Gathering Theme: The Justice System

GATHERING THEME

The Justice System

Kate Kehler
Maraleigh Short

Opening common to all gatherings

The criminal justice system in Canada and Manitoba is primarily based on the European adversarial model. The crown attorney seeks to prosecute on behalf of the government while the defense attorney works to discredit the Crown’s arguments. The Crown’s role is to do what is best for society as a whole, not seek revenge for an individual. However, day to day reality is such that many Crown attorneys seek the strictest punishment they think they can get, and the defense lawyers just try to mitigate that. Often this results in a plea bargain – a joint submission that the judge then accepts. In Manitoba, courts today are so backlogged with procedural matters that resolving cases has seemingly become more important than resolving them well. It is often so rushed that the accused can be asked to make decisions that will affect the rest of their lives in cramped little rooms, just minutes before going into court.

The Crown does not lay charges. The police do that. However it is up to the Crown to decide which charges to pursue. The Crown is not supposed to pursue a charge they are not convinced they can prove beyond doubt. However, Crown attorneys routinely pursue charges that are only ‘triable’. The fear here is that someone who has spent months incarcerated prior to trial, if promised immediate release given time served, will just plead guilty and no real resolution will have been achieved.

Remand and bail

Manitoba continues to be the province that holds the most people for the longest period of time on pre-sentenced (or remand) status. On any given day, about 70% of the people we have in custody are awaiting trial or sentencing.

The wealthier amongst us can pretty well count on getting bail because we are viewed as low risk and can afford a lawyer or afford to borrow to hire one. People in poverty may or may not have a stable home or job and have to rely on the chronically underfunded legal aid system. The perceived risks in both this instability and lack of advocacy mean they are more often than not denied bail.

To the average person it must seem that we have jails and prisons overflowing with very dangerous individuals. This is not the case. Most people in our provincial jails are there for breaches of bail or probation conditions, and not for committing a new crime. Most front line workers and even some judges complain about the number of conditions recommended and imposed on people as simply setting them up to fail.

Here are just some of what we know about who we currently have incarcerated in Canada with some Manitoba specific statistics:

  • The adult non-Indigenous population in jail has been decreasing steadily, while the Indigenous (a younger demographic) population has increased dramatically. Indigenous peoples represent about 4% of the total population, but about 25% of those we incarcerate.

  • There has been an increase of 112% in the incarceration of Indigenous women in recent years. In the prison for women in Headingly, 8 out of 10 inmates are Indigenous.

  • In Canada, you are 10 times more likely to be incarcerated at some point in your life if you are Indigenous.

  • 90% of the 11,000 children in care in Manitoba are Indigenous,

  • 65% of the men in Stony Mountain Penitentiary were children in care.

  • 80% of those we incarcerate grew up in poverty and lack a grade 12 education.

Being Indigenous and poor is the most direct path to prison. Canadians worry about a two-tier health system? We have long had a two-tier justice system.

Poverty and Crime

Let’s look more closely at the link between poverty and crime. Former Conservative Senator Hugh Segal said, given that 80% statistic above “if crime abatement is the goal then it is time that all Canadians and their governments got tough on poverty.” Many will say that they know lots of people who have grown up in and/or continue to struggle in poverty but have never committed a crime. Of course the majority don’t commit crime. They are in fact more likely to be the victims of crime given that they are forced to live in high crime areas due to the lack of truly affordable housing elsewhere. Furthermore, that is their community so they may not want to leave.

In Manitoba, one in three children live in poverty. Winnipeg Harvest shares food with nearly 62,000 Manitobans a month, through emergency food programs across the province. Of these, more than 26,000 are children and more than 4,000 of them are under the age of 2.

Harvest also reports that those growing up in poverty were far more likely to be in ill health and die before the age of 65, than those who do not.

When we allow people to be raised in desperate situations, we should not be surprised if some become desperate. Children know when they are being left behind or left out. The effects of that knowledge has lasting impact. Crisis thinking and impulse decision making becomes all too easily entrenched.

Our current justice system relies on incarceration to rehabilitate individuals who commit crime.

What is actually happening in our jails is another matter .The vast majority of resources simply go to keeping staff and inmates alike physically safe. Rehabilitative programing resources are scarce. Headingly’s workshop rooms were converted to provide more beds. The use of solitary confinement as a security measure remains a huge issue. The Government of Manitoba and Justice Department recently changed terminology. They stopped calling the provincial institutions “jails” and renamed them “correctional centres”. It was meant to highlight the importance of rehabilitation. However, the reality is that people come out not corrected, but institutionalized.

Institutionalization creates its own consequences. Taking decision making out of people’s hands creates dependency. People lose the ability to stay on a schedule and manage what little money they may have properly. This culture of dependency, added to a criminal record, keeps people from establishing stable living conditions and employment.

When we incarcerate people we stop any progress they may have made. If they had a job or place to live, that is gone. If they are a woman with kids, those kids usually end up in government care. The disruption and cost to us all is massive.

It costs three times as much to incarcerate a person than it does to keep them supported in the community. These costs do not even include police, court and Child and Family Services’ costs.

The TRC highlights the need for child and family service, education and justice reform.

Restorative justice

Restorative Justice is the traditional justice system for many Indigenous peoples. It also has the added benefit of being the form of justice for many of our newcomer communities who are also becoming one of the fastest rising populations caught up in our justice system for much the same reasons; trauma, poverty, colonization through violence and war.

Restorative Justice approaches crime and harm as an imbalance that needs to be corrected.

It ensures that the person who committed the harm is accountable, takes responsibility for and works to repair the harm.

When possible, it allows for direct restitution to the person harmed, but also provides more peace to these victims as they get a better understanding of the whys of what was done to them. Victims of crime who engage in restorative justice processes report much higher levels of satisfaction than those who go through our current system.

Restorative Justice can also come into play at various stages in the system. It can divert one out of the system before all of the ill effects of incarceration makes matters worse. But it has also been used after a sentence has been served. Some family members of murder victims have received peace of mind when meeting with those who have served their sentence and have ‘owned’ what they have done.

Contrary to the popular perception that restorative justice is easier than incarceration and tantamount to ‘thug hugging’, most perpetrators who go through the process say it is much harder to ‘own-up’ to their failings and face the ones they harmed than it is to sit in a jail cell and focus on their own suffering, rather than what they caused.

Most importantly, by a careful examination of the incident, the context of the crime is better understood by the community and the community gains a better understanding of how it can address the root cause of the imbalance.

Discussion; passing the talking stick

Closing common to all gatherings

Gathering Theme: Métis Struggles for Land

GATHERING THEME

Métis Struggles for Land

Author: Dr. Fiola

Red River Resistance: Provisional Government & Manitoba Act (1870)

Métis families were established in the region where the Red and Assiniboine Rivers converge (“The Forks,” Winnipeg), by the time the Selkirk Settlers arrived in 1812. French and Métis voyageurs retired there with their families when their fur trade contracts expired. Here, the Métis Nation would emerge shortly.

In 1670, King Charles II of England gave the HBC an exclusive trade monopoly over Rupert’s Land (Hudson’s Bay drainage). In 1869, the HBC transferred Rupert’s Land to Canada. Surveyors arrived in Red River ‒ where the Métis formed a majority ‒ to divide the land without consultation. Fearing an influx of settlers, Louis Riel and others stopped surveyors in October 1869; so began the Red River Resistance.

Métis, and others, politically organized to protect their land. The Comité National des Métis was formed in December 1869 with John Bruce as president and Riel as secretary. In March 1870, Bruce would become president of the provisional government; Riel would eventually become president. The provisional government issued a “Declaration of the People of Rupert’s Land and the North-West,” rejecting Canada’s authority over the North-West, asserting the legitimacy of their provisional government, and inviting Canada to negotiate the region into confederation. Since Canada had yet to establish formal government in Red River, the provisional government became the legal government in the area. Ottawa begrudgingly recognized this and began negotiations.

The provisional government drew up a bill of rights ‒ terms by which they would agree to confederation ‒ and sent three representatives to Ottawa to negotiate. The bill of rights would become the List of Rights which secured the confederation of Manitoba as the fifth province of Canada via the Manitoba Act (1870). The list aimed to secure Métis land use, rights, and customs. Section 31 of the Act reserved 1.4 million acres of land for Métis families in the new province; Section 32 secured land rights for already established inhabitants (including white farmers).

Only the British Parliament could legally amend the Manitoba Act; however, the Canadian government ignored this and passed amendments limiting eligibility for sections 31 and 32. These included Eurocentric ideas of a “proper” home, garden size, and fence; many Métis lived in shacks without fences and were sometimes bison hunting during harvest time. Métis faced backlash from English Canada for confederating a province, and because a Métis tribunal condemned Orangeman Thomas Scott to death by firing squad in March of 1870.

Prime Minister John A. Macdonald sent Colonel Wolseley and the Red River Expeditionary Forces to ensure the transition from a provisional to a provincial government. For two years, they beat Métis men, raped Métis women, established saloons which increased alcohol-related violence, and prevented Métis from voting. Scrip, a federal land grant system, also cheated many Métis from their land (more below). Métis began to flee from Manitoba.

North-West Resistance (1885) and The Forgotten Years

Métis established themselves in communities further west (St. Laurent, Batoche, SK). Settlers followed and again Métis feared they would lose their land. They formed a second provisional government with local Métis leader, Gabriel Dumont, assuming the role of Adjutant General. Petitions sent to Ottawa were ignored. Instead, Macdonald used the new railway to send militia to suppress the Métis. The series of battles that ensued became known as the North-West Resistance (1885). After their defeat, the Métis scattered again. Some stayed and faced oppression on the prairies, others moved to British Columbia, to the Northwest Territories, and into the northern United States ‒ these were roughly the boundaries of the historic Métis Nation; many had trade and kinship relationships therein.

After 1885, the Métis entered a period of repression known as “The Forgotten Years.” Riel was executed and the Métis experienced severe poverty, unemployment, and racism; many become known as “Road Allowance People.” The only places left for Métis to live were along road allowances set aside for future buildings, roads, railway. Families moved every time construction crews arrived; community cohesion suffered. Many Métis denied their Indigenous identity. Survival trumped passing on cultural knowledge. Repression began to lift only after WWI.

Historic Treaties and Scrip

Meanwhile, the Canadian government was extinguishing Aboriginal title (rights) to land via treaties and scrip. One year after the Manitoba Act, the government began signing the Numbered Treaties. Treaty 3 is the only historic treaty that Métis were permitted to enter as a collective. Otherwise, only individual Métis were accepted. Initially, one could choose treaty or scrip; however, Métis faced increasing pressure to take the one-time scrip as it let the government off the hook for annuities. Many First Nations chiefs, like Shingwauk, requested that Métis enter treaty. Treaty commissioners were instructed to say no – the government denied Métis indigeneity to reduce the number of people entering treaty.

In Manitoba, scrip was supposed to distribute the 1.4 million acres promised to the Métis. This lottery system of land allotment issued coupons to individuals for 160 or 240 acres or dollars. Eurocentric amendments by the federal government regarding what constituted a “proper” house, fence, garden size drastically reduced those who were eligible. The system was slow (scrip wasn’t issued until 1876), disorganized, confusing (many Métis were illiterate and spoke Indigenous languages but instructions were in English/French), and fraud was rampant. Residence patterns were ignored and split up families. Many sold their scrip for a pittance; most did not receive their entitled land ‒ many left Manitoba.

Phases two and three of Métis scrip occurred in the North-West (Saskatchewan and Alberta) and during the signing of Treaties 8 and 10 (Alberta, Northwest Territories, Saskatchewan), respectively. Scrip coupons did not specify that they were meant to permanently extinguish Aboriginal title.

Métis Settlements & Modern Treaties

Métis lobbying in Alberta led to the Métis Population Betterment Act (1939) which created 12 Métis colonies (four dissolved in the 1950s). This is the only constitutionally-protected Métis land base in Canada. Métis own their land in fee simple (strongest land right) and have a measure of self-government.

Since 1975, Indigenous peoples have been signing modern treaties (comprehensive land claims) with Canada. There are currently 100 treaty negotiation tables across Canada with dozens of treaties in various stages of negotiation; on average it takes 15 years to finalize a treaty. Some of these treaties include a self-government clause. Self-government agreements are slowly gaining traction. A few of these agreements have fee simple ownership. With exceptions in the north, the government refuses to negotiate treaties and self-government agreements with the Métis.

Courts & Legislation

In 1982, Canada patriated its constitution and included section 35 which identifies the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit), and states that Aboriginal/treaty rights must be honoured. The terms Métis and Aboriginal rights were not defined; the courts are defining these. Government refuses to negotiate unless they are forced to in court.

In 2013, the Supreme Court declared that the Crown failed when distributing the 1.4 million acres promised in the Manitoba Act (MMF v Canada). In May 2016, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between President David Chartrand of the Manitoba Métis Federation (MMF) and Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs, Carolyn Bennett, to advance reconciliation. The MMF’s goal is to sign a modern treaty with Canada including a trust fund, lands for collective use, and programs, supports and initiatives to benefit Manitoba Métis.

In July 2016, Thomas Issac, Ministerial Special Representative for Métis rights, issued his final report and recommendations regarding section 35 Métis rights, and implementation of the MMF v Canada land claim. Isaac asserted that rights-bearing Métis communities have outstanding land claims from Ontario westward that must be negotiated; that First Nations treaty rights should not trump Métis rights; and that Canada should accept unique forms of Métis self-government. He urged the government to develop a Framework Agreement with the MMF to settle the 1870 land claim. Formal negotiations have not begun.

In 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Métis (and non-status Indians) are “Indians” in section 91(24) of the Constitution Act (1867) which states that the federal government has jurisdiction over “Indians and lands reserved for Indians” (Daniels v Canada). Like in MMF v Canada, remediation/compensation was not awarded; however, it opens the doors to federal assistance for Métis like that enjoyed by First Nations.

In Powley v Canada (2003), the Supreme Court recognized that Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario is a historic Métis community with section 35 Métis rights. This case devised the “Powley Test” to define what constitutes Métis rights and who is entitled to them. Courts are taking a case-by-case approach; a ruling in one case does not necessarily apply to other Métis communities.

Nonetheless, Métis people are maintaining relationships with their home territories. Many Indigenous peoples are moving from rural to urban locations, yet remaining connected to their communities/land through celebrating culture days, pursuing subsistence activities, and reconnecting with land through ceremonies. Métis are not waiting for government/court assistance; we push forward and continue nurturing our relationships with land.

References – Métis Struggles for Land

Adams, Howard. 1989. Prison of Grass: Canada from a Native Point of View. Calgary: Fifth House Publishers.

Augustus, Camie. 2008. “Métis Scrip.” Our Legacy. University of Saskatchewan Archives. Accessed February 13, 2017. http://scaa.sk.ca/ourlegacy/exhibit_scrip.

Barkwell, Lawrence, ed. 2002. Métis Rights and Land Claims: An Annotated Bibliography. Winnipeg: Louis Riel Institute.

Chartrand, Paul, and John Giokas. 2002. Who Are the Métis? A Review of the Law and Policy. In Who Are Canadas Aboriginal Peoples? Recognition, Definition, and Jurisdiction, edited by Paul Chartrand, 268-304. Saskatoon: Purich Publishing.

Daniels v. Canada. 2016. Judgements of the Supreme Court of Canada. Accessed February 13, 2017. https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/15858/index.do

Fillmore, W. P. 1978. “Half-Breed Scrip.” In The Other Natives: The-Les Métis, edited by Antoine Lussier, and D. Bruce Sealey, 31-36. Vol. 2. Winnipeg: Manitoba Métis Federation Press.

Fiola, Chantal. 2015. “Re-Kindling the Sacred Fire: Métis Identity, Anishinaabe Spirituality and Identity.” Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada. 2008. Treaty 3 between Her Majesty the Queen and the Saulteaux Tribe of the Ojibbeway [sic] Indians at the Northwest Angle on the Lake of the Woods with Adhesions (1875). Accessed February 13, 2017. http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100028675.

Milne, Brad. 1995. “The Historiography of Métis Land Dispersal, 1870-1890.” Manitoba History, no. 30: 30-41.

MMF (Manitoba Métis Federation) v Canada (Attorney General). 2013. Judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada. Accessed February 13, 2017. http://scc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/12888/index.do.

Murray, Jeffrey S. 1993. Métis Scrip Records – Foundation for a New Beginning. The Archivist 20(1): 12-14.

Peterson, Jacqueline, and Jennifer S. H. Brown, eds. 1985. The New Peoples: Being and Becoming Métis in North America. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.

R. v. Powley. 2003. Judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada. Accessed February 13, 2017. https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/

Gathering Theme: Métis Identity and Nationhood

GATHERING THEME

Métis Identity and Nationhood

Author: Chuck Bourgeois

Métis identity and Nationhood are often discussed together, but are best understood as two closely related, yet separate and distinct concepts. Métis identity refers to the ways in which a person identifies as Métis, and the practices, beliefs, and history that make up this identity. Métis identity is an intensely personal experience, and as such, the way it is understood can vary greatly from one person to the next. Métis Nationhood, on the other hand, is the result of very specific historical events, and in modern times, is the basis for the political relationship certain Métis organizations share with the federal and provincial governments in Canada. While there are differing views on the subject, this discussion will focus on the Red River Métis who have continuously occupied their traditional territory on the prairies, and who developed a distinct language, culture, and political structure which rose to prominence during the 19th century.

Métis Nationhood

The story of the Métis Nation predates the confederation of Canada by at least a century. Throughout what are now known as the Prairie Provinces, early European settlers intermarried with women from primarily Cree, Ojibway, and Nakota groups as the fur trade spread throughout the continent. Many of the children from these unions learned the cultures of both parents, and as a result, they became very active in the fur trade as interpreters, voyageurs, buffalo hunters, and trading post factors. A number of significant historical events led Métis people to develop a robust political awareness, and to understand themselves as a Nation rather than simply as a ‘cultural group’. During the Battle of Seven Oaks in 1816, Métis fighters were the first to fly the infinity flag that is still used as a national symbol today. The Métis were also members of an all-Indigenous political alliance known as the Iron Confederacy which was active in the mid to late 1800s on the central plains. The Iron Confederacy included Cree, Nakota, Assiniboine and other Indigenous groups who negotiated treaties among themselves, and fought together to defend their land and resources which were increasingly threatened by European settlement. The Métis, however, are best known for the events which led to the Red River Resistance in 1869 and the Battle of Batoche in 1885. During these conflicts, the Métis established a provisional government, elected Louis Riel as their representative into the House of Commons, negotiated Manitoba into Confederation, and consistently refused to be governed by the new Canadian Federal Government and its laws.

The history of the Métis Nation, and all its conflicts, victories and adventures spans centuries, and is the subject of much debate and study. It cannot be denied, however, that Métis people organized themselves politically long before Canada became a country. Their governance style and political structure evolved during the great buffalo hunts of the nineteenth century. At their peak, these hunts consisted of over a thousand Red River carts, included hunters and families from several different Indigenous groups, and were strictly regulated by distinct laws. At the time, there was no other political organization that even came close to bringing together such a large and diverse group in such a cohesive way. Before each hunt, the hunters elected a chief, several captains, and discussed their travel route until a consensus was reached. Upon their return, the chief and captains would step down from their positions, and the whole process would begin anew at the outset of each hunt. This allowed for a very fluid, and democratic approach to leadership and governance. Indeed, political organizing was an integral part of Métis culture long before confederation.

During the Red River Resistance, the Métis negotiated with the federal government – not as a special interest group, or a as Canadian citizens – but as a distinct Nation, with its own representative body, political structure, and territory. Today, the Métis continue to hold a unique space in Canadian politics, and have been successful in having their rights recognized through a number of landmark court cases.

There are currently five provincial, and one national political organization which represent the interests of Métis people. They are; the Métis Nation of Ontario, the Manitoba Métis Federation, the Métis Nation – Saskatchewan, the Métis Nation of Alberta and the Métis Nation British Columbia. Each of these is represented at the national level by the Métis National Council. Membership requirements are determined by each organization, but generally follow similar protocols. The Manitoba Métis Federation (MMF), for example, requires individuals to self-identify as Métis, to show an ancestral connection to an historic Métis community, and to be accepted by the contemporary Manitoba Métis Community. Citizens of the Manitoba Métis Federation benefit from training and employment programs, harvesting rights, funding for education and small businesses, and other services managed by the MMF.

One of main differences between historic and contemporary expressions of

Métis Nationhood is that while Métis people historically fought for independence from the Canadian state, today, the Métis Nation exists as a part of Canada, and many Métis people consider themselves to be Canadian citizens.

Métis Identity

Contemporary Métis identity isn’t so easily defined, or understood. Seeking membership in one of the provincial representative organizations is an easy first step for many individuals, but while this provides a political identity, it does little for those of us who seek a deeper understanding of what it means to be a proud Métis person in today’s world.

Our ancestors benefitted from a vibrant and intensely unique culture. Among other characteristics, their clothes, their skill at buffalo hunting, their beading patterns, and the languages they spoke, gave early Métis people a deep sense of pride, and a distinct identity. However, the Métis experienced severe hardships and discrimination during the colonization of Canada and well into the twentieth century. Generations grew up either ashamed of being Métis, or completely unaware of their cultural heritage. Some would argue that Métis still have not fully recovered from the many injustices they endured. In 1885, Louis Riel prophesized that his people would sleep for a hundred years, but would then be reawakened by our artists, and begin to feel pride again. In many ways, his prophecy has come to pass. But our journey has not been easy.

Many people understand the term Métis as a racial characteristic; a way of describing people of mixed ancestry. Unfortunately, however, contemporary Métis people in Canada often have difficulty getting out from under this outdated racial stereotype. This is due, in part, to longstanding federal policies which have sought to discourage the Métis from asserting rights, or defending land claims as Indigenous peoples. A Métis person is often asked; “which one of your parents is Indigenous”, or “how much Indian are you? half?, a quarter?, an eighth?” Questions like these set up two points of reference: white or European on one end; and Indigenous on the other. Métis identity becomes an awkward space that is stuck somewhere in between these two points. This obsession with race – and the associated stigmas of skin color and racial ‘purity’ – is a pathology we have inherited from our colonial past. It was not that long ago that the Métis were simply known as Half-Breeds. The mixed race stereotype automatically suggests that someone is ‘less than’, not fully one or the other. What many Métis people today are now realizing, is that their racial make-up doesn’t tell them much about who they are. Métis identity simply cannot be measured through blood quantum, or by counting how many Indigenous relatives we have in our family trees. These issues lead to some very complex questions. If we no longer live in the cultural environment our ancestors lived in, and if our distinct histories and political affiliations are only small parts of what makes us who we are; then what, exactly, makes a person Métis?

To some, a Métis person is someone who displays certain cultural traits – they wear sashes, dance the Red River Jig, play the fiddle, and participate in events like the Festival du Voyageur. But these are only external symbols representative of much deeper experiences. An Elder once said that trying to understand Métis identity is like trying to catch a moving train. Métis people in Canada today are constantly recreating their identities in new and powerful ways.

Many of us are rebuilding relationships with our First Nations relatives, and acknowledging the destructive impact colonization has had on our families. Others are building vibrant connections to their ancestry by learning an Indigenous language, or by participating in traditional ceremonies. Genealogical research also serves as a strong foundation for building Métis identity. It is not uncommon to discover that one or several of our direct ancestors participated in the great buffalo hunts, fought with Louis Riel, or founded one of the many Métis communities still in existence today. The challenge is to find creative ways to express our traditional understandings and worldviews in modern contexts. As contemporary Métis people, we must do more than inherit the legacy of our diverse and complex history; we must also contribute to this legacy by constantly renewing and re-visioning our identities.

In this sense, it is best not to think of Métis identity as a fixed set of characteristics as laid out by political or legal definitions. Métis people are here today because of the strength, and resolve of our ancestors who fought to protect their way of life for their grandchildren, and great grandchildren. In many ways, we too are now engaged in a struggle. Métis identity must be defined by the people who live by it, not by the organizations who represent us, or the colonies that have sprung up around us. This is what we, in turn, will pass on to our children, to ensure that they too will be proud to call themselves Métis for generations to come.

 

References

Adams, H. (1999). Tortured people: the politics of colonization. Penticton, BC: Theytus Books Ltd.

 

Andersen, C. (2015). “Métis”: race, recognition, and the struggle for indigenous peoplehood. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Ens, G. J., & Sawchuk, J. (2016). From new peoples to new nations aspects of Métis history and identity from the eighteenth to the twenty-first centuries. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

 

Fiola, C. (2015). Rekindling the sacred fire: Métis ancestry and Anishinaabe spirituality. Winnipeg, Manitoba: University of Manitoba Press.

Vowel, C. (2016). Indigenous writes: a guide to First Nations, Métis, and Inuit issues in Canada. Winnipeg: HighWater Press.

 

  • Manitoba Métis Federation:

http://www.mmf.mb.ca/

  • Métis National Council :

http://www.metisnation.ca/

 

Top