Queen's review of policies on Indigenous identity claims rife with issues, say critics

Ten months after Queen's University announced a review of how it evaluates Indigenous identity claims when hiring staff, critics say the process has been rife with problems, including potential conflict of interest and lack of transparency. 

While the school in Kingston, Ont., has refused to publicly disclose all the individuals and groups involved in the review process, which was completed in mid-March, CBC News has learned that the Ardoch Algonquin First Nation was among those consulted despite its role in the centre of the controversy.

The issue came to a head in June 2021 after an anonymous report alleged six individuals affiliated with the school had made misleading or false claims about their Indigenous identity.

Three of the people named are members of the Ardoch Algonquin First Nation — a non-status community in eastern Ontario.

Queen's initially defended those individuals, but changed its position after nearly a hundred Indigenous academics and leaders across North America signed a letter asking the school to take the allegations seriously.

The letter specifically called on Queen's to reject Ardoch, but Ardoch appears to have been the primary group representing Algonquins in the subsequent "dialogues on Indigeneity" consultations.

"The larger Algonquin Anishinaabe Nation does not recognize them," said Veldon Coburn, professor of Indigenous studies and political science at the University of Ottawa, who's been a vocal critic of Ardoch's legitimacy.

"[Ardoch] emerged out of a group of settlers and non-Algonquin people … It's not historical. It's a contemporaneous corporation. It just isn't Algonquin."

Ardoch is not a federally recognized band or First Nation. The Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation Tribal Council does not consider Ardoch an Algonquin nation, nor do the Algonquins of Ontario (AOO) — which include 10 status and non-status Algonquin communities.

Coburn, a Queen's graduate, said he is disappointed that Queen's didn't do more to engage with Algonquin First Nations. 

Another academic at Concordia University said appointing a group to review itself is potentially problematic. 

"This particular lack of transparency then even adds to the belief … that there is a perceived conflict of interest going on," said Moshe Lander, senior lecturer of economics whose specialty includes governance policy.

"Why can't you tell us who's on this committee, or who's guiding some of the decisions?" 

As part of the review process, Queen's ran at least 17 "group" sessions and 13 "individual" sessions through March 18.