Current Problems

Government Commitments to Truth and Reconciliation

First Nations in Ontario continue to call for more clarity surrounding the identification of six new so-called “historic Métis communities” in the region

August 30, 2024

NationTalk: First Nation Leadership in the Ontario region have released the following statement on the deadline of the final report of the Métis National Council’s (MNC) internal review:

(August 30, 2024) First Nation Leadership Ontario share the same concerns that legitimate Métis organizations have had about the Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO) for years. The mere existence of individuals of mixed European and First Nation ancestry in the province does not prove the existence of a distinct, rights-bearing nation.

“Our concern is that the MNC’s internal investigation into MNO is merely another example of a process created to rubberstamp the MNO’s claims that only serve MNO’s political agenda,” said Caldwell First Nation Chief Mary Duckworth. “We are deeply skeptical about the results that will come from the MNC’s internal investigation into the MNO. First Nations have lived in Ontario for thousands of years and we’ve done the research that Canada and Ontario haven’t—we know these so-called ‘Métis communities’ never existed.”

MNO’s aggressive and illusory campaign that distorts the historical record to a manufacture distinct Métis communities that never existed must end. First Nations call for transparency from Ontario and Canada and genuine, open scrutiny of the MNO’s claims.

“There is nothing that could come out of the MNC’s internal review that would change the fact that there was never a ‘historic Métis community’ in N’dakimenan,” said Temagami First Nation Chief Shelly Moore-Frappier. “We did exhaustive research to prepare for our land defense in Ontario (Attorney General) v Bear Island Foundation, [1991] and we can guarantee that fact.”

“Our history and genealogies are thoroughly documented by our oral tradition, and fur trade and colonial records. Historically, anyone who could be described as ‘mixed blood’ was naturalized and adopted under our authority. Today, we continue to exercise our inherent right to self-determination. While some of our citizens may be non-status Indians, they are not Métis—they are Teme-Augama Anishnabai,” Chief Moore-Frappier said.

In August 2017, the Métis Nation of Ontario and the Province of Ontario jointly the identification of six new so-called “historic Métis communities” in the province. This was done without consulting First Nations whose territories are now threatened by the MNO’s claims.

But the national Métis governing body, MNC, put the MNO on probation by way of resolution in November 2018. The MNC resolution sanctioned the MNO for failing to apply the citizenship criteria adopted by the MNC General Assembly in 2002, consistently ignoring and breaching of MNC own resolutions on citizenship and attempting to extend the boundaries of the historic Métis Nation homeland without the consent of the MNC and its other governing members.

The MNO was suspended from the MNC in January 2020 but continued to work with the Métis Nation of Alberta (MNA) and Métis Nation-Saskatchewan (MN-S) under the guise of the a “tri-council.” In September 2021, the Manitoba Métis Federation (MMF) withdrew from the MNC, stating the MNC had “abandoned the MMF and the true Métis Nation” because it allowed the MNO to maintain “a seat at the governance table while they—by their own admission—have nearly 80% non-Métis Nation Citizens in their registry.”

In 2021, the Métis National Council General Assembly established an internal review process to examine the history of six “Ontario Métis communities” identified by MNO and Ontario in 2017 through the lens of the National Definition and contemporary Métis governance.

That process began about a year ago. According to the terms of reference, the “Expert Panel” is made up of representatives with knowledge of Métis rights, laws and history who are appointed by the MNC governing members (MNO, MNA, MN-S and Métis Nation British Columbia).

“We are extremely concerned with the roll-out of this internal review, from an MNO member co-drafting the terms of reference and the MNO being able to appoint their own reviewers, to not making any of the findings public. The entire process is pretty bogus,” said Ontario Regional Chief Abram Benedict. “Although we didn’t have high hopes for the outcomes of the review, the lack of transparency is deeply troubling and unacceptable.”

In January 2018 an “‘independent review” was completed that “verified” the credibility of the MNO’s “Métis Family Lines.”  The “Verified Métis Family Lines” are what the MNO uses to allege they meet the criteria set out in Powley—a test to determine if Métis rights exist and/or apply in a certain context. However, that independent review explicitly states that it “is understood in the scope of work that the Independent Reviewer should not provide conclusions or opinions regarding whether or not the Powley criteria have been met in the Study Areas.”

Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians Deputy Grand Chief Stacia Loft echoes the concerns of other First Nation Leadership.

“At no point have the MNO’s claims to meet the Powley criteria been verified. Not when Ontario announced the ‘new historic communities’ in 2017, not when Canada introduced federal Bill C-53, Recognition of Certain Métis Governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan and Métis Self-Government Act in 2023, and not as part of the internal review process,” Deputy Grand Chief Loft said. “This is deeply concerning. First Nation Leadership in Ontario continue to call on Ontario to release the information and research it says it relied on to make its political recognition of the so-called ‘new historic Métis communities.’” There must be transparency and actual public scrutiny of the MNO’s claims. Any further agreements with the MNO by either government must cease until the concerns about the complete lack of verifiable proof of these communities are addressed.”

Extensive academic research has been published in recent years showing that the so-called communities represented by the MNO do not meet the criteria set out in Powley to be considered legitimate, historic, rights-bearing communities. The research also shows how the MNO has misrepresented the histories of First Nation ancestors to manufacture its fiction.

  1. Robinson-Huron Waawiindamaagewin – “An Exploratory Study of the Métis Nation of Ontario’s ‘Historic Métis Communities’ in Robinson-Huron Treaty Territory” – March 2023
  2. Wabun Tribal Council – “The ‘Historic Abitibi-Inland Métis Community’ – Final Report” – Sept 2022
  3. Manitoba Métis Federation – “Historic Métis Communities of Ontario: An Evaluation of Evidence” – October 2020
  4. Manitoba Métis Federation – “An Analysis of the MNO’s Recognition of Six New Historic Metis Communities: A Final Report” – March 2020

The Chiefs of Ontario continue to call on the Government of Ontario to release the evidence and analysis that was used to justify the 2017 identification of the six so-called “historic Métis communities” in the Ontario region. Further, given this has become a matter of public interest, the Chiefs of Ontario are also calling on the MNC to publicly release the three quarterly reports and the final report from the internal review so that they can be scrutinized by First Nation Leadership, and legal and academic experts.

-30-

The Chiefs of Ontario supports all First Nations in Ontario as they assert their sovereignty, jurisdiction, and their chosen expression of nationhood. Follow Chiefs of Ontario on Facebook, X, Instagram, or LinkedIn @ChiefsOfOntario.

Media Contact:

Isak Vaillancourt
Communications Manager
Chiefs of Ontario
Mobile: 416-819-8184
Email: isak.vaillancourt@coo.org

Declan Keogh
Communications Officer
Chiefs of Ontario
Mobile: 416-522-4518
Email: declan.keogh@coo.org