Paul Dubé’s historic visit to Neskantaga First Nation in September inspired the Ontario ombudsman to call on the federal and provincial governments to take “immediate action” to address “unacceptable and unsafe conditions” in the fly-in community.
But while Dubé’s office seeks to better respond to the human rights complaints of Indigenous people and communities, Canada is responsible for most programs and that puts a response to those concerns out of reach.
“There is an ombudsman for every province in Canada and two of the territories,” Dubé said. “There’s a national ombudsman for Ireland, for England, for Japan, for the Netherlands, just about every country has a national ombudsman. In Canada, there should be someone to go to for those federal matters – someone with influence.”
Dubé is not alone. It has been six years since the idea arose among the Calls to Action in the 2019 Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. MMIWG Call for Justice 1.7 urged the federal, provincial, and territorial governments to establish a formal mechanism to resolve complaints on Indigenous and human rights, to be developed in partnership with Indigenous peoples.
Dubé, who has been Ontario’s ombudsman since 2016 and has been instrumental in establishing international industry funding and accountability standards, was among the signatories to a letter from the Canadian Council of Parliamentary Ombudsman to the Ministry of Crown-Indigenous Relations in 2019.
Saskatchewan ombudsman and then-CCPO president offered Canada the support of her staff and colleagues, calling the idea of cross-jurisdictional Indigenous ombudsman a “positive and interesting proposition.”
The federal government tasked ministerial special representative Jennifer Moore Rattray to produce a report that would guide Call to Action 1.7’s implementation. She met with a total of 600 people, including representatives of 125 First Nations, Inuit and Metis governments, and Indigenous organizations. She also consulted extensively with CCPO members and staff.
“To be honest with you, I’m kind of frustrated that we haven’t heard much response.”
Rattray’s final report published in May 2024 recommended that ombudspersons be selected by December 31, 2024 and that all national and regional Indigenous offices be staffed and operational by December 31, 2025.
The CCPO urged “swift action” under strong support for the creation of what it called, “an office dedicated to providing Indigenous people with a trusted mechanism to safeguard their rights, address concerns, and hold governments and public institutions accountable for their commitments to Indigenous people.”
When no ombudspersons had been chosen by spring, it was Neskantaga who led Nishnawbe Aski Nation chiefs in assembly to pass a resolution that urged the federal government to make the office a priority. That was two months before the First Nation was evacuated under multiple infrastructure failures and its newly-elected Chief Gary Quisess issued a public plea for leaders to visit.
“We’re subject to jurisdiction volleyball,” said Chris Moonias, Neskantaga’s proxy representative at that meeting.
“Ontario said, ‘this is not in my jurisdiction’ or Canada would say, ‘this is not in my jurisdiction.’ This is something we go through all the time. I feel like the same thing is happening with the Ontario ombudsman. It doesn’t seem to be getting any traction and it seems people profit out of our misery.”
In June, current CCPO president and Manitoba ombudsman, Jill Perron, issued another letter to Northwest Territories MP and newly-appointed Crown-Indigenous Relations minister Rebecca Alty.
Perron described the Rattray report as, “a thorough and thoughtful roadmap,” which “meticulously and accurately incorporated the information” CCPO provided her. Perron repeated the CCPO was “ready and willing to help facilitate” the implementation of Call for Justice 1.7, but reminded the minister implementation is behind schedule.
“Because there is currently no independent oversight body to deal with Indigenous people’s issues as they pertain to most federal services, those complaints are often brought to provincial and territorial ombuds offices, where we have no jurisdiction or authority over federal matters and consequently, limited avenues to help Indigenous people resolve those types of issues,” the letter reads. “The absence of a federal ombuds entity prevents collaboration between our offices and a federal counterpart to assist Indigenous people.”
Dubé said that outreach was met without reply.
“To be honest with you, I’m kind of frustrated that we haven’t heard much response,” he said.
“I’ve always said there should be a federal general jurisdictional ombudsman for Canada. Having an Indigenous ombudsman seems like a good idea to me. I think we speak for my colleagues when I say we’re willing to support that any way we can.”
In a written statement, Perron reiterated the CCPO’s position that the creation of a federal ombudsman office to serve federal human rights complaints would strengthen the country’s accountability network and provide deeply-needed services for Indigenous people and communities.
“The creation of an independent ombudsperson would enhance existing mechanisms that serve to promote fairness, respect, accountability and trust in public services,” Perron’s statement reads. “It would ensure that Indigenous rights are recognized and respected, perspectives and experiences of Indigenous people are heard and meaningfully included in decisions, and culturally appropriate solutions are developed to address systemic issues in federal public services. It is also an important step in advancing reconciliation.”
A statement from Crown-Indigenous Relations spokesperson Pascal Laplante says, “The Government of Canada is reviewing the final report and looking at opportunities to use its findings to effectively implement Call for Justice 1.7.”
Jon Thompson is a Local Journalism Initiative reporter based in Thunder Bay. Contact him with tips and story ideas at Jon@ricochet.media
