The Métis Nation of Ontario …

The Métis Nation of Ontario (“MNO”) acknowledges the Ministry’s March 6, 2026 posting regarding proposed updates to the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (“S&G”) as part of the Heritage Framework Transformation (“HFT”). We appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback on this important work.

The MNO recognizes Ontario’s interest in modernizing its heritage framework and improving regulatory efficiency. At the same time, changes to archaeological processes must not weaken protections for Métis rights, cultural heritage, or the Crown’s Duty to Consult and Accommodate under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Updating the Standards and Guidelines is a strategic, system-wide Crown decision that requires early, distinctions based, and meaningful engagement with Métis communities.

The MNO is concerned that several elements of the proposal – including limited assessments, partial clearances, increased reliance on Licensed Consultant Archaeologists (“LCAs”), and shorter review timelines – may reduce oversight and increase the risk of harm to Métis cultural heritage. Collectively, these structural shifts raise serious concerns about cumulative impacts on Métis heritage, land use, and cultural continuity.

With these risks in mind, we outline the following comments, which identify fundamental concerns that the province must address to uphold its constitutional obligations and protect Métis cultural heritage.

1. Duty to Consult and Strategic Crown Action

Updating the S&G will shape how archaeological sites are identified, evaluated, and protected across Ontario. This is a strategic Crown action that directly affects Métis cultural heritage and therefore requires meaningful consultation.

To date, consultation on the HFT has been largely reactive, offered insufficient time or space for meaningful dialogue, and centred on information sharing rather than co-development.

Key concerns include:

• limited time to review technical materials or engage with citizens
• inconsistent communication and response timelines
• unclear plans for future phases of the HFT
• no opportunity for Métis to shape the process at the early stages where it matters most
Providing information after decisions are made does not meet the Crown’s duty to consult.

2. Distinctions Based Recognition of Métis Rights and Heritage

The S&G uses broad references to “Indigenous communities” and defines the category to include First Nations, Métis, and other “Aboriginal” peoples. By failing to outline Métis-specific considerations, the document risks obscuring the distinct rights, histories, and cultural landscapes of Métis communities. Métis heritage is often post contact, mobile, and closely tied to waterways, fur trade routes, coastal networks, and harvesting corridors – features not adequately reflected in the current or proposed S&G.
The MNO recommends that the updated S&G:

• explicitly reference Métis communities and Métis cultural heritage
• recognize traditional Métis travel routes and harvesting areas as culturally significant land-scapes
• ensure that Métis sites are not deprioritized relative to older archaeological sites
• embed Métis Traditional Knowledge as an equal knowledge system
A distinctions-based approach is essential if Métis cultural heritage is to be accurately identified, respected, and protected.

3. Risks Associated with Streamlining

The introduction of limited assessments, expanded partial clearances, and greater reliance on LCA discretion raises concerns about reduced oversight and increased risk to cultural heritage:

• limited assessments may overlook culturally significant sites
• partial clearance buffers may not be sufficient for cultural landscapes
• small scale projects have historically been used to avoid full assessments
• reduced Ministry oversight shifts responsibility onto Indigenous communities
• the proposed compliance model does not include Indigenous involvement
Streamlining cannot become a substitute for proper assessment or consultation.

4. Métis Knowledge, Data Sovereignty, and Cultural Landscape Mapping

There are significant gaps in provincial archaeological mapping, particularly for Métis sites. The shift toward pre mapping values under the HFT risks placing unreasonable burdens on Métis communities:
The MNO recommends:

• co developing GIS and mapping tools with Métis communities
• establishing data sharing agreements that respect Métis governance and data sovereignty
• protecting sensitive cultural information, including no go zones
• integrating Métis cultural landscapes into the S&G
Accurate and distinctions based mapping is essential to preventing irreversible harm to Métis sites.

5. Capacity, Timelines, and Resourcing

The current funding envelope of $15,000 is insufficient for Métis communities to meaningfully participate in archaeological processes. Métis communities require adequate funding to support GIS capacity, technical review, and participation in archaeological processes.

To meet the Crown’s duty to consult, Ontario must provide sustained funding for:

• technical review of archaeological reports
• participation in fieldwork
• Traditional Knowledge contributions
• GIS and mapping capacity
• training Métis archaeologists and guardians
• responding to accelerated timelines
Without adequate resourcing, consultation becomes procedural rather than meaningful.

6. Training Requirements for Licensed Consultant Archaeologists

Meaningful heritage protection requires Licensed Consultant Archaeologists to understand Métis cultural practices, values, and site types – not only generic “Indigenous” considerations.

While such training is not currently required, the MNO encourages the Ministry to establish mandatory, distinctions-based training requirements for all LCAs. This training should be developed in partnership with Métis knowledge holders to ensure it reflects Métis cultural heritage, governance, and knowledge systems.

Mandatory training for LCAs would:

• improve the identification and evaluation of Métis cultural heritage
• strengthen cultural safety and respectful engagement practices
• reduce the risk of misclassification or destruction of Métis sites
• support a more consistent and accountable archaeology sector
• align with the Crown’s duty to consult and the principles of UNDRIP
The MNO is prepared to work with the Ministry to co develop Métis specific training modules, including cultural protocols, Métis Traditional Knowledge, and the identification of Métis cultural landscapes.

7. Repatriation, Artifact Stewardship, and Community Access

The MNO has a strong and direct interest in understanding where Métis cultural artifacts are currently held, how they can be accessed, and what processes govern their return to Métis communities. These materials are essential to cultural continuity, community well being, and the exercise of Métis rights and self determination.

To ensure that stewardship and repatriation practices meaningfully reflect Métis priorities, the MNO recommends:

• strengthening repatriation provisions
• supporting Métis community led stewardship of artifacts
• ensuring that Métis institutions are included in stewardship pathways
Repatriation and stewardship processes must be grounded in distinctions based approaches that recognize the unique history, governance structures, and cultural practices of Métis people.

Conclusion

The MNO recognizes Ontario’s efforts to modernize its heritage framework. However, modernization must advance reconciliation – not efficiency at the expense of Métis rights and cultural heritage. The section 35 rights of Métis communities cannot be compromised through accelerated timelines, expanded exemptions, or increased reliance on proponents and LCAs.

Ontario must ensure that Métis communities can meaningfully participate in and benefit from heritage modernization through distinctions based partnerships that uphold the honour of the Crown.

The MNO appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments and looks forward to seeing the
Ministry’s approach to addressing these recommendations.