Home Page Election 2019 News Opinion Foreign Policy Politics Policy Legislation Lobbying Hill Life & People Hill Climbers Heard On The Hill Calendar Archives Classifieds
Hill Times Events Inside Ottawa Directory Hill Times Store Hill Times Careers The Wire Report The Lobby Monitor Parliament Now
Subscribe Free Trial Reuse & Permissions Advertising
Log In

‘This is cultural genocide’: activists call on Liberals to act now to fix Indian Act sex discrimination

By Charelle Evelyn      

The Trudeau cabinet could make the decision ‘on any given Tuesday’ to make the necessary changes, says Sharon McIvor, who brought the most recent complaint to a UN human rights body.

Liberal Sen. Lillian Dyck had unanimous Senate support in February for a motion calling on the government to remove the remaining elements of sex discrimination through the Indian Act by June 21. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade
Share a story
The story link will be added automatically.

The government’s lack of action in the face of multiple calls to strip the remaining vestiges of sex discrimination from the Indian Act before the election is tantamount to cultural genocide, say Indigenous women and activists who descended on Parliament Hill April 9. But the Liberals won’t shift from existing timelines, which have a report on next steps not coming until June.

“Existing Indian Act registration provisions are based on assimilation and elimination and allows sex-based discrimination against Indigenous women and their descendants to this day,” said Francyne Joe, president of the Native Women’s Association of Canada (NWAC), during a press conference in West Block. “This is cultural genocide. And the government must act now.”

In January, the United Nations Human Rights Committee released a decision saying that Canada is violating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights it ratified in 1976 by denying full Indian status—known as 6(1)(a)—to First Nations women and their descendants.

B.C. lawyer Sharon McIvor launched the most-recent successful complaint to the United Nations Human Rights Committee that found the Canadian government is violating an international covenant through the Indian Act. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade

The committee’s decision in a complaint brought by B.C. lawyer Sharon McIvor said the government is obligated to ensure that the Indian Act “is interpreted to allow registration by all persons including [Ms. McIvor and her son, the complainants] who previously were not entitled to be registered under section 6(1)(a) solely as a result of preferential treatment accorded to Indian men over Indian women” born before 1985, and “to take steps to address residual discrimination within First Nations communities arising from the legal discrimination based on sex in the Indian Act” within 180 days.

In December 2017, after the government compromised on Senate-led amendments to broaden the scope of the legislation, Parliament passed Bill S-3, which allows all women to pass Indian status down to their descendants if they’ve married or borne children of non-Indian men, dating back to 1869, as opposed to an earlier proposed cut-off date of 1951, to comply with a 2015 Quebec Superior Court decision. However, the changes to the law don’t have an actual timeline attached. Bill S-3 prescribes deadlines for beginning consultations on the implementation, and reporting to Parliament, but the actual removal of the sex-based inequities requires an order-in-council (essentially a cabinet order).

In an emailed response to questions from The Hill Times, Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Carolyn Bennett’s (Toronto-St. Paul’s Ont.) office said the government is “working collaboratively with its partners to develop an implementation plan to eliminate or mitigate any challenges or unintended consequences of bringing the 1951 cut-off amendments into force. This includes identifying any additional measures or resources required to do this right and we have appointed [Claudette Dumont-Smith] as a ministerial special representative, who is concluding a national engagement process to do this.”

On Feb. 28, Liberal Senator Lillian Dyck (Saskatchewan) received unanimous backing in the Senate for a motion calling on the government to bring in the outstanding provisions of Bill S-3 no later than June 21. “It’s just unbelievable that in this day and age that women do not have the same rights as men with regard to passing on their Indian status,” she said.

The next deadline is a June 12 update to Parliament on the path forward, Ms. Bennett’s office said, which hasn’t been altered in the wake of the UN committee’s decision. “The consultation timelines were set out in the co-design phase of the Collaborative Process, in accordance with Bill S-3, and as such; they were not impacted by the UN Human Rights Committee’s decision.”

Dawn Lavell-Harvard, president of the Ontario Native Women’s Association, said discriminating against women isn’t something that requires much consultation. “It is a human rights violation and governments cannot consult communities on acceptable levels of discrimination, on acceptable levels of violation of human rights,” she said. “This tactic is a stalling process and it’s just continuing the further violation of Indigenous women.”

Since S-3 was passed, changes to the Indian Act “eliminating sex-based inequities back to the creation of the modern registry in 1951 have already been implemented,” Ms. Bennett’s office said. “Once in force, the amendments for the removal of the 1951 cut-off will fix sex-based inequities all the way back to 1869.”

As part of the consultation process, the government has attended 208 community sessions with First Nations and Indigenous groups, with more scheduled for this month, according to Ms. Bennett’s office. This is in addition to the consultation activities groups and organizations held on their own, and with funding from the government. Ms. Dumont-Smith has led 14 regional events across the country. The government approved 183 funding proposals for consultation activities.

“On any given Tuesday, cabinet can make us legally equal to our [male] counterparts,” said Ms. McIvor.

Ryerson University professor Pamela Palmater joined other First Nations women in West Block on April 9 calling on the government to fulfil all the provisions in Bill S-3, to get rid of sex discrimination from the Indian Act, by June. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade

‘Way past time’ for Sen. Beyak to take down racist letters: Minister Bennett

The refusal to act any quicker than the timeline set out in S-3 comes amid Ms. Bennett’s ongoing calls for unaffiliated Senator Lynn Beyak to comply with a recommendation from the Senate ethics officer regarding letters posted to her official website the officer said are racist.

Pierre Legault began an investigation in March 2018 into whether the Ontario Senator had breached the Chamber’s Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code by posting the letters.

Senator Lynn Beyak has refused to apologize or take down the offending letters on her website after a finding by the Senate ethics officer on March 19 that she was breaching the Chamber’s ethics code. The Hill Times file photograph

The now-unaffiliated Sen. Beyak was removed from the Conservative Senate caucus in January 2018 after she refused to remove some of the letters from her website. One of the letters said Indigenous people in Canada would only “wait until the government gives them stuff,” and another that said Indigenous people should be “grateful” for the residential school system imposed on them by Canada’s government, in which as many of 6,000 children died and countless suffered abuse.

NDP MP Romeo Saganash (Abitibi-Baie-James-Nunavik-Eeyou, Que.) highlighted this sentiment in a March 28 tweet, where he said, in response to Ms. Bennett’s counting of days since Mr. Legault’s report: “It’s been way longer that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled against your government for discrimination and racism against indigenous kids in this country. You’ve had 7 Compliance Orders since then. Why are you giving orders to others?”

“The Senate Ethics Officer’s requests of Senator Beyak are straightforward,” said Ms. Bennett’s office. “In the context of removing the 1951 cut-off from Indian Act registration, the Government is working collaboratively with its partners to develop an implementation plan to eliminate or mitigate any challenges or unintended consequences of bringing that clause into force.”

Pamela Palmater, a Mi’kmaq lawyer and associate professor who holds the chair in Indigenous governance at Ryerson University, said there’s “lots of discriminatory things happening in the country” and the group didn’t want to comment on anything outside of S-3 on April 9.

Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Carolyn Bennett’s office says the timelines for fulfilling S-3 weren’t changed by the UN committee’s January decision. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade

In his March 19 report, Mr. Legault said he found that Sen. Beyak did breach the code and he recommended three remedial measures: removing the offending letters from the website, making a formal apology and posting the apology on her website, and completing a course on cultural sensitivity.

His report indicated that though Sen. Beyak initially agreed to take the letters down, and refused the other two remedial measures, but she later retracted that agreement.

Since March 19, Ms. Bennett has regularly tweeted calls for Sen. Beyak to comply with Mr. Legault’s recommendations, and on April 5 wrote her a letter directly. “It is way past time that you abide by the Ethics Officer’s orders. You need to remove the letters and admit you have much to learn about the lived experiences of Indigenous peoples,” the letter says. “You have been asked to apologize for your actions over the last two years, and you must, but not because you have been ordered to. For this apology to offer any healing for Indigenous peoples, it must come from a place of sincere regret.”

Sen. Beyak’s office did not respond to a request for comment. According to Mr. Legault’s report, Sen. Beyak told him during interviews completed as part of the investigation process that she “disclaimed an intention to promote anything that could be misconstrued as racist or promoting hatred in any way and reiterated that her objective was to restate the positive stories regarding Indian Residential Schools in order to help find solutions for some of the problems Indigenous people are facing.”

She also expressed views on racism, saying that those “who seek to divide us are the racists”—namely the people who call out racism in the country.

The Senate’s Conflict of Interest and Ethics Committee is currently studying Mr. Legault’s report. As per the Senate’s ethics code, Sen. Beyak will be afforded the opportunity to address the committee during its deliberation—which is always held in private—and the group has a variety of possible sanctions to consider, if deemed appropriate. These include the reduction or removal of access to Senate resources, losing duties or powers conferred by the Senate, being ordered to apologize, or being suspended.


The Hill Times

Charelle Evelyn

Charelle Evelyn is a managing editor with The Hill Times.
- cevelyn@hilltimes.com

Politics This Morning

Get the latest news from The Hill Times

Politics This Morning

Your email has been added. An email has been sent to your address, please click the link inside of it to confirm your subscription.

Nearly 100 new MPs offer new face of Parliament, including 60 in flipped seats

In many ways the incoming Parliament looks quite similar to its predecessor, with 240 returning MPs, the same number of MPs who are Indigenous or a visible minority, and 10 more women.

Rise of advance voting raising questions about impact on, and of, campaigns: experts

Almost 4.8-million Canadians voted at advance polls this year, according to Elections Canada estimates, a roughly 30.6 per cent increase over 2015, accounting for roughly one-quarter of all ballots cast this election.

Watchdog’s proposed minority Parliament rules ‘appalling,’ says legal expert

News|By Mike Lapointe
Democracy Watch says Governor General should speak with all party leaders before deciding who can try forming government, but Emmett Macfarlane says the confidence convention is the linchpin of the parliamentary system.

McKenna may be moved to new cabinet role after four years implementing Grits’ climate policies, say politicos

News|By Neil Moss
Catherine McKenna's 'tenure in environment would have prepared her well for any other kind of responsibility the prime minister may assign,' says former environment minister Jean Charest.

‘They went with what they knew’: Politicos react to Election 43

'If anybody should've won a majority, it should've been Trudeau. He didn't, and it's his to wear,' says CBC columnist Neil Macdonald of the Oct. 21 election results.

‘A clear mandate’: Trudeau wins second term, with voters handing Liberals a minority

News|By Beatrice Paez
Though not improbable, his victory was not inevitable. It brings an end to a nail-biting, gruelling 40-day slog that has exposed deepening rifts across the country.

McKenna wins re-election in Ottawa Centre, trumpets voters’ support for climate fight

News|By Neil Moss
'I’m so relieved,' Catherine McKenna said, about continuing with the Liberal climate change plan.

Election 2019 was a ‘campaign of fear,’ say pollsters

'There may well be a message to this to the main parties, that slagging each other will only take you so far,' says Greg Lyle.

Election 2019 campaign one of the most ‘uninspiring, disheartening, and dirtiest’ in 40 years, says Savoie

News|By Abbas Rana
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May says she has never seen an election where mudslinging overwhelmingly dominated the campaign, leaving little or no time for policy discussion.
Your group subscription includes premium access to Politics This Morning briefing.