, I’m especially sensitive to the gaps and misunderstandings that exist about Métis identity. So, if you’ll indulge me, I’ve prepared some remarks on this subject — partly academic, partly personal. I hope you’ll find it interesting, as well as useful when matters that affect Métis people and communities come before us in the future.

The Rupertsland Institute, named for the original Métis homeland, states:

The Métis are one of three distinct Aboriginal peoples of Canada recognized under the 1982 Canadian Constitution. During the Fur Trade (1670-1870), the Métis were known to be fiercely independent and instrumental in the development of western Canada.

The word Métis comes from the Latin term “miscere” (to mix) and was used initially to describe the children of Native women and French men.

Colleagues, this is how many Canadians today think of Métis people. There is a misconception that, if someone has partly Indigenous ancestry, that makes them Métis. Often, people who are beginning to reclaim their Indigenous ancestry declare themselves Métis — in the old sense of mixed blood — without understanding that the meaning of the term has changed dramatically over the last 200 years.

The fact is that if someone discovers that their great‑grandmother was Cree, for example, then their responsibility is to connect with their Cree family members, find the community she was from and learn about what it means to be Cree from that geographical perspective.

To claim Métis identity without understanding the history of Métis people and nationhood is unfortunate and false.

Some do so with the intent to deceive; for others, it can be a good-faith misunderstanding. But it can be hurtful and harmful either way.

In her sweeping history of the Métis people, Jean Teillet writes that Métis identity is bound up in Métis history and stories. As she says:

Only descendants of those who lived those stories within the geographical boundaries of their motherland are part of the historical Métis.

The Rupertsland Institute describes the original Métis culture as:

 . . . a fusion of French, English, Scottish and Indian influences, and took root and flourished in the late 1800s. The Métis developed a unique language called Michif, using both Indian nouns, and English or French verbs. Métis fiddlers combined jigs and reels into their unique forms of dance and music. Métis women created intricately decorated attire included woven sashes, embroidered gun sheaths, deer hide caps, quilled and beaded pipe bags, and the capote, a European-style coat made from Hudson Bay point blankets. The sale of these items often contributed to the income earned by the Métis family.

The Métis developed technologies for moving freight, such as the Red River Cart and York boat, and were known to elect Councils to organize highly successful buffalo hunts. From the buffalo meat the Métis provided pemmican to the fur trade, a remarkable energy-giving food, which in great measure, is responsible for the first crossing of the North American continent and explorations of the far northwest. By 1816, the Métis had challenged the Hudson’s Bay Company’s monopoly of the fur trade, and began to develop a political consciousness and a collective sense of community and nation-hood.

I will note that the institute is referring to the first European crossing of the North American continent. The point is that, while Métis culture draws on a combination of influences — as many cultures do — it developed into something all its own.

Métis people established successful, self-determining communities throughout Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. Lawrence J. Barkwell lists and describes them in his 2016 report, Métis Homeland: Its Settlements and Communities.

It was — and is — at the Red River and in these Métis communities that the unique identity of Métis people was formed and forged — with language, clothing, art and a lifestyle that are distinct yet somewhat connected to both settler and First Nations culture.

Importantly, they developed a fierce sense of independence and commitment to self-determination that characterizes Métis communities to this day.

However, while past and current culture is essential to Métis identity, it doesn’t tell the whole story.

Identity for Indigenous people is also very political, and can include the requirement of official membership in a nation and proof of ancestry. This goes to the heart of what Senator McCallum is asking the Senate to study — fraudulent claims of Indigenous identity.

In September 2002, the Métis National Council adopted the following definition of Métis:

“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.

But we have to break that definition down to truly understand it.

“Historic Métis Nation” means the Aboriginal people known in the 1800s as Métis or half-breeds who resided in the Historic Métis Nation Homeland.

“Historic Métis Nation Homeland” means the area of west‑central North America used and occupied as the traditional territory of the Métis.

“Métis Nation” means the Aboriginal people descended from the Historic Métis Nation which is now comprised of all Métis Nation citizens and is one of the “aboriginal peoples of Canada” within the meaning of section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

“Distinct from other Aboriginal peoples” means distinct for cultural and nationhood purposes. This means a person can’t hold a Métis and a First Nations band or treaty status at the same time.

In Alberta, to become a member of the Métis Nation of Alberta, in addition to meeting the Métis National Council’s national definition, the following documents are also required: a complete genealogy that clearly outlines your Métis ancestry dating back to the mid-1800s, a detailed birth certificate, one piece of valid photo identification and proof of permanent residency in Alberta for a minimum of 90 consecutive days.

I should note that there are different bodies that act as representatives of Métis people. In Alberta, for instance, there’s the Métis Nation of Alberta and the Metis Settlements General Council, which are land-based Métis people. To avoid oversimplification, I’ll refrain from trying to explain these distinctions in a short period of time, but the general point holds that 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.

For example, allow me to tell you the story my own Métis family, which spans this vast and beautiful Métis homeland from Montreal to St-Paul-des-Métis in Alberta. Jean Teillet says that the Northwest — all the land west and north of Montreal — is our original Métis homeland, known at the same time as Rupert’s Land.

It was in Montreal where my first ancestor, François Fournaise, arrived from Toulouse, France, around 1725, first as a soldier, then as a voyageur for the Hudson’s Bay Company. His grandson Joseph Lafournaise moved to St. Boniface and married an Indigenous woman named Suzanne in 1830. Then they moved to the Red River. Their son and my great-great-grandfather Jean‑Baptiste Lafournaise dit Laboucane moved his family from the Red River to White Plains, Manitoba. These are all Métis communities.

According to the online Métis museum:

In 1878 six brothers of the Laboucane family left White Horse Plain in Manitoba and headed west for the Battle River (Alberta). They were accompanied by members of the St. Germain and Poitras families. Three Laboucane brothers, Jean Baptiste, Gabriel and Elzear settled on land north of the river crossing and the other three, Jerome, Pierre and Guillaume settled on the south side.

These entrepreneurial Métis families established a trade route for transporting merchandise in the famous Red River carts, as well as raising livestock and horses. The community was formally known as the Laboucane Settlement for many years, until it was renamed Duhamel, Alberta, and there is still a historical Laboucane Settlement sign in that area.

In his 2016 report, Lawrence Barkwell notes that:

With the arrival of homesteaders in the region, in 1896, a number of the families from the Laboucane Settlement moved to new colony of Saint-Paul-des-Métis north of the Saskatchewan River . . . .

According to the book Restoring the History of St. Paul des Métis, published in 2020, “In 1898, the prosperous LaBoucane family with their livestock and farm equipment started moving to St. Paul des Métis.”

Senators, I brought my receipts, but this is what you need to do if you’re claiming your Métis status.

By all measures, St-Paul-des-Métis was a successful, thriving community. Many of the Métis homesteaders had large herds of cattle and horses as well as other holdings. By 1904, there were 80 families and 600 people living there.

The later history of St-Paul-des-Métis is unfortunate. It includes a betrayal by a Catholic priest, even though the Métis families were devoted Catholics; racist laws regarding communal landownership on the “half-breed reserve,” as the community was classified; and the building of the railway, which suddenly made the land much more valuable and caused it to be rezoned to a municipality, with the Métis people now deemed squatters. They were told to leave, and the priest worked to attract White Catholic francophone settlers to populate the new town of St. Paul.

This true history of St-Paul-des-Métis is just now being told due to the efforts of a group called Reconciliation St. Paul. I’m so grateful for their work. As we’re all finally starting to realize, acknowledging and reckoning with our past is a prerequisite for building a better future.

Despite the evictions, my family stayed in St. Paul. My great‑grandfather Alfred, my grandfather Paul, as well as my father, Terry, and I were all born there. I’m proud to be part of a Métis nation that has First Nations and European roots but that has forged a distinct identity through unique history, geography and culture.

Honourable senators, the story of the Métis people on their homeland is the story of the Lafournaise dit Laboucane family. It’s my history. At the same time, it’s a part of the history of this country, which belongs to all of us. I hope you and all Canadians feel a connection to Métis history and culture. I invite you to enjoy it and cherish it. And I invite Canadians to respect it — which means, among other things, not laying claim to it if it’s not really yours.

Once again, I thank Senator McCallum for introducing the motion and giving me the opportunity to deliver these remarks.

Senators, I’ll add one more thing: that I’m really lucky. My dad’s cousin Barbara did all of this history. I have an entire family tree given to me by Barbara. When I was reading Jean Teillet’s book The North-West Is Our Mother, I could map my family history along her book. It was actually a gift to do this speech, Senator McCallum, because I got to sit in that history a bit.

But there are a lot of young people who are products of the child welfare system, and they don’t have a Barbara in their life, and they don’t have the capacity to find out who they are. I have to hand it to the Métis Nation of Alberta because they’re holding a lot of genealogy for those kids so that they can reclaim their Métis history. If we do this study, and I think it’s a good idea, we have to be careful to think about all those children who were not connected to their families, who don’t have a family tree to call upon. We have to be careful that they don’t get caught up in the identity fraud that is happening, because they just don’t know who they are. Thank you for your time today, senators. Hiy hiy.

Yes.

Thank you for the question. I don’t have the numbers. I think it’s worthwhile studying that, for sure, in the committee study. I agree with you that finding the truth in all of this — and the history is oral, and it’s written; it’s definitely something that we can find — would be a worthwhile enterprise.