The Final Report to Parliament on the Review of S-3: December 2020

Message from the Minister

It is my pleasure to present the 2020 report on the review of the implementation of S-3, the last of 3 reports mandated in S-3: An Act to amend the Indian Act, in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général).

S-3 received Royal Assent on December 12, 2017 with many provisions put in force on December 22, 2017. On August 15, 2019 the last remaining provision was brought into force by order of the Governor in Council, advancing our work on gender equality and reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples. These last changes removed the "1951 cut-off" from the Indian Act. The removal of the cut-off aligns patrilineal and matrilineal lines and ensures that descendants born prior to April 17, 1985 (or of a marriage before that date) of women who lost status or were removed from band lists because of their marriage to non-status men going back to 1869 are entitled to registration under the Indian Act.

S-3 corrects historical wrongdoings in the registration provisions of the Indian Act that have affected women and their descendants for generations and is a testament to the perseverance and advocacy of Indigenous women, leaders and allies over decades. The removal of the "1951 cut-off" responds to longstanding concerns raised by First Nations People, the United Nations Humans Rights Committee, the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and other key stakeholders.

It is estimated that the full implementation of S-3 could result in 270,000 to 450,000 newly registered individuals in total. To date, more than 10,000 individuals have been newly registered. In addition, 57,000 individuals who were already registered and were unable to pass on their entitlement to their descendants are now able to do so due to category amendments made between 2019 and 2020.

While sex-based inequities in the registration provisions have been eliminated, residual impacts from years of sex-based inequities continue to be felt in the registration context today. Additionally, other non sex-based inequities still remain in the Indian Act and the department continues to work with First Nations and Indigenous partners on how best to address these concerns.

The implementation of S-3 is an important shift towards confronting Canada's history and redressing the historical wrongs. It is a shift that ensures that Canada continues to renew and rebuild its relationship with Indigenous Peoples based upon the affirmation of rights, respect, cooperation and partnership.

Executive Summary

• In 2016, Bill S-3 An Act to amend the Indian Act in Response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux was introduced in Parliament in direct response to a court decision which found that some registration provisions of the Indian Act violated equality rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
• S-3 partially came into force in 2017 to address the sex-based inequities identified by the court, as well as additional sex-based inequities raised by Indigenous women, leaders and allies.
• Following consultation with First Nations, further amendments removing what is referred to as the "1951 cut-off" came into force in August 2019 and eliminated all sex-based inequities in registration.
• While sex-based inequities in registration have been eliminated, the department recognizes that there are residual impacts of these historical sex-based laws and their effects that continue to affect registration.
• Registration provisions for patrilineal and matrilineal lines going back to 1869 are now aligned. Those newly eligible include grandchildren born prior to September 4, 1951 of women who were removed from their First Nation's band list or lost status because of their marriage to a non-Indian man. Now, descendants born prior to April 17, 1985 (or of a marriage before that date) of women who lost status or were removed from band lists because of their marriage to non-status men going back to 1869 are entitled to registration under the Indian Act.
• Pursuant to S-3, the Minister is responsible for tabling three reports to Parliament. The first report, tabled on May 12, 2018 reported on the design of a Collaborative Process on Indian Registration, Band Membership and First Nation Citizenship. The second report, tabled on June 12, 2019 reported on the findings of that Collaborative Process.
• S-3 outlines the objectives on which the third and final report must focus:
  1. A determination as to whether any sex-based inequities remain in section 6, the registration provisions, of the Indian Act;
  2. A review of the operation of the provisions of the Indian Act that are enacted by S-3; and
  3. If the Minister determines that any sex-based inequities still exist with respect to the provisions of section 6 of the Indian Act enacted by S-3, a statement of any recommended changes to the Indian Act must be provided in order to reduce or eliminate those sex-based inequities.
• The report presents the following findings:
  1. It has been determined that sex-based inequities in the registration provisions of the Indian Act have been eliminated.
  2. At the 3-year mark, the department has seen one third of the S-3 applications it had initially anticipated and the number of newly registered individuals is also lower than expected. As a result, the impacts to date to programs and services associated with registration under the act are minimal^{Footnote 1}.
  3. While sex-based inequities have been eliminated from registration, the department recognizes that residual effects of these previous sex-based inequities and non sex-based inequities in the registration provisions persist, including: the "second-generation cut-off," scrip, and enfranchisement. Registration and its link to band membership is also a concern for many individuals and First Nations. Engagement with First Nations and stakeholders is ongoing to determine how best to address these concerns.
• To date, more than 10,000 individuals have been successfully registered as a direct result of the changes to the registration provisions. The department has an inventory of 12,000 applications still requiring review. Although productivity early in the COVID-19 pandemic was reduced, processing has now returned to pre-COVID levels.
• The department is working to improve the client experience, address delays in registration decisions and raise awareness among those who are newly entitled.
• Specifically, the department is:
  • making a number of processing and policy changes to enhance and modernize operations such as a digital tool to move away from paper-based applications;
  • investing $15.4 million to scale up processing;
  • investing an additional $5.8 million on engagement, outreach and monitoring of impacts.
• It is important for Canada to continue to cultivate its commitment to a renewed relationship with Indigenous Peoples based upon the affirmation of rights, respect, cooperation and partnership. Going forward, the department must continue to address these outstanding concerns to ensure that the department is on the path to "getting out of the business of Indian registration^{Footnote 2}."

Introduction

This report fulfills the Minister of Indigenous Services Canada's obligation under S-3 to report after 3 years on the review of S-3: An Act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général).

As required by S-3, this report reviews whether any sex-based inequities remain in the registration provisions, reviews the operation of the provisions enacted by S-3 and the aligning of matrilineal and patrilineal lines going back to 1869. The report also determines that, while no sex-based inequities remain, ongoing and residual effects of the previous sex-based legislation and policy and non-sex-based inequities persist.

The department recognizes that it faces many challenges in redressing historical wrongs in the Indian Act. Further, it recognizes that the disconnection resulting from these wrongs and their residual effects have disproportionality impacted the descendants of Indigenous women, many who may not know that they're now entitled to registration. The department is committed to ongoing outreach and timely access to programs and services for those newly entitled.

COVID-19

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a global pandemic. Following instructions from public health agencies, the federal government issued work-from-home orders.

As a result, the COVID-19 pandemic has created operational challenges for the department in the implementation of S-3, including its commitment to continue discussions on the remaining inequities of the Indian Act and its obligation to process applications for registration. Because of the paper-based, mail-in nature of applications for registration, productivity early in the pandemic was reduced. Processing has now returned to pre-COVID levels. Alternative virtual environments are being established to deliver on commitments relating to engagement, outreach and the monitoring of impacts.

Background on Sex-Based Inequities in the Indian Act

Since the 1869 Gradual Enfranchisement Act and with the implementation of the first Indian Act in 1876, the federal government has exercised exclusive statutory authority in determining the definition of Indian^{Footnote 3} and therefore eligibility to Indian registration (Indian status) under the Indian Act^{Footnote 4}. This authority is exercised through the Office of the Indian Registrar. Under the Indian Act, status Indians, also known as registered Indians, may be eligible for a range of benefits, rights, programs and services offered by the federal and provincial or territorial governments.

Section 6 of the Indian Act sets out requirements for entitlement to registration as an Indian. Eligibility to Indian status is determined on the basis of an individual's descent from a person registered or eligible to be registered as an Indian. Applicants must establish a link to Canadian Indian ancestry based upon documentary evidence such as a birth certificate.

Since the 19th century, women and their descendants have been discriminated against due to sex-based inequities in legislation related to registration and band membership under the Indian Act. Beginning in 1869 with the Gradual Enfranchisement Act, the definition of Indian was no longer based on First Nations kinship and community ties. Instead, it built on the predominance of men over women and children and aimed to remove families headed by a non-Indian man from First Nations communities^{Footnote 5}. The Gradual Enfranchisement Act also introduced the "marrying out rule" that was maintained in the 1876 Indian Act. This rule removed entitlement to registration from Indian women who married non-Indian men, while granting entitlement to non-Indian women who married Indian men. In addition, children of entitled men who married non-Indian women became entitled under the Indian Act, while children of women who "married out" were no longer entitled^{Footnote 6}.

In 1951, substantial changes with respect to registration were made including the creation of a centralized Indian Register. Further amendments reinforcing discrimination against women and their descendants were made, including the "double mother" rule^{Footnote 7}.

Sex-based discrimination in the act has been challenged in light of national and international human rights legislation, including the removal of women from First Nations communities and their inability to retain their Indigenous identity in the eyes of Canadian law. For decades, Indigenous women have fought for equal rights under the law and challenged the patriarchal provisions of the Indian Act. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, Jeanette Lavell of Wikwemkoong, Yvonne Bédard of Six Nations of the Grand River^{Footnote 8}, elder-activist Mary Two Axe Earley of Kanien'kehá:ka^{Footnote 9}, and Senator Sandra Lovelace Nicholas of Maliseet Nation^{Footnote 10} brought various challenges against the act for its discrimination against women and their descendants.

In 1985, with the 1982 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms coming into force and increased international pressure, C-31 An Act to Amend the Indian Act was enacted.

C-31 introduced changes to the Indian Act that:

• would address sex-based inequities and remove:
  • the "marrying out" rule
  • the "double mother" rule
  • "voluntary" or involuntary enfranchisement and
  • the ability to be removed via protest due to non-Indian paternity^{Footnote 11}.
• reinstated entitlement to registration to:
  • individuals affected by the "double mother" rule
  • women who had lost status or who were no longer recognized under the Indian Act when they married a non-Indian man.
• maintained the status of all individuals who were entitled immediately prior to the passage of the act by virtue of section 6(1)(a) including women who had gained status due to their marriage to an entitled man.
• created five entitlement categories under section 6(1) and introduced the "second generation cut-off" under section 6(2)^{Footnote 12}.

Although this was an important step toward the elimination of sex-based inequities in the Indian Act, C 31 did not address all sex-based inequities. In 2007, lawyer and activist Dr. Sharon McIvor of Nle?kepmxc Nation and her son Jacob Grismer challenged the act by revealing that sex-based inequities remained. Women who had lost their status as a result of marrying a non-Indian man and who were reinstated under section 6(1)(c) were unable to pass on entitlement to their grandchildren while Indian men who married non-Indian women were still able to pass on entitlement to their grandchildren. In 2009, the British Columbia Court of Appeal agreed with Dr. McIvor and found that these aspects of the act were contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and were discriminatory based on sex^{Footnote 13}.

In response to this court decision, C-3 the Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act was adopted in 2011 and created the provision 6(1)(c.1). This new provision established the entitlement of the grandchildren of women who married non-Indian men. C-3 also introduced the "1951 cut-off" to fix the "double mother" rule created in 1951. The "1951 cut-off" required that an individual must have had a child or adopted a child on or after September 4, 1951 and have a mother who lost entitlement due to a marriage to a non-Indian man, to be registered under 6(1)(c.1)^{Footnote 14}. However, C-3 did not resolve the inequities in entitlement for further descendants of women compared to descendants of men in similar circumstances. This resulted in further litigation against Canada^{Footnote 15}.

In the 2015 Descheneaux decision^{Footnote 16}, the Superior Court of Quebec ruled that the act violated equality rights under the Charter by continuing sex-based differences in registration. In the 2017 Gehl decision^{Footnote 17}, the Ontario Court of Appeal supported Dr. Lynn Gehl, an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe and determined that women were unfairly disadvantaged by the Indian Registrar's policy with respect to unstated or unknown parentage. In 2017, to address these persisting sex-based inequities, Parliament with the support of important work by Indigenous organizations and leaders, such as former Senator Lillian Dyck, brought into force S-3 An Act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général).

These legislative changes were implemented in 2 phases.

Phase 1:
The first phase (Annex A) of the implementation included immediate amendments to the Indian Act to address the following sex-based issues:

• The "cousins" issue: differential treatment of first cousins whose grandmother lost status due to marriage to a non-Indian man before April 17, 1985.
• The "siblings" issue: differential treatment of women who were born outside of marriage to entitled fathers between September 4, 1951 and April 17, 1985.
• The issue of omitted minor children: differential treatment of minor children who were born of an entitled mother and an entitled father between September 4, 1951 and April 17, 1985, but could lose entitlement to status if they were still minors at the time of their mother's subsequent marriage to a non-Indian man.
• The unstated or unknown parent issue: in response to the Ontario Court of Appeal's Gehl decision, S-3 provides flexibility for the Indian Registrar to consider various forms of evidence in determining eligibility for registration in situations of an unstated or unknown parent, grandparent or other ancestor.

On December 22, 2017, the first phase of S-3 came into force and introduced the new sections of 6(1)(c) entitlement categories for newly eligible individuals (hereafter referred to as 6(1)(c) provisions).

The first phase of the bill left in place the "1951 cut-off" until consultation with First Nations and stakeholders and impacted individuals occurred.

Phase 2:
The second phase of the implementation of the S-3 provisions addressed the "1951 cut-off" by removing it, ensuring the entitlement of all descendants of women who lost status or were removed from band lists for marrying a non-Indian man going back to 1869, when the Gradual Enfranchisement Act was introduced. Due to the projected impacts on First Nations, there was a delay in removing the "1951 cut-off" to allow for consultations. Between 2018 and 2019, during the Collaborative Process on Indian Registration, Band Membership and First Nation Citizenship, First Nations were consulted on the removal of the cut-off as well as broader issues relating to the Indian Act. The 2019 Report to Parliament on Indian Registration, Band Membership and First Nation Citizenship indicated general agreement for the removal of the "1951 cut-off^{Footnote 18}."

On August 15, 2019, S-3 was brought fully into force to remove the "1951 cut-off" (see Annex B for how these amendments broadened eligibility). All 6(1)(c) provisions of the Indian Act were repealed or replaced with new 6(1)(a) provisions. These amended provisions now recognize descendants of women who married non-Indian men the same as descendants of men who married non-Indian women.

Objective 1: Reviewing the Elimination of Sex-Based Inequities

Section 12(1)(a)(i) of S-3 mandates a determination as to whether any sex-based inequities remain in the registration provisions of the Indian Act.  

It has been determined that S-3 amendments address the inequities as outlined by the Descheneaux decision as well as the sex-based inequities with respect to unstated and unknown parentage. The provisions in section 6 of the Indian Act no longer privilege one sex or gender over another. The amendments go beyond addressing the "double mother" rule and work to align the entitlement of descendants of men and women going back to the Gradual Enfranchisement Act, specifically addressing cases where women were removed from First Nations and band lists for their marriage to a non-Indian man. As a result, all sex-based inequities previously in section 6 of the Indian Act have been eliminated (See Annex C); however, the department recognizes that there are residual impacts of these historical sex-based laws and their effects that continue to affect registration (See Objective 3). 

Additionally, clause 9 of S-3 provides that the amended provisions of the Indian Act are to be liberally construed and interpreted so as to remedy any disadvantage to a woman, or her descendants, born before April 17, 1985 with respect to registration under the Indian Act as it read on April 17, 1985^{Footnote 19}. As such, clause 9 works to enhance the equal treatment of women and men and their descendants under the Indian Act.

Objective 2: Review of the Operation of the Provisions

Section 12(1)(a)(ii) of S-3 mandates a review of the operation of the provisions of the Indian Act that are enacted by S-3. 

As a result of S-3 coming into full force on August 15, 2019, section 6 of the Indian Act has been renumbered and some paragraphs have been repealed.  The following charts outline the current legislative language of relevant provisions of the Indian Act and provide a description of the standardized interpretation and application.

Objective 3:  Recommended Changes to Reduce or Eliminate Sex-Based Inequities

Section 12(1)(b) of S-3 indicates that if the Minister determines that any sex-based inequities still exist with respect to the provisions of section 6 of the Indian Act enacted by S-3, a statement of any recommended changes to the Indian Act must be provided in order to reduce or eliminate those sex-based inequities. 

As it has been determined that sex-based inequities in the registration provisions of the act have been eliminated, there are no recommended changes with respect to sex-based inequities in the provisions of section 6 of the Indian Act enacted by S-3. 

However, while sex-based inequities have been eliminated from the registration provisions, the department recognizes that 150 years of discriminatory laws and policies and the resulting sex-based inequities created residual effects that continue to be felt in the registration context today. Ongoing concerns regarding timely access to rights, services, and benefits; as well as retroactive treaty benefits, reparations, and issues of band membership; and the ways that other provisions of the Indian Act intersected with these historic laws and policies have been raised by Indigenous women and leaders. 

Moreover, there are non sex-based inequities that continue to persist in registration provisions of the Indian Act including enfranchisement, scrip, and "second generation cut-off." There are also First Nation membership and citizenship concerns. These will require legislative changes and the department continues to engage with First Nations and Indigenous partners on how best to address these issues. 

The department is taking steps to address inequities in registration. Most recently, the Hele decision^{Footnote 20} found that the Indian Registrar did not have the authority to enfranchise an unmarried Indian woman by application between 1951 and 1985. In response, the department addressed those directly involved in the litigation or similar litigations. Steps are currently being taken to review the additional impacts of the decision and identify other women and their descendants who may be affected in order to address the situation. This includes reviewing women registered or entitled to be registered under 6(1)(d) in the Indian Act, and their descendants.

Work continues on both the residual impacts of sex-based discrimination and the non sex-based inequities in registration.

Impacts of Implementation of the Provisions to Date

Communications and Engagement

Communications

With the coming into force of S-3 in December 2017, a communications plan for the Collaborative Process on Indian Registration, Band Membership and First Nation Citizenship with First Nations and Indigenous organizations was developed and implemented in 2018 and 2019. As outlined in the 2019 report to Parliament, the Collaborative Process outreach was extensive and included information sessions, regional events, community events, expert panels, funding for organizational participation and an online survey specifically targeted to urban populations^{Footnote 28}.

Long description for figure 1: Communication and Engagement Infographic

This infographic highlights that representatives from 395 First Nation communities and organizations took part in the Collaborative Process, an estimated 10,403 participants provided input during the 419 community and regional organization sessions funded by the department and $2.2 million was provided to Indigenous organizations to participate in the Collaborative Process and develop research and communications products.

Information and training sessions were organized, phone inquiries were fielded and additional funding was provided to Indigenous organizations for outreach, research and communications materials (see engagement section below).

Updates were provided through social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, web pages and 3 ministerial announcements. Local and national media, including APTN, Nation Talk, CBC, The National Post, Le Devoir, The Globe and Mail and Maclean's reported on S-3 developments. 

Engagement

Throughout the engagement process, remaining inequities in the registration provisions of the Indian Act were raised including issues of the "second-generation cut-off", scrip and enfranchisement. The department continues to work in partnership with First Nations to address these remaining concerns and to ensure the department remains on the path to "getting out of the business of Indian registration."

After the completion of the Collaborative Process in April 2019, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada engaged with First Nations communities and organizations during a series of information and discussion sessions entitled "Broader Reform Events" in early 2020.  These events provided updates on the full implementation of S-3, discussed the input collected during the Collaborative Process and highlighted general information on what Canada would be undertaking as next steps in relation to the inequities in registration and First Nation citizenship.  Invitations to attend the Broader Reform Events were sent to 744 First Nations bands and other First Nations stakeholders. Of the 19 sessions that were held over 200 First Nations bands were represented (Annex D)^{Footnote 29}.

Long description for figure 2: Communication and Engagement Infographic

This infographic highlights that 600 individuals were trained on changes to registration and Bill S-3, including departmental staff, band council members, band managers and Indian Registration Administrators. Between Service Canada and the Indigenous Services Canada public inquiries line, over 54,000 telephone inquiries on S-3 have been fielded. 19 Broader Reform Events took place and more than 200 First Nations communities represented.

Further engagement occurred throughout 2020 on topics including impacts to communities, newly entitled individuals and registration category amendments. Due to the ongoing pandemic, in-person meetings were not possible. Between August and November 2020, Indigenous Services Canada held meetings with over 100 First Nations via teleconference or videoconference through bilateral engagements and additional training sessions (Annexes E and F). Indigenous Services Canada has begun and continues to work with provinces and territories to better understand any S-3 impacts to the provision of programs and services to registered individuals and communities. Engagement on these and other inequities will be ongoing throughout the 2020-2021 fiscal year and beyond, including a public facing communications and outreach plan.

The department continues to seek partnerships with Indigenous organizations including the Assembly of First Nations and Native Women's Association of Canada to engage as broadly as possible on outstanding inequities in registration. This important work will be used to develop solutions to bring forward to First Nations and other stakeholders. 

Processing and Policy Changes

To deliver on S-3 commitments, including the timely processing of applications for those newly entitled, the department continues to take steps to improve upon its internal and client-facing processes.

Since 2017, the department has committed over $40 million towards S-3. This includes making a number of processing and policy changes to enhance and modernize operations; over $30 million in scaling up processing capacity; and over $10 million on engagement, outreach and monitoring of impacts.  All of these investments aim to improve the client experience and ensure applicants receive timely access to programs and services.  

To date, the department has put in place or is in the process of putting in place the following:

• enhanced processing capacity to support an increase in applications. In addition to ramping up processing capacity in the Winnipeg Processing Unit, a secondary Quebec City Processing Unit is being established to enhance overall capacity to render entitlement decisions and further support the processing of applications for French speaking clients.
• integrated registration and collection of individuals' ancestral information to the great-grandparent level. Doing so improves the department's ability to research and determine entitlement and ensures clarity in ancestry and facilitates faster file processing for subsequent generations. Integration of the applications means that there is no duplication in the registration process and ensures ease of access to the Secure Certificate of Indian Status which facilitates access to benefits and services specific to the applicant's status.
• advanced digital tool to modernize the department's application process for both registration and SCIS.  This tool provides an essential shift away from paper-based applications to a more modern and streamlined digital in-person application form.
• reduced the number of applicants needing to reapply by holding applications for those eligible under the removal of the "1951 cut-off" instead of denying them in the first phase of S-3.  In doing so, applicants maintained their place in the processing queue.
  
• proactively amended category codes to reflect the new legislation, for example 6(1)(c) to 6(1)(a.1). Since 2017, the automated amendments resulting from S-3 have been completed in the Indian Registration System, benefiting approximately 124,000 individuals^{Footnote 30}.
• simplified the application process and processing requirements including a less prescriptive and more flexible approach to documentation and evidence to support application on the balance of probabilities. All forms of acceptable evidence can be submitted to demonstrate entitlement to status and increased subjectivity during the review process allows for flexibility in assessment of documentation. The department continues to work towards making the application process more client-centered.
• introduced new guidance and tools for departmental staff to address complex cases such as unstated and unknown parentage cases and to provide guidance to decision makers on how to render decisions based on the balance of probabilities^{Footnote 31}. Mandatory training from the Department of Justice was completed by departmental staff reinforcing the balance of probabilities approach in decision making.
• updated guidance and training for departmental staff across the regions, resulting in more consistency in training and improved understanding of the applicability of the amendments.
• priority processing of persons over 75 years of age with applications in the queue to ensure that the elders who may have the lived experience of discrimination caused by sex-based inequities in the provisions of the act have their applications processed efficiently.
• digitized records in order to access an applicant's information and family genealogy faster. The department has a large digital collection of historical records that will yield improved service to applicants born pre-1951 and their descendants.
• implemented non-binary gender identifiers on both registration and Secure Certificate of Indian Status applications and soon on the physical card of the Secure Certificate of Indian Status itself. 
• leveraged existing agreements with provincial Vital Statistics Agencies to reduce the burden on applicants who need to acquire information about their birth, their families and their ancestry. This is an ongoing effort and one that the department will continue to raise with provinces and territories as we collectively monitor the impact of S-3.
• developed partnerships with First Nations organizations, Canada Post Corporation and Correctional Services Canada to reduce redundancies in application requirements and facilitate efficient client-centered services.

Long description for figure 3: Processes and Policy Changes Infographic

This infographic highlights the process and policy changes discussed in the report. Changes have generated 124,000 automated category amendments, reduced the number of applicants needing to apply, integrated registration and Secure Certificate of Indian Status applications, developed new unstated and unknown parentage policy and started priority processing of persons over 75 years of age with applications in the queue. ISC has invested $40 million for resources, monitoring and engagement, created the Quebec City Processing Unit, updated and created new training materials for officers, advanced digital tool to modernize the application process and digitized records. Further, Indigenous Services Canada has leveraged agreements with Vital Statistics Agencies, implemented non-binary gender identifiers on applications, developed partnerships with First Nations Organizations, Canada Post Corporation and Corrections Services of Canada and produced flexible documentation requirements.

Next Steps

Although S-3 has resulted in the removal of known sex-based discrimination in the registration provisions, there is more to be done to address concerns and redress the effects of historic policy and law. Next steps include:

ANNEXES