Thank you so much for the question. I'm so glad you asked it, because there is very much a gender dimension here.

Indigenous women have long been excluded on the economic front for a large variety of reasons. It's hard to apply for money for an individual business or be part of a business on reserve if you're not actually a member because you're outside of the Indian Act because of sex discrimination. We know this has happened for decades. It means that indigenous women in general are 10 steps behind all other indigenous people. We know that from the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. We know that from RCAP. We know that from all the reports we have ever done.

There are still gaps, obviously. We have not gotten rid of all the sex discrimination in the Indian Act. We have a whole working group on that. We hope Bill C-38 will deal with some of that, but Bill C-38 only addresses enfranchisement. In the past, you were involuntarily or voluntarily enfranchised as a woman if your husband was, and so were your kids. How do we bring these women back who are rightful members? Similarly, consultations will be happening in the new year on all our kids or grandkids who are not included because of the second-generation cut-off, who are disproportionately indigenous women and girls.

At every level, you have indigenous women and girls who are disproportionately impacted in an indigenous procurement policy that hasn't been verifying identity to begin with. I would like to see the numbers on how many indigenous women were provided with supports who are actually indigenous. For indigenous women and girls, this means more than just business. This is about how you can provide for yourself and your children in situations of domestic violence, have a house and shelter for yourself and be able to live in a safe location. All of these things are directly related to policies like this.

Transcript

Discussions (0)