Annex C: Section 5 consistency assessments of laws and regulations

• Previous page
• Table of Contents
• Next page

Legislation tabled during the 2025-26 fiscal year

Procedural legislation with likely minimal impacts on Indigenous rights and interests

The following bills are procedural bills with little to no substantive content.

Bill C-1 An Act respecting the administration of oaths of office:
This is a pro-forma bill introduced in the House at the beginning of each session. It is not debated or voted on.

Bill C-6 An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2026:
Funding for government operations

Bill C-7 An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2026:
Funding for government operations

Bill C-17 An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2026:
Funding for government operations

Bill C-23 An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2026:
Funding for government operations

Bill C-24 An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2027:
Funding for government operations

Bill C-26 Improving Housing Supply Act:
To authorize certain payments to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the purpose of improving housing supply

Bill S-1 An Act relating to railways:
This is a pro forma bill introduced in the Senate at the beginning of each session. It will not be debated or voted on.

Laws of general application with potential impacts on Indigenous rights and interests

Analysis: N/A

Analysis: Changes to the Citizenship Act stemming from Bill C-3 address the Ontario Superior Court of Justice's declaration that certain key provisions of the first-generation limit to citizenship by descent were unconstitutional. The legislative changes contained in Bill C-3 were first introduced in May 2024 as part of Bill C-71 (An Act to amend the Citizenship Act). As required by the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, an Assessment of Modern Treaty Implications was conducted.

Analysis: The Building Canada Act sets out the obligation to consult Indigenous peoples when considering projects for listing under the Act, and no projects will be added to the schedule until consultation has taken place. For projects that are added to the Schedule of the Building Canada Act, the regulatory review process will continue to include further consultations with potentially impacted Indigenous peoples, as the Act sets out the obligation that they be consulted before the Minister issues the document containing the project’s authorizations and conditions. The Government has created an Indigenous Advisory Council to help shape how the Major Projects Office works with Indigenous peoples. This includes providing advice on advancing economic participation in major projects, and how best to integrate UN Declaration’s principles throughout the process.

Analysis: C-8 applies to federally regulated sectors (energy, finance, banking, and transportation) and focusses on protecting telecommunications infrastructure.

Analysis: The new intimidation, obstruction and hate crime offences are consistent with combatting discrimination based on identity and protecting social and cultural institutions.

Analysis: Bill C-11 amends provisions of the National Defence Act that relate to the military justice system in response to the Report of the Third Independent Review Authority to the Minister of National Defence and the Report of the Independent External Comprehensive Review of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces.

Analysis: N/A

Analysis: An Assessment of Modern Treaty Implications (AMTI) on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) proposed text was conducted and identified modern treaty implications related to federal procurement. These implications have been addressed through the inclusion of reservations and exceptions for Indigenous peoples in the relevant chapters of the agreement. These reservations and exceptions are continued in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP, which is fundamentally based on TPP text) and will be applied to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the UK) as part of its accession to the CPTPP. In addition, preambular language of the CPTPP reaffirms the importance of promoting corporate social responsibility, Indigenous rights, and traditional knowledge. Given the potential impacts raised through the AMTI were addressed via negotiations and will be applied to the UK upon entry into force of Bill C-13, the consistency assessment was not assessed/considered.

Analysis: The changes in Bill C-14 implicates the UN Declaration Act since it potentially intersects with the following rights and objectives in the UN Declaration: rights related to liberty (Article 7), rights to practice cultural traditions and customs (Article 11), and rights to practise and teach their spiritual and religious traditions (Article 12), and potentially others.

Analysis: The Fuel, Alcohol, Cannabis, Tobacco, and Vaping taxation framework supports self-determination and is consistent with the UN Declaration, as it allows interested Indigenous governments to have access to additional revenue streams to be used to fund community priorities.

Analysis: An exemption for Indigenous settlement and community trusts from the alternative minimum tax is expected to ensure that the reform is consistent with the UN Declaration by maintaining the current tax treatment of these trusts.

Analysis: The proposed legislative amendments are considered consistent with Article 19 of the UN Declaration and section 5 of UN Declaration Act. Divestiture of the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation and repeal of the Freshwater Fish Marketing Act may affect both Indigenous and non-Indigenous fish harvesters in rural and remote communities that rely on the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation, with impacts depending on the successor entity’s mandate and business model. Access to the fishery itself would not be affected, as the Freshwater Fish Marketing Act does not regulate fishing access.

Analysis: Potential indirect intersections were identified with UN Declaration Act articles on equality and non-discrimination, economic and social rights, and participation in decision-making and Indigenous institutions. However, the proposed amendments to the Human Pathogens and Toxins Act were assessed as having no inconsistencies with these articles, as they apply broadly to protect the health, safety, and security of all individuals in Canada, including Indigenous peoples, and Indigenous peoples were therefore not directly involved in the assessment.

Analysis: NRCan assessed the legislative amendment proposal using the “Section 5 Consultation & Cooperation Tool,” identifying potentially implicated articles and outlining possible inconsistencies with additional context. Indigenous peoples were not directly involved in the assessment due to cabinet confidence and commercial confidentiality. The final analysis found no inconsistencies with the initiative with the UN Declaration.

Analysis: The amendments in Bill C-16 may impact the rights and interests of Indigenous peoples, including those set out in Articles 21 and 22, which speak to, amongst other things, ensuring that Indigenous women and children enjoy the full protection and guarantees against all forms of violence and discrimination.

Analysis: The Initial Assessment of Modern Treaty Implications examined the geographical scope and subject matter of the initiative in relation to modern treaties in effect and did not identify any potential modern treaty impacts. The Canada-Indonesia CEPA does not have a geographic footprint but applies on a national scope. The original decision to launch negotiations with Indonesia was found to potentially have modern treaty implications in the area of government procurement market access. However, given that the final outcome of the CI-CEPA does not include market access for government procurement, there are no potential modern treaty impacts. As in its other free trade agreements (FTAs), Canada has retained the policy flexibility necessary to provide preferential treatment to Indigenous peoples and Indigenous-owned businesses, including in the areas of services, investment, environment, and state-owned enterprises through specific reservations and exceptions. Further, the CI-CEPA also contains an Aboriginal Rights general exception article, which provides greater certainty that the Government of Canada can adopt or maintain measures it considers necessary to fulfill its legal obligations to Indigenous Peoples, including those recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, or those set out in self-government agreements between central or regional levels of government and Indigenous Peoples. Given the Initial Assessment of Modern Treaty Implications of the final outcomes of the CEPA did not identify any potential modern treaty impacts, the consistency assessment was not assessed/considered.

Analysis: The first stage of assessment did not find potential intersections between the proposal and the UN Declaration, given that it is general legislation that does not seek to change the current role or impact the responsibilities of the Government of Canada with respect to Indigenous rights, or the overall Indigenous housing landscape. Rather, this is a machinery of government change, that shifts roles and responsibilities internally within the Government of Canada.

Indigenous peoples have been engaged throughout the design and development of Build Canada Homes as an overall initiative, as well as on the legislation specifically, since its introduction in the House of Commons. The assessment was based in part on these, and other ongoing conversations with Indigenous partners.

Analysis: N/A

Analysis: The proposal broadly intersects with Article 19 and Article 32 of the UN Declaration, with Article 19 being upheld through prior engagement with Indigenous groups on the Canada Green Buildings Strategy, which these amendments support. Indigenous peoples were not involved in this specific assessment, but NRCan does not anticipate impacts on existing recognized and affirmed Indigenous or treaty rights and will consider potential future impacts on Indigenous peoples in subsequent legislative processes.

Analysis: An Assessment of Modern Treaty Implications (AMTI) identified relevant considerations related to Indigenous self-governance, Indigenous Peoples’ custodianship of data, including health data, and the need to further understand Indigenous partners’ concerns related to data governance. Bill S-5 is narrowly focused on health IT vendor requirements to support interoperability and prohibit data blocking. It would not compel health information sharing or alter existing privacy obligations. Health Canada has and will continue to engage Indigenous organizations and partners, Indigenous health and data organizations, and Modern Treaty and Self-Government organizations. Engagement has supported consideration of Indigenous rights, interests, and perspectives, including in relation to Indigenous data sovereignty and future regulatory development.

Bills relating to Indigenous rights and interests

Analysis: The initiative was co-developed and advances the recognition and implementation of Métis self-government, consistent with the rights of Indigenous peoples to self-determination and self-government. It supports participation in decision-making processes and reflects a co-development approach aligned with the principles of the Declaration.

Analysis: The legislation supports the implementation of Indigenous self-government and reflects recognition of the right of Indigenous peoples to self-determination and self-government. By giving effect to the negotiated agreement, the legislation advances Indigenous participation in decision-making and supports governance structures determined by the Tlegohli Got'ine. It also enables the Tlegohli Got'ine to enforce their own laws and deliver culturally relevant programs and services, including education, traditional healing, income support, and social housing.

Analysis: Bill S-2 seeks to address enfranchisement in response to the Nicholas et al. v. AGC litigation, and addresses issues raised during the collaborative process held in 2018 and 2019, including voluntary deregistration, natal band membership, and some outdated and offensive language. Engagement sessions were also held to discuss feedback on the proposed amendments and inform the drafting of the bill. Engagement and co-development for Bill S-2 (former Bill C-38) therefore occurred at an earlier pre-UN Declaration Act stage. Bill S-2 replaced the former Bill C-38 since it did not receive Royal Assent before Parliament dissolved in March 2025. The proposed provisions of Bill S-2 reflect the initially proposed amendments of Bill C-38 to continue efforts to address these inequities.

Regulations published in the Canada Gazette during the 2025-26 fiscal year

Analysis: It was determined that there are currently no anticipated direct, indirect, hidden or unintended effects anticipated with the proposal regarding the rights and interests of First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples. As such, no articles were identified. An inconsistency was not identified.

Analysis: It was determined that there are currently no anticipated direct, indirect, hidden or unintended effects anticipated with the proposal regarding the rights and interests of First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples. As such, no articles were identified. No inconsistencies were identified.

Analysis: The Compensation for Destroyed Things and Animals Regulations are applicable across Canada, and compensation is applicable equally to Indigenous producers should they have animals ordered destroyed. The amendment is administrative in nature to increase the maximum amounts of compensation in the Compensation for Destroyed Things and Animals Regulations for cattle ordered destroyed, noting that the actual compensation amount is based on the market value of the animal. There are no changes to the underlying compensation principles or processes. As such, there are no anticipated direct, indirect, hidden or unintended effects to Indigenous producers anticipated for this initiative.

Analysis: The amendments focus solely on reducing burden within existing regulatory requirements; they do not introduce any new obligations. Their purpose is to enhance regulatory flexibility and clarity. As such, no intersections were identified with the UN Declaration. The primary aim of the omnibus regulatory package is to reduce red tape by introducing regulatory flexibility in specific areas of the Health of Animals Regulations (including the Import Reference Document) and the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations, to support economic competitiveness and innovation in the agriculture and agri-food sector. By reducing regulatory burdens and increasing flexibility, it may help Indigenous agricultural and agri-food producers to participate more fully in the affected industries.

Analysis: Article 31.1 of the UN Declaration recognizes Indigenous peoples’ rights to maintain, control, protect, and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and related intellectual property, including plant genetic resources. A potential intersection with Article 31.1 was considered, but no intersection was found because the Regulations Amending the Plant Breeders' Rights deal only with the breeding and protection of new plant varieties, which differ from native plant species, and include legal safeguards that prevent misappropriation or “bio-piracy” of plant genetic resources. The amendments do not create new rights but extend and clarify existing ones in line with other jurisdictions and international obligations.

Analysis: The objectives of the Regulations Amending the Plant Protection Regulations were to increase regulatory agility, to reduce red tape and to promote the use of electronic documentation submission. The amendments did not amend the context of the Regulations and/or the position of the CFIA on any regulated pest. Indigenous peoples are not directly impacted by enabling agility in regulatory amendments.

Analysis: Given that the amendments are administrative in nature to repeal regulations that are no longer relevant, they are not expected to disproportionately impact Indigenous peoples or groups. The repeal of the spent and outdated regulations and the Golden Nematode Order will not impact Indigenous community members any differently than other stakeholders. This repeal is not expected to have any adverse impacts to Indigenous communities and right holders.

Analysis: This regulation amendment was part of the miscellaneous amendment regulation process. These amendments were correcting discrepancies between English and French, and harmonizing the powers of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act with the regulations and making non-substantive amendments to improve clarity, so no intersection with the UN Declaration was expected. In accordance with the miscellaneous amendment regulation process, no engagement was completed as the amendments were minor.

Analysis: The Rights Impact Assessments and draft regulations were pre-published on the Canada Gazette, Part I on March 30, 2024, meaning that all substantive policy analysis and drafting was finalized in 2023, prior to the publication of consistency guidance.

Analysis: The Nuclear Security Regulations were substantially complete before the posting of the Guidance from Department of Justice in June 2024. By that point, the engagement and analysis of the Nuclear Security Regulations were complete. The Nuclear Security Regulations publication was delayed in part due to the federal election in 2025. However, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission did perform extensive engagement with Indigenous nations and communities and also completed the Modern Treaties analysis as per the requirements of the Directive. The Nuclear Security Regulations were also reviewed under an UN Declaration Act lens by the drafters at Department of Justice.

Analysis: DFO assessed that the proposed amendments to the Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations are minor, administrative or confirmatory in nature and do not tangibly intersect with the rights of Indigenous peoples set out in the UN Declaration. More than 800 Indigenous contacts were engaged through national consultations and notified of the public comment period, which DFO considers consistent with Article 19 on consultation and cooperation, although they were not involved in the consistency assessment. No inconsistencies with the UN Declaration were identified.

Analysis: An internal assessment found that the proposed regulatory amendments may affect the interests, though not the exercise of rights, of modern treaty partners. DFO engaged Indigenous partners through existing advisory and technical forums to ensure these rights and interests were considered, and will continue working with partners to monitor implementation, assess effectiveness, and address issues as they arise.

Analysis: No UN Declaration articles were identified as potentially relating to this regulatory proposal.

Analysis: Indigenous partners were consulted, but these consultations did not necessarily further the objectives of UN Declaration Act. The assessment drew on input from the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework’s Arctic and Marine Transportation Initiative, GBA Plus analysis, letters sent to Indigenous partners, and the Recovery Strategy and Action Plan.

Analysis: Indigenous partners were consulted, but these consultations did not necessarily address the objectives of UN Declaration Act. The assessment relied on input from the Arctic and Marine Transportation Initiative, GBA Plus analysis, letters sent to Indigenous partners, and the Recovery Strategy and Action Plan.

Analysis: Fisheries and Oceans Canada fully met all consultation obligations under applicable modern treaties and completed the required Modern Treaties analysis, as per the requirements of the Directive, which found minimal implications on rights, and/or self-government provisions of Nunavut and Nunavik Treaty Partners. Inuit harvesting rights will not be limited. The MPA falls within the Nunavut Settlement Area and triggers Article 9 of the Nunavut Agreement. DFO fulfilled its obligations through conformity determination by the Nunavut Planning Commission, review by the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, and negotiation of an Inuit Impact and Benefit Agreement with the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, completed prior to the establishment of the MPA. DFO will continue engagement with Nunavut partners during implementation and subsequent conservation planning.

Analysis: Fisheries and Oceans Canada fully met all consultation obligations under applicable modern treaties and completed the required Modern Treaties analysis, as per the requirements of the Directive, which found minimal implications on rights, and/or self-government provisions of Nunavut Treaty Partners. Inuit harvesting rights will not be limited. The MPA falls within the Nunavut Settlement Area and triggers Article 9 of the Nunavut Agreement. DFO fulfilled its obligations through conformity determination by the Nunavut Planning Commission, review by the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, and negotiation of an Inuit Impact and Benefit Agreement with the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, completed prior to the establishment of the MPA. DFO will continue engagement with Nunavut partners during implementation and subsequent conservation planning.

Analysis: The proposal is consistent with the cited articles because it embeds species-at-risk listing within a framework that protects biodiversity central to Indigenous rights and commits to engagement and recognition of Indigenous knowledge. The Species at Risk Act relies on collaboration with Indigenous partners in species assessments, recovery planning, and habitat protection, reflecting UN Declaration's emphasis on Indigenous rights to lands, resources, and cultural practices.

Analysis: The proposal is consistent with the cited articles because it embeds species-at-risk listing within a framework that protects biodiversity central to Indigenous rights and commits to engagement and recognition of Indigenous knowledge. The Species at Risk Act relies on collaboration with Indigenous partners in species assessments, recovery planning, and habitat protection, reflecting UN Declaration's emphasis on Indigenous rights to lands, resources, and cultural practices.

Analysis: In consultation with the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, consideration and assessment of the modern treaty implications was completed and it was determined that the amendments were not expected to have an impact on modern treaty obligations. It was also determined that directed Indigenous consultation was not required.

Analysis: Articles 19, 32, and 38 of the UN Declaration were identified as potentially relating to Amendment 18 to the Energy Efficiency Regulations, with Natural Resources Canada engaging Indigenous partners on the regulations and the Canada Green Buildings Strategy but not involving them directly in the consistency assessment. While potential intersections were noted, particularly regarding consultation, resource use, and regulatory measures to achieve the Declaration’s objectives, no specific intersections or impacts were identified for Amendment 18, and no comments were received from Indigenous partners indicating inconsistency. NRCan remains willing to work with Indigenous partners to identify any inconsistencies with the UN Declaration and to amend the Energy Efficiency Regulations as appropriate within its legal authority.

Analysis: Offshore renewable energy projects in the future could have an impact on the Indigenous rights referenced in Articles 25 and 26, though there is some uncertainty as to whether these rights may be impacted. Offshore renewable energy projects would be subject to impact assessment/project reviews, following an established land tenure process with opportunities for Indigenous engagement and/or consultation.

Indigenous peoples were not involved in the UN Declaration assessment. It was unclear to what degree Indigenous peoples in Atlantic Canada used areas in the offshore in a significant manner, but it was determined that this could be learned through engagement with Indigenous peoples. Addressing potential impacts to fishing was beyond the scope of the present legislative initiative and the specific impacts, if any, could not be known until projects have been proposed. In the interim, through Regional Assessments and subsequent engagement by the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Energy Regulator, Indigenous groups have been engaged and shared their concerns for meaningful consideration.

Analysis: Parks Canada currently manages the Grosse Ile and Irish Memorial National Historic Site and adding the site to the National Historic Sites of Canada Order is primarily an administrative change. It will result in Parks Canada's ability to issue authorizations that support management of hyperabundant deer species, which in turn may support First Nations implication in deer management and disposal of harvested deer. In the long run, the change in legislative regime may be positive or neutral in relation to these articles.

• Previous page
• Table of Contents
• Next page