Ian Lafrenière was named Minister responsible for Indigenous Affairs on October 9, 2020, a few days after the death of Joyce Echaquan. Immediately, her appointment sparked an outcry, particularly from indigenous women’s associations.
Given the state of relations between the First Peoples and the Quebec police forces, how could it be judged that a former high-ranking officer of the Montreal City Police Service (SPVM) was the best person to carry out something? form of reconciliation? Was there no one else within the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) who had demonstrated a shred of interest, competence and sensitivity in their relations with the First Nations?
Immediately, both Prime Minister François Legault and many observers of Quebec politics pleaded for giving “the runner’s chance.” We were, in short, ordered to put aside what we already knew about the character’s long career – notably responsible for communications for the SPVM during the student spring of 2012 – and to pretend that we were dealing with a blank sheet, to be welcomed with candor, with all the benefits of the doubt.
Three years later, has the rider had enough “chances” and track time for us to be able to assess his work without being reprimanded? Let’s try it.
At the close of the June 2022 parliamentary session, the chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador (APNQL), Ghislain Picard, published an open letter in which he deplored the “historically disappointing” record of relations between the CAQ with indigenous peoples. A leader for 30 years, Picard recalled having had the opportunity to work with eight prime ministers and a premier of Quebec. It is rich in this experience that he wrote while “the first mandate of François Legault’s government stands out from all others in modern history by the number of missed meetings with the Indigenous people.” It’s still not nothing.
The leader of the AFNQL denounced in particular the adoption of law 96 on the French language, which, unlike law 101, does not exempt indigenous communities from its application. The symbol is important, since the imposition of a European language on First Peoples has a heavy history in Canada. Already, here, the pill was not working.
But there is more. From the summer of 2022, we began to be exasperated by the slowness in implementing or the refusal to apply the recommendations of the Viens commission, on relations between Indigenous people and public services, as well as those of the commission Laurent which affected the place of indigenous families and children in social services. We also denounced Quebec’s decision to challenge in the Supreme Court of Canada the constitutionality of the (federal) Act concerning children, youth and families of the First Nations, Inuit and Métis (C-92). For the AFNQL, this refusal to recognize the jurisdiction of the First Nations in matters of child and family services added “insult to injury”.
Reacting to Ghislain Picard’s exit, Ian Lafrenière said he “completely disagreed” with his point of view, and continued to praise his record and his projects.
How have things evolved since then? On June 9, Minister Lafrenière tabled a bill on cultural security. To say it was poorly received is an understatement. There were almost as many harsh critiques of the bill as there were indigenous speakers participating in the launch of work in the National Assembly last month. We deplore a far too narrow vision of cultural security, and we denounce the government’s refusal to recognize and apply the Joyce Principle – which presupposes recognition of systemic racism towards Aboriginal people in health and social services. Above all, perhaps, it describes a “colonialist” way of proposing reforms. We invite the government to co-draft with the First Peoples the laws that primarily concern them.
When the College of Physicians of Quebec added its voice to the concert of criticism, Ian Lafrenière came out of his depth. There is no question of “reviewing one’s position” on systemic racism or of co-drafting a legislative text with the First Nations, he asserts.
Later in September, Minister Lafrenière’s bill on indigenous languages received the same frosty reception. This is because while the intentions of protecting and revitalizing Indigenous languages are good, it is certainly not up to a non-Indigenous government to determine and govern these languages and their future. Once again, the lack of listening and collaboration upstream on the part of Ian Lafrenière has led the CAQ into a dead end. Faced with the outcry, the government was forced last week to put the brakes on its “Indigenous Bill 101” bill.
Finally, the Public Protector published its first follow-up report on the Viens commission on Wednesday. The findings are devastating. Four years after the report was published, the government still does not have a comprehensive strategy to improve relations between Indigenous people and public services. In total, more than two thirds of the recommendations of the Viens commission report have not yet had satisfactory follow-up.
Questions, in closing: in what other case could a minister suffer so many setbacks, so heavily damage his relations with those opposite him, make so many missteps and make so little progress while still keeping his post? a long time ? Where does this political tolerance for mediocrity, stagnation and slippage come from when it comes to indigenous peoples? How many more chances does the runner deserve?
Anthropologist, Emilie Nicolas is a columnist at Duty and to Release. She hosts the podcast Detours for Canadaland.