Canada’s Indigenous health obligations can’t be separated from rights and reconciliation

0 September 29, 2026 19:21

Commitments to Indigenous health research cannot be clawed back as part of proposed dismantling of equity, diversity and inclusion criteria for federal research funding.

Ads

Health disparities affect Indigenous people across Canada. As the country marks the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation this week, a need exists to reiterate that First Nations, Inuit and Métis people must be partners in health research decisions that affect their lives.

A House of Commons committee recently recommended removing all references to equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the process for awarding federal research funding.

The Standing Committee on Science and Research report describes Indigenous research programs in its discussion of EDI, including the Indigenous Advisory Circle and Indigenous Scholars Awards.

Across 96 pages, the Sept. 21 report never mentions treaties with Indigenous Peoples, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) or specific urgent calls issued by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of Canada.

Examining Indigenous research under “EDI” obscures the constitutional, treaty and inherent rights that distinguish Indigenous Peoples from other equity-seeking populations.

Indigenous health obligations cannot be separated from rights and reconciliation, and federal research policy must demonstrate this.

Indigenous rights

Indigenous Peoples are sovereign rights holders. Yet across 49 witnesses and 35 written briefs — even while some witnesses advocated for valuing Indigenous community-based research and the need to mitigate existing biases — the committee did not hear from a single national Indigenous organization, Indigenous government or the granting agencies’ own Indigenous Leadership Circle in Research.

Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution affirms Aboriginal and treaty rights.

When Canada’s Parliament enacted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, the Act committed Ottawa to align federal laws with the declaration.

Article 23 affirms Indigenous Peoples’ right to develop and determine health programs, while Article 24 affirms an equal right to the highest attainable standard of health. Indigenous-led research is required to build the evidence needed to act on those commitments.

The TRC’s Call to Action 18 asks Ottawa to recognize Indigenous health-care rights under international law, constitutional law and the treaties.

Call 19 asks for measurable goals to close health gaps and annual reporting on progress.

Heeding ‘New Directions’

Canada’s federal granting agencies now have an Indigenous research framework, Setting New Directions.

This was co-created through 14 regional gatherings, a national dialogue with 300 participants and 94 position papers from Indigenous-led projects, and it created the Indigenous Leadership Circle in Research.

Acting on recommendations affecting Indigenous-specific programs without Indigenous rights-holders violates the federal government’s legal commitments to consultation and co-operation under the UNDRIP Act.

When Indigenous Peoples are inadequately represented in research and data collection, health inequities are harder to identify and address.

In British Columbia, First Nations life expectancy fell from 73.3 to 67.2 years between 2017 and 2021.

A study released in July found First Nations people in Ontario were 51 per cent more likely to die from breast cancer and 60 per cent more likely to die from cervical cancer.

Regardless of how some witnesses speaking to the committee frame public opinion support for EDI, it’s essential to remember that Constitutional and treaty rights do not depend on public opinion.

Rights and reconciliation in medicine

Three days before the committee tabled its report, the Canadian Medical Association took a markedly different approach.

On Sept. 18, it released its revised Code of Ethics and Professionalism. This was shaped by consultation with more than 50 groups, including national Indigenous organizations.

Read more:
How Indigenous-led health education in remote communities can make reconciliation real

The new code calls racist and discriminatory conduct unethical and expects physicians to address harmful conduct and report it.

It commits physicians to the TRC’s Calls to Action 22 and 23, pertaining to recognizing the value of Indigenous healing practices, increasing the number of Indigenous health professionals and providing cultural competency training for all health-care professionals. It also commits them to the relevant provisions of UNDRIP.

These are the same Indigenous rights and reconciliation frameworks absent from the Parliamentary committee’s report.

Specific report recommendations

The Parliamentary committee’s report recommendations would also “ban the use of demographic quotas and proportionality targets by federal funding programs administered by the granting agencies.”

These recommendations, in the absence of any Indigenous frameworks, appear to ignore commitments to Indigenous health.

In 2016, Canada’s federal funding agency for health research, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), launched an action plan committing at least 4.6 per cent of its budget to Indigenous health research, a share set in proportion to Canada’s Indigenous population. This was on the advice of First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples.

It reached 5.2 per cent in 2023-24, up from 4.7 per cent the previous year.

CIHR’s Network Environments for Indigenous Health Research, renewed with $37.6 million in 2024, supports Indigenous-led research centres in every region.

Other current commitments must be noted, like research funding allocated in direct response to the TRC’s call to advance understanding of reconciliation (Call to Action 65).

Despite these initiatives, progress on Canada’s reconciliation commitments remains limited.

The Yellowhead Institute’s 2025 review of the TRC’s health Calls to Action reported this and warned that symbolic gestures without accountability do not amount to reconciliation.

This was echoed in a federal government report on the progress of the UNDRIP Act, which was tabled on Aug. 19. Of 181 measures, only a handful reported meaningful progress in the last year.

Ottawa has 120 days to respond to the Standing Committee on Science and Research report.

Its response must state explicitly that the recommendations regarding EDI (13 to 15) do not apply to Indigenous research and training, and that any future changes to those programs will be co-designed with First Nations, Inuit and Métis partners.
Jamaica Cass works for Queen’s University and York University. She also sits on the board of the Indigenous Physicians’ Association of Canada and the Medical Council of Canada.

Tags: Academic Journalism, The Conversation, The Conversation Academic News