MMF denounces Ont. group’s claims

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 23/09/2023 (763 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

A recent First Nations protest on Parliament Hill against Canada recognizing Métis rights of Métis Nation of Ontario communities has garnered approval from the Manitoba Métis Federation, the National Government of the Red River Métis.

On Wednesday, a crowd of 200 people gathered to protest against Bill C-53, federal legislation that would grant the Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO) internal Indigenous self-government rights.

According to Will Goodon, minister with the Manitoba Métis Federation (MFF), the problem is that the MNO has no right to claim Métis ancestry.

“The ancestors that these communities are pointing to as being Métis are actually ancestors of First Nations [people],” Goodon said.

The claims of the MNO are illegitimate, the MMF said in a press release sent out on Sept. 20, and there are no Métis communities in eastern Ontario.

“We use the word ‘eastern’ Ontario, but folks in Ontario see that word a little differently. It’s actually almost all of Ontario, anything east of Rainy River. So that’s a much broader area than just what some perceive when they hear the word ‘eastern’ Ontario,” Goodon said.

The Red River Métis are a distinct people who came to be through contact between First Nations and European people in the Prairies in the late 1700s. But being Métis is not about being of “mixed” ancestry, Goodon says. It’s about the common language of the Métis, Michif, and other cultural markers that are unique to the Red River Métis.

“Whether it’s the beadwork, whether it’s the food that we have, that’s in common with all of us, whether it’s the music, the dance — those things are very uniquely Métis,” Goodon said.

The MNO is seeking to stretch the Métis homeland as far east as the Ottawa River on the border of Quebec, but the First Nations leaders who showed up to protest Bill C-53 say their elders report that there is no evidence of a Métis presence there.

A press release from the Chiefs of Ontario says that the bill points to the federal government’s “rushed” decision that is preventing rights-holders and the public from scrutinizing the legitimacy of the MNO communities’ false claims.

“MNO continues to build its case on misrepresentations, outright falsehoods and sweeping, unsupportable statements,” said Ontario Regional Chief Glen Hare. “The historical ‘communities’ that MNO claims to represent have never factually existed.”

The fact that leaders and nationwide organizations have taken a stand against Bill C-53 is gratifying, Goodon said.

“We’ve been talking about this for years,” he said. “It’s good now that this is getting some spotlight on this identity theft by the MNO.”

MNO President Margaret Froh told the Sun that while she “completely respects” the rights of First Nation leaders to voice their concerns, the legislation on Bill C-53 is “really clear.”

The bill is described as an Act respecting the recognition of “certain Métis governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan, to give effect to treaties with those governments and to make consequential amendments to other Acts,” Canada’s parliamentary website says.

“We are continuing to do our work reaching out to First Nation leaders, for example, but also getting information out more broadly as well about what the legislation is about and what Métis self-government is about,” Froh said. “There’s a lot of misinformation that’s being circulated.”

Froh said that while there are Métis people in Ontario that can trace their roots back to the Red River Métis, many cannot.

“But again, we follow the national definition, which is not limited to only recognizing those that historically tie to the Red River,” she said, adding that that definition hearkens back to the landmark Métis rights victory at the Supreme Court of Canada in R v. Powley.

R v. Powley came about when two people from a community near Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., were charged with hunting contrary to provincial statute. The respondents were acquitted of unlawfully hunting a moose without a hunting licence and knowingly possessing game hunted in contravention of part of Ontario’s Game and Fish Act.

The trial judge found that the members of the community in and around Sault Ste. Marie have, under Section 35 of the Constitution Act, “an aboriginal right to hunt for food that is infringed without justification by the Ontario hunting legislation.” The Superior Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal upheld the acquittals.

The MNO said in September 2021 that the Powley case “set the stage” for the Métis Self-Government Agreements signed in 2019 by the MNO, the Métis Nation of Alberta, Métis Nation-Saskatchewan and the MMF.

However, at that same time, MMF President David Chartrand says that while the MMF respected the hardships, sacrifices and eventual triumph of Steve Powley and his family during their long battle in the courts, the decision could not be used in self-government decisions.

The Powley decision was about affirming that Non-Status and Métis harvesting rights are protected by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. This decision also outlined criteria for how to determine if a specific community had those rights, Chartrand said.

“The stage for self-determination and self-government in the Métis homeland was set by the Red River Métis in the Red River Settlement, the birthplace of the Métis Nation and the heart of the true Métis Nation Homeland, what is now called Winnipeg and the surrounding areas.”

Goodon says Froh is misinterpreting and misapplying the national definition of Métis, which is 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.

Moreover, the MNO’s focus on governance in Bill C-53 is a distraction tactic, Goodon says.

“They aren’t historic Métis Nation, so the rights of self government don’t apply. Most aren’t Métis and most aren’t even Indigenous. The First Nations are right. The MNO is misrepresenting, using falsehoods and are outright lying and misleading. It’s disgusting, quite frankly.”

According to Goodon, the MMF commissioned three academics over the past several years to do studies on the veracity of the MNO’s claims, featuring deep dives into genealogy. Their findings showed that there is little to no connection between the Red River Métis people and MNO communities.

“One of the big things, when we look at nationhood … is kinship connections,” Goodon said. “If you go to any community in the Homeland, from Turtle Mountain in southern Manitoba to Lac la Biche in Alberta, we’re going to be related.”

The MNO is attempting to use Red River Métis culture, identity, flag and language, as well as its alliance with the Métis Nation Saskatchewan and Métis Nation Alberta, said Chartrand.

“Once they’ve gotten what they want from Canada, they will no longer need to use our symbols or our legitimacy to bolster their claims, which is a clear bait-and-switch tactic, with an ultimate result that will shock true Red River Métis citizens across the Homeland and leave Canadians and our people paying the price for generations to come.”

While there were certainly mixed marriages between First Nations and European people in Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and elsewhere outside the Homeland of the Red River Métis, this does not equate belonging to that group, or being a part of their unique culture and community, Goodon said.

“Most Canadians these days have heritage from different sources, and that’s great. You can celebrate that heritage from different sources … but if a Mohawk person married a Swedish person and they had children, why would those children then claim a completely different national identity?” he said.

The MMF will continue to take the necessary steps to protect the identity of its people, Chartrand said, and decisions made by the federal government in support of the MNO without due diligence will have impacts on legitimate right holders.

“We cannot let these cultural thieves and modern-day identity colonizers erode our distinct Red River Métis identity or those of the First Nations for their own gain,” he said.

Goodon hopes that people will continue to discuss what it means to be Métis when it comes up in conversation with their families, friends, co-workers and peers.

“We had to hide for many generations because of fears of violence, fears of not being able to get work. The last 25 years has changed that substantially, but we still have 150 years of misunderstanding that needs to be fixed,” he said. “It’s going to take a little bit of time, and we’re just going at it one day at a time.”

Bill C-53 is currently at consideration in committee in the House of Commons.

» mleybourne@brandonsun.com

» X: @miraleybourne