Status, Membership, and Bill S-2: Proposed Amendments to the Indian Act

Tawow!

Today’s post will briefly touch on Bill S-2. Specifically, the proposed amendments to the Indian Act that seek to address ongoing inequities, such as those from former enfranchisement provisions.

The debate around Bill S-2 is extensive. Bill S-2’s proposed amendments include changes to enfranchisement, deregistration, home band membership, and specific offensive and outdated language. 

If passed, Bill S-2 would change who has status under the Indian Act. It would allow people with a family history of enfranchisement to pass on registration entitlement to the same extent as people without histories of enfranchisement. This means that people who are currently not entitled to registration under the Indian Act, because their ancestor was enfranchised by application, involuntarily, or as part of a band prior to 1985, would now be entitled to registration. It would also allow people to choose if they would like their name removed from the Indian Register, meaning they would no longer have status. Individuals who choose to have their name removed from the Indian Register would retain their entitlement to registration under the Indian Act, could seek re-registration at any time in the future, and would not impact their descendants' entitlement to registration. 

Bill S-2, if passed, would also affect membership claims. It would support individuals’ rights to reclaim membership in their home band, but First Nations that maintain their own membership lists would still have the right to limit their membership in accordance with their membership criteria. The bill would also eliminate the outdated and offensive language that is currently used in the definition of “dependent persons.”

Bill S-2 may also affect the second-generation cut-off rule. One of the most recent proposed amendments to Bill S-2 in December addresses this rule. This change was unanimously voted for by the Senate, and is now being considered in the House of Commons. 

The second-generation cut-off rule created a two-tiered system for Indian Status, where some people with status cannot pass that status on to their children. Nations working through complex citizenship and membership questions, while dealing with the impacts of the Indian Act on their ways forward, are often significantly impacted by the second-generation cut-off rule. If the new proposed amendment is included in Bill S-2, and the bill passes, the second-generation cut-off rule would be removed from the Indian Act. This removal would mean that only one parent would need Indian status to entitle their child to Indian status, no longer needing both parents to have status in order to pass status to the child.

For more information about Bill S-2, enfranchisement, and other related considerations, check out these resources from the Wahkohtowin Law and Governance Lodge Resource Library: Bill S-2 Infographic and What is Bill S-2?