Murray Wood: Who's hot and who's not
Every Friday, Murray Wood takes a look at the week's news and decides who's hot and who's not. Today's list includes tho...
OTTAWA — The Federal Court has rejected the federal government’s motion to dismiss a claim for monetary relief in a class-action lawsuit brought by non-status individuals and Métis who were involved in the so-called “’60s Scoop.”
It’s also granting the plaintiffs’ request for a motion declaring that the Crown had a duty of care to these kids — but only the ones placed or adopted through Saskatchewan’s Adopt Indian Métis [AIM] program.
The ’60s Scoop refers to a period when governments in Canada oversaw the large-scale removal of Indigenous children from their homes to live outside of their communities, mostly with non-Indigenous caregivers.
A class-action settlement for survivors saw the federal government pay about $750 million in compensation — but Métis were largely excluded from that because child welfare services for them were run by the provinces.
Métis and non-status individuals who were apprehended as children from their families filed a class-action lawsuit arguing Canada should compensate them as well — but the Federal Court says Ottawa is not liable.
The Federal Court says that only those who were placed or adopted through Saskatchewan’s AIM program fall under Canada’s duty of care because that program received federal funding.
“This is because the federal government directly funded AIM, which, in the context of the historical relationship, creates the proximity necessary to establish a duty of care,” wrote Justice Sébastien Grammond in the decision released April 29. “The harm was foreseeable and there are no countervailing policy considerations negating such a duty.”
The AIM program ran newspaper campaigns that advertised Métis children available for adoption.
Grammond wrote that when the federal government funded that program, it would have known the outcome would be the permanent separation of Indigenous children from their families and communities.
“This was obvious from the grant application, and even from the name of the program itself, as adoption severs the relationship between a child and their biological parents,” he wrote.
“What matters is that funding the program enabled the harm it allegedly caused to class members.”
Manitoba Métis Federation president David Chartrand, whose organization was an intervener in the case, said he was disappointed by the decision.
“But I think at the end of the day, the question really has to (be) to the federal government of Canada,” he said.
“How can you settle the First Nations and leave the Métis and non-status out? The federal government will definitely have to look in a mirror and ask themselves that question.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 1, 2025.
Alessia Passafiume, The Canadian Press
