1) February 28, 1986, Letter from then INAC Minister, David Crombie to Judith Sayers, Michel Lawyer:
The Minister promised to make a report to parliament to make recommendations for technical changes in legislation to provide for the registration of persons enfranchised as a band, and to look into the possibility of having the band declared by the Governor in Council to be a band for the purposes of the Indian Act.
2) September 29, 1986, Letter from Minister, Bill McKnight to Judith Sayers:
The Minister promised that the 1987 report to Parliament on the operation of the 1985 amendments will recommend a remedy to the inequality.
3) April 24, 1987, Jim Lahey, Director General Executive Support Services, INAC
The Director General stated that the Minister had made commitments to the senators concerning a report to Parliament. Part of this report was to recommend a remedy to the "inequality" experienced by the members of the Michel Band.
4) September 16, 1987, Letter from D.I.Jette, Director, Membership and Entitlement Directorate:
The Failure of Bill C-31 to address Michel's situation is a contravention of the intent of the amended Indian Act: the intention of Bill C-31 was to abolish the concept of enfranchisement. The reinstatement provisions do not address the individuals who enfranchised under section 112 of the previous Indian Act. Paragraphs 6(1)(c) and 6(1)(d) refer to persons entitled to be registered due to enfranchisement under the previous subsections 109(1) and 109(2). David Crombie indicated that this technical flaw would be remedied and provisions would be made for the registration of persons who enfranchised as a band.
Further consideration should be given to the inequities identified in the Act as it appears that the intent of Parliament in removing most if not all descrimination has not been totally met.
5) NAC, RG 10, Acc. 1997-98/374, Box 7, File E1021-J1, Vol.12, Encl.:
Internal memo labeled "high priority" identified that "In 1958, the Michel Band in Alberta was enfranchised as a whole under section 111 of the Indian Act. Bill C-31 does not provide for the reinstatement of Indians who enfranchised collectively." The memo suggested that the inequity be remedied by including in Section 6(1)(d) of the Indian Act, reference to provisions of the previous Indian Acts which addressed band enfranchisement. The memo stated that a Cabinet Document on Implications of Bill C-31 was being prepared which would address further amendments to the Indian Act, and that such revisions would be neither complex nor difficult.
Internal Recommendations:
1) July 1992, Letter to John Rayner, Assistant Deputy Minister, INAC, from Gary Wouters, Regional Director INAC:
Michel Band descendents presented a petition to Dan Goodleaf asking for reinstatement of the Band. Writer requests that the petition be given consideration from a policy perspective on the condition that reinstatement is supported by a majority of registered Indians with Michel Band affiliation, and that no land base be provided unless granted under a specific claim settlement.
2) November 23, 1992: Letter from Gregor MacIntosh, Director General to Chief Gilbert Anderson:
"...Kenneth Kirby had almost completed an analysis of the issue, then they will respond...."
3) September 21, 1993, Letter from Roger Gagnon to Chief Gilbert Anderson:
"...DIAND is reviewing the Michel Band's request to reconstitute the former Michel Band...."
The Minister promised to make a report to parliament to make recommendations for technical changes in legislation to provide for the registration of persons enfranchised as a band, and to look into the possibility of having the band declared by the Governor in Council to be a band for the purposes of the Indian Act.
2) September 29, 1986, Letter from Minister, Bill McKnight to Judith Sayers:
The Minister promised that the 1987 report to Parliament on the operation of the 1985 amendments will recommend a remedy to the inequality.
3) April 24, 1987, Jim Lahey, Director General Executive Support Services, INAC
The Director General stated that the Minister had made commitments to the senators concerning a report to Parliament. Part of this report was to recommend a remedy to the "inequality" experienced by the members of the Michel Band.
4) September 16, 1987, Letter from D.I.Jette, Director, Membership and Entitlement Directorate:
The Failure of Bill C-31 to address Michel's situation is a contravention of the intent of the amended Indian Act: the intention of Bill C-31 was to abolish the concept of enfranchisement. The reinstatement provisions do not address the individuals who enfranchised under section 112 of the previous Indian Act. Paragraphs 6(1)(c) and 6(1)(d) refer to persons entitled to be registered due to enfranchisement under the previous subsections 109(1) and 109(2). David Crombie indicated that this technical flaw would be remedied and provisions would be made for the registration of persons who enfranchised as a band.
Further consideration should be given to the inequities identified in the Act as it appears that the intent of Parliament in removing most if not all descrimination has not been totally met.
5) NAC, RG 10, Acc. 1997-98/374, Box 7, File E1021-J1, Vol.12, Encl.:
Internal memo labeled "high priority" identified that "In 1958, the Michel Band in Alberta was enfranchised as a whole under section 111 of the Indian Act. Bill C-31 does not provide for the reinstatement of Indians who enfranchised collectively." The memo suggested that the inequity be remedied by including in Section 6(1)(d) of the Indian Act, reference to provisions of the previous Indian Acts which addressed band enfranchisement. The memo stated that a Cabinet Document on Implications of Bill C-31 was being prepared which would address further amendments to the Indian Act, and that such revisions would be neither complex nor difficult.
Internal Recommendations:
1) July 1992, Letter to John Rayner, Assistant Deputy Minister, INAC, from Gary Wouters, Regional Director INAC:
Michel Band descendents presented a petition to Dan Goodleaf asking for reinstatement of the Band. Writer requests that the petition be given consideration from a policy perspective on the condition that reinstatement is supported by a majority of registered Indians with Michel Band affiliation, and that no land base be provided unless granted under a specific claim settlement.
2) November 23, 1992: Letter from Gregor MacIntosh, Director General to Chief Gilbert Anderson:
"...Kenneth Kirby had almost completed an analysis of the issue, then they will respond...."
3) September 21, 1993, Letter from Roger Gagnon to Chief Gilbert Anderson:
"...DIAND is reviewing the Michel Band's request to reconstitute the former Michel Band...."