COO and NAN submission to the Tribunal regarding NCCC Notice of Motion seeking Interested Party Status
Press Release
PART I – STATEMENT OF FACTS
A. Overview
1. The newly formed National Children’s Chiefs Commission (the “NCCC”) seeks to be added as an interested party to the remedies stage of this proceeding, including Jordan’s Principle and the long-term reform of the First Nations Child and Family Services Program
(the “FNCFS Program”) outside of Ontario (together, the “remedial proceedings”). The
NCCC does not meet the test for interested party status and should not be admitted into the remedial proceedings.
1. Chiefs of Ontario (“COO”) and Nishnawbe Aski Nation (“NAN”) have a strong interest in the timely and orderly conclusion of the remedial proceedings. In the event the Final Agreement on Long-Term Reform of the First Nations Child and Family Services Program in Ontario (the “OFA”) is not approved, COO and NAN may be required to re-engage in the national FNCFS Program reform process and would be directly affected by how the proceedings are structured and who is involved. COO and NAN remain a part of all remedial processes regarding Jordan’s Principle.
1. The NCCC’s interest in long-term reform is aligned with the Assembly of First Nations’ (the “AFN”) and the NCCC can be represented by the AFN before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”). Both the NCCC and the AFN take their mandates from and represent the First Nations-in-Assembly. There is no reason to have two bodies before the Tribunal representing the same interest or to allow two “seats at the table” to what amounts to one entity.
1. The NCCC has no expertise in these proceedings. The NCCC is not a service provider and has no expertise in the delivery of child and family services or Jordan’s Principle. The
NCCC will not add to the legal positions of the parties or bring a unique perspective: as a representative body for the First Nations-in-Assembly, the NCCC’s expertise and interest overlap with the AFN’s.
1. The addition of any interested parties at this late stage of the remedial proceedings risks further delaying long-term reform, contrary to the Tribunal’s responsibility to conduct proceedings as informally and expeditiously as the requirements of natural justice and the rules of procedure allow.
6. First Nations children, youth, families, and communities have waited too long for reform. The Tribunal has said that it “is far better for children to complete the long-term remedial
phase shortly rather than wait for long periods of time”.1 It is not in the best interests of First Nations children to make them wait any longer. Reform of the FNCFS Program and
Jordan’s Principle must be allowed to proceed without delay.
B. Background
⦁ The complaint and finding of discrimination by the Tribunal
⦁ The history of these proceedings is well-known. On January 26, 2016 – nine years after the AFN and the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada (the “Caring Society”) filed this complaint – the Tribunal ordered Canada to cease its discriminatory practices and reform the FNCFS Program and the Memorandum of Agreement Respecting Welfare Programs for Indians (also known as the 1965 Agreement), and to immediately implement the full meaning and scope of Jordan’s principle.2
⦁ The bifurcation of Jordan’s Principle and FNCFS Program long-term reform
⦁ On December 31, 2021, COO, NAN the AFN, the Caring Society, and Canada signed an
Agreement-in-Principle (the “AIP”).3 After the AIP was signed, the long-term reform of the FNCFS Program and Jordan’s Principle were bifurcated.4 In 2025 CHRT 80, the Tribunal found it more efficient to complete the long-term reform of the FNCFS Program
IHT5
