The first nation in Ottawa -Ontario and Manitoba Matis Federation says that about 1 billion dollars in federal funding went to a group, alleging that they are claiming Mattis identity.
Ontario heads who represent 133 first nations in the province shared with Canadian press data for more than 20 years of federal funding provided to Metis Nation of Ontario.
It suggests that $ 819,836,061 moved from Ottawa to MNO – an organization First Nations leaders say there is no validity and threatens their rights.
Ontario heads said in a media statement, “This data shows how much damage is being done to the first nations in Ontario due to the government’s funding away from the needs of nations and other legitimate groups.”
“The question is, why is Crown MNO sending hundreds of million dollars, when there are huge evidence opposing his claims?”
The data indicates that the money comes from many federal departments, including indigenous service Canada, Crown-Swadeshi relations, Park Canada and Environment and Climate Change Canada. The MNO also received funds from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the potential impacts of projects in its communities from the impact evaluation agency.
The conflict between the first nations, some Metis groups and the MNO, the government of Ontario stems from the 2017 decision to recognize six “new, historical” Metis communities in the province-and the 2023 Federal Government Bill, which never passed, will confirm the right to MNO’s self.
First Nations and other Metis groups say the communities represented by the MNO have no claim to identify Metis heritage and Ottawa and Ontario, they have no right to identify them.
Last month, the History Professor of the University of Quebec in Montreal, Leela Inkseter, drafted a report on behalf of the Vabun Tribal Council, which concluded that there is no evidence of the mixed-analyst community in the area of the Vabun Tribal Council in Northeast Ontario.
MNO rejected the report stating that “try to discredit it” despite the years out of the years, “nothing has changed.”
The group said in a media statement, “The facts of history will not change because a new ‘specialist’ has been paid for the same Metis refusalism.”
MNO has cited the 2003 verdict by the Supreme Court of Canada to recognize the Métis community in and around Sault Ste. Mary, Onts. The case did not consider the six new communities recognized in 2017, but formed a Metis right.
Another report, published last month and commission by Saugeen Ojibway Nation, also concluded that there is no evidence of a separate Metis community in their area in South -Western Ontario.
“Historical evidences do not support this claim,” said the report of the approximately 200-points written by two historians at the University of Toronto.
Whereas the report states that the region had “surely individuals and families of mixed dynasty”, which could not form the basis of a separate community claim within the Safozen Ozibway nation region.
Jennifer St. German, MNO Chief Strategy Officer, said that Metis and First Nations “should not work in untruth because we are not enemies.”
“We have worked together in our shared history so that colonial governments to respect the rights of metis and first nation, to invest properly in those programs for our families and communities, and to maintain the honor of Crown,” he said.
“When MNO and Ontario first work together, we make better changes for our land and water with our children, families and communities. It’s time to return to the table contained in our shared values of honesty, truth and respect.”
Ontario heads say that academic research “only confirms reality.”
“It is extremely disappointing that Canada and Ontario … any one failed to do adequate research before identifying MNO. Not only Ontario and Canada are refusing to consult the first nations, they refuse to share research that they trusted or accept the growing body of research and take steps to correct their mistakes,” Ottario’s prominences take steps to fix their mistakes. Said.
Open controversies over the claims of Métis Heritage came close to separate the Métis National Council last year, once worked as a national voice for Métis, but now there are only two provincial members.
Métis Nation-Saskatchewan withdrew from Métis National Council last September, citing concerns about MNO and claiming that the council failed to ensure the integrity of its citizenship registry.
Metis Nation British Columbia withdrew from the council shortly after, saying that it had lost faith in the council’s ability to serve as a National Advocacy Organization.
Citing similar concerns, the Manitoba Matis Federation departed years after being withdrawn from the council.
Will Goodon, Minister of Identification Protection and Inter-Swadeshi Affairs of the Manitoba Matis Federation, said that the amount of public funds available to the Metis communities is limited and should not be shared with the bodies that call the historic Metis nation-which are recognized as a descendant of the Red River communities in Manitoba.
A park received by MNO was to allow the Canadian grant organization to protect the land and support the support of a ecological corridor in the area along the northern coast of Lake Superior, “a federal document says.
Goodon said the type of funding raises red flags for both red river metis and first nations, which are concerned about the possibility of MNOs that demand land in their areas.
The Manitoba Matis Federation said that it was also upset with the fact that the federal government had last week invited MNO leaders for a meeting to discuss the law of its controversial major projects.
The Federation, which boycotted the meeting, said that MNO’s invitation reduced the integrity of the gathering and put the agenda of major projects of the government.
Ontario heads said in a media statement, “Canada and Ontario are advancing the pro-development agenda. They say they will consult with ‘indigenous communities’, but, in Ontario, only one consultation that should be with the rights holders, the heads of Ottario,” Ottario’s heads said in a media statement.
“PAN-Swadeshi approaches do not work and only devaluate true rights holders.”
