In what is now known as Canada, there are three recognized distinctions of Indigenous Peoples: First Nations, Inuit, and Métis. Despite significant cultural differences, the distinctions are often grouped together by governments and institutions—this is called a “pan-Indigenous approach”.

First Nations are fundamentally opposed to the pan-Indigenous approach of governments and institutions because it is inconsistent with the constitutional recognition and priority of First Nations’ Inherent, Treaty and Aboriginal rights.

Resolution 09/15, passed at the 2009 All Ontario Chiefs Conference, mandated the Chiefs-in-Assembly to call for the immediate cessation of Ontario’s pan-Indigenous approach to health funding and services, and called on First Nations to cease participation in all pan-Indigenous processes related to health.

The Governments of Canada and Ontario, through their various ministries and departments, consistently continue to use a pan-Indigenous approach to funding, programs, and services to First Nations and Treaty rights-holders across the province, failing to adequately prioritize resource allocation to First Nations and Treaty rights-holders.

When governments apply a pan-Indigenous approach, First Nations are forced to compete with Métis and Inuit organizations for funding. This inequitable funding approach becomes even more difficult for First Nations when they are forced to compete with groups falsely claiming to be Indigenous. This competitive environment exacerbates the effects of unequal funding processes that disproportionally impact the Ontario region, which frequently does not receive funding commensurate to its needs or population size.

The reality is that there is finite government funding to address the damage visited upon our communities from hundreds of years of colonialism. In addition, current funding levels for First Nations in many areas of basic services have been repeatedly found to be underfunding First Nations. The diversion of hundreds of millions of dollars to groups falsely claiming to be Indigenous does real harm to First Nation communities.

The pan-Indigenous approach by the Governments of Canada and Ontario violates First Nations’ Inherent and Treaty rights to land and self-governance; and undermines First Nations’ responsibility to protect their lands and resources for the benefit of future generations in accordance with their values, traditions, laws, as well as nation-to-nation relations.

As per Resolution 22/11A, passed at the Annual Chiefs Assembly in June 2022, the Chiefs of Ontario call on the Governments of Canada and Ontario to immediately cease its pan-Indigenous approach to funding, programs, and services, and develop First Nations-led approaches that are separate from those negotiated with the Métis and Inuit. The Chiefs of Ontario remain committed to this position by refusing to participate in engagement sessions and processes which take a pan-Indigenous approach and are not specific to First Nations rights and priorities.

Métis Rights Assertions in First Nations Ancestral and Treaty Territories in Ontario

Métis rights are included in those rights recognized and affirmed under section 35 of the Constitution. However, the claims of the MNO are not and cannot be included in those rights that are recognized by section 35, as there have never been any valid rights-bearing Métis communities in Ontario to recognize. The First Nations in Ontario do not support the claims that distinct and stable Métis communities and territory existed throughout Ontario as asserted by the MNO.

Groups in Ontario claiming to be Métis assert claims to territories covering almost the entire province. First Nations reject the legitimacy of these claims as they are not based in facts or history. They are an attempt to invent a history that never existed and one in which First Nations did not have jurisdiction in their own territories. If legitimate cohesive historical groups existed within the territories of First Nations, First Nations would have recognized those groups through proper protocols and laws at the time.

The fact that people of mixed ancestry existed historically throughout the territories of First Nations in Ontario cannot be the basis for the creation of a historic community.  Many people of mixed ancestry were integral members of their parents’ First Nations, as their descendants continue to be. Other people of mixed ancestry were integrated into settler communities. The bare fact that there were mixed-ancestry people living in Ontario does nothing to demonstrate there were any distinct Métis communities. Robust evidence of a distinct culture, language and political existence required. Essential to that is the historical recognition of any alleged Métis community by First Nations that governed the territories in Ontario.

Vague claims that Métis were “mobile” is not a valid justification for granting rights to Métis individual originating from outside Ontario or recognizing “communities” within Ontario that never existed. Many of the ancestors claimed by MNO were involved in the fur trade, who naturally moved between trading posts as part of their employment with the Hudson’s Bay Company. This movement reflects part of their employment within the fur trade.

The modern claims made by the MNO have no basis in historical fact or the law—under either Canadian law or the inherent laws of First Nations in Ontario. The Supreme Court has explained that rights-bearing Métis groups, in addition to being mixed-ancestry, developed their own customs and common way of life. There is no such evidence that any distinct cultures, languages or communities developed in First Nations’ territories in Ontario.

It is unlawful for Ontario or Canada to ignore First Nations rights and unextinguished jurisdiction over our territories and attempt to give away our rights to illegitimate groups.

The MNO’s unfounded assertions do not entitle them to any proprietary interests to the Crown revenues derived from the natural resources from these territories, and they do not entitle the MNO to any substantive consultation.

Below is a map of the MNO’s Traditional Harvesting Territories compared with a map of First Nations’ treaties with the Crown.