An Act to amend the Indian Act (new registration entitlements)

Summary#

• This bill changes the Indian Act to expand who can be registered as a “status Indian.” It responds to a court case (Nicholas v. Canada) that found parts of the Act unfair.

• It moves to a simple “one-parent rule” for passing on status, cleans up old language, and gives people the choice to remove their names from the Indian Register.

• It also restores band membership rights to women who lost them by marrying non‑members in the past, and to their descendants, for bands that use lists kept by the federal department.

• Key changes and impacts:

  • Opens new entitlements to registration for people excluded by past rules, including those tied to sex‑based discrimination and “marrying out.”
  • Replaces complex status categories with a one‑parent rule: if at least one parent is or was entitled to status, the child is entitled.
  • Deems people who were registered under the old “6(2)” category to now be registered under the new one‑parent rule.
  • Lets a person apply in writing to have their name removed from the Indian Register (and from the federal Band List).
  • Updates wording by replacing “mentally incompetent Indian” with “dependent person,” and modernizes how estates are managed for people found unable to manage their affairs.
  • Ensures people on Band Lists kept by the Department are treated the same as “Indians” across many parts of the Act.
  • Some registration and band list changes take effect 12 months after Royal Assent.

What it means for you#

• Individuals and families

  • If you were blocked from getting status because only one parent had status, you may now qualify.
  • If you have status, your child will qualify even if the other parent does not. This removes the “second‑generation cut‑off.”
  • If your mother, grandmother, or ancestor lost status or band membership in the past because she married a non‑member, you and your family may now be eligible for status and, for bands that use federal Band Lists, band membership.
  • If you do not want to be registered, you can ask to have your name removed. Your descendants’ right to apply in the future is not lost because of your choice.
  • Newly registered people may gain access to federal programs for registered Indians and certain tax exemptions on reserve.

• Band members and communities

  • Bands that use Band Lists kept by the Department will likely see more people added to their lists, including women who “married out” and their descendants.
  • People on these Band Lists will be treated as “Indians” for many parts of the Act, which affects land use, band moneys, and related rights.
  • Bands that control their own membership under custom rules keep that authority; federal registration does not automatically change a custom membership list.

• Administration and timelines

  • The federal Registrar must recognize past entitlements that existed under the old rules and convert them to the new one‑parent rule.
  • Expect a higher volume of registration applications and possible processing delays.
  • Several major changes take effect 12 months after the bill becomes law.

Expenses#

• Estimated impact at a glance: would likely increase federal costs and create new pressure on some First Nations services due to more people becoming eligible.

• What may drive costs:

  • More people eligible for federal benefits for registered Indians (for example, health benefits, education supports, and income assistance on reserve).
  • More demand for housing, water, education, and social services in communities, especially for bands using Department Band Lists.
  • One‑time and ongoing administrative costs to process new registrations and update band lists.

• Exact government cost estimates have not been publicly and clearly stated in the bill text.

Proponents' View#

• Fixes long‑standing unfairness in the Indian Act and responds to the court’s direction to end discrimination.
• Replaces confusing categories with a clear one‑parent rule, making it easier for families to understand and pass on status.
• Restores rights to women who lost band membership by marrying non‑members, and to their descendants, helping to reunite families and communities.
• Gives people personal choice to remove their name from the Indian Register while protecting their children’s future entitlement.
• Updates outdated and offensive language in the law and clarifies that band members on Department lists get equal treatment across the Act.

Opponents' View#

• Could significantly increase costs to federal programs and strain community services like housing, health, and education without matching funding.
• May create administrative backlogs as many people apply at once; 12 months may not be enough time to prepare.
• Some First Nations worry about Ottawa’s continued role in defining status and band lists, instead of fully recognizing First Nations’ own citizenship rules.
• Bands with limited land and infrastructure may face added pressure from larger membership numbers.
• Critics say the bill fixes parts of the Act but does not address the broader issue of replacing the Indian Act with a system based on Indigenous self‑determination.