The Collaborative Process on the Second-Generation Cut-off and Section 10 Voting Thresholds

Find out about the collaborative process to address remaining inequities in registration and membership.

Current status: Closed

Quick links

On this page

The second-generation cut-off and section 10 voting thresholds

Since 1985, the second-generation cut-off has continued to have deep impacts on First Nation individuals, communities and families.

The second-generation cut-off prevents many First Nations people with status under the Indian Act from passing entitlement on to their children and grandchildren simply because of the person with whom they chose to parent.

The issue of double majority voting thresholds is also being examined. This is to ensure that any proposed solution to the second-generation cut-off does not become an obstacle to First Nations seeking control over their membership lists due to an increased registered population that a legislative remedy would impose.

To learn more about the issues for consultation, watch the videos below or visit the Rights-Holders Information Kit.

Understanding the Second-Generation Cut-off

ISBN: 978-0-662-78347-3

Transcript for Understanding the Second-Generation Cut-off

Narrator: Indian status in Canada is governed by the Indian Act. It defines how and if a person is entitled to registration.

Registered persons are eligible for certain federally-issued rights, benefits, programs, and services.

The registration provisions under the Indian Act have been changed over time. Recent changes have addressed known sex-based inequities.

In 1985, two general registration categories, 6(1) and 6(2) were introduced under Bill C-31. This change led to what is now commonly known as the 1985 cut-off, or the second-generation cut-off.

The second-generation cut-off prevents many First Nations people with status under the Indian Act from passing entitlement on to their children and grandchildren.

Let's learn more about the different registration categories, how the second-generation cut-off occurs, and some of the known impacts on individuals, families and communities.

There are two categories for registration:

Section 6(1) applies to individuals who have two parents entitled to registration. Individuals born prior to April 17, 1985 will be registered under this section.

Section 6(2) applies to individuals born with only one parent entitled to registration under section 6(1) of the Indian Act. Most people registered under 6(2) are born after 1985, when Bill C-31 took effect, or gained entitlement through Bill C-31.

Individuals registered under 6(1) and 6(2) both have access to the same rights, benefits, programs, and services. However, the ability to pass on entitlement to their children is different.

If a parent is registered under section 6(1), they will be able to pass on entitlement to their children regardless if the other parent is entitled or not.

If a parent is registered under 6(2), the only way they can pass on entitlement is if the other parent is also entitled. Their children will be impacted by the second-generation cut-off.

After two consecutive generations of parenting with a person not entitled to registration, the third generation is no longer entitled to registration.

The second-generation cut-off occurs without consideration of individual or family circumstances.

It means that entitlement can vary even within the same family unit.

Before 1985, entitlement under the Act wasn't divided this way. Many individuals entitled or born before C-31 came into effect are entitled under 6(1), while having only one entitled parent.

This can make a person's date of birth important in determining which category they are entitled under.

Let's look at some examples:

Here, Alex has one grandparent entitled under 6(1) and one grandparent who is not entitled.

Alex has one entitled parent under 6(2), born in 1987. This parent is eligible under 6(2) because they only have one entitled parent and were born after April 17, 1985. Alex's other parent is not entitled.

Alex is not entitled to registration because their only entitled parent is entitled under 6(2). Alex is impacted by the second-generation cut-off.

In the next example, we'll look at Taylor's family.

Taylor has one parent, born in 1983, entitled under 6(1) and one non-entitled parent.

Taylor is entitled under 6(2) because they have one entitled parent under 6(1) and one non-entitled parent. Taylor's children will be impacted by the second-generation cut off, unless Taylor parents with another entitled individual.

Our final example shows Morgan's family. Both Morgan's parents are entitled under 6(2). This means Morgan is entitled to registration under 6(1), and the second-generation cut-off may not occur for another two generations.

What are some of the impacts of the second-generation cut-off?

If the registration provisions of the Indian Act remain the same, the rules for passing on status will continue to affect future generations. People registered under section 6(2) can only pass on entitlement to their children if the other parent is also entitled to registration. Because of this rule, the second-generation cut-off continues to have important long-term impacts for families and communities.

Currently, 29% of the national population is registered under 6(2). Despite a community connection, some children and community members may not be entitled to registration, and as a result, the First Nation does not receive funding for these individuals for certain programs and services.

These community members do not have access to the rights, benefits, programs, and services provided to registered individuals.

In response, Indigenous Services Canada has launched a collaborative process to find a solution to the second-generation cut-off that reflects of First Nations perspectives. To learn more and get involved, visit our website.

Understanding the Section 10 Voting Threshold

ISBN: 978-0-662-78223-0

Transcript for Understanding the Section 10 Voting Threshold

First Nations membership is one of the ways that individuals access membership rights in their communities. Legislative amendments to the registration and membership provisions of the Indian Act made through Bill C-31 in 1985 introduced 2 options for the control of band membership under sections 10 and 11 of the Indian Act.

This video will explain how First Nation membership is defined under the Indian Act, the process involved in transitioning sections, and the importance of including the double majority voting threshold in consultations.

Before Bill C-31 in 1985, all First Nations membership lists were, by default, maintained by Indigenous Services Canada. Today, First Nations membership is governed under one of three ways:

  • under Section 11
  • under Section 10, or
  • under a Self-Governing agreement

For Section 11 first nations, membership is maintained by Indigenous Services Canada. When individuals are added to the register, typically based on a family connection to a Section 11 nation, individuals automatically become a member at the time of registration.

As for section 10 First Nations, membership is maintained by the First Nation. When a person is registered under the Indian Act, typically based on a family connection, they are affiliated to the First Nation on the federal register, but they must apply for membership directly to the First Nation. It is up to the First Nation to accept or deny, based on their membership rules and codes.

For self-governing First Nations, membership may be controlled and administered by the First Nation. Like section 10 First Nations, registered individuals are affiliated to the First Nation on the federal register, but must apply for membership directly to the self-governing Nation. Some First Nations may use the term citizenship instead of membership.

Today, 57% of First Nations are governed under section 11, while 37% control their membership under section 10.

The remaining 6% are under self-governing agreements and modern treaties.

In order for a First Nation to take control of their membership under section 10, there are four key steps they will need to follow.

First, they must notify all the eligible electors, members 18 years old and older, of the First Nation's intention to assume control of membership and establish their own rules.

Secondly, the First Nation needs to obtain consent from their eligible electors for the First Nation to obtain control of membership through the proposed membership rules. Consent is obtained through a vote, and achieved once a double majority voting threshold is reached.

Thirdly, the First Nation must ensure that the acquired rights to membership are maintained under the newly proposed rules.

Finally, if the double majority voting threshold is met, the First Nation must notify the Minister that they are assuming control of membership and share a copy of the membership rules for approval.

So, what is the double majority threshold and why is it considered a barrier? A double majority threshold means that a majority of the eligible electors of the First Nation must vote, and a majority of those who vote must be in favour of the proposed actions.

Let's look at an example:

If a First Nation has a population of 1000 eligible electors, at least 501 of those eligible electors must participate in the vote. If 501 electors participate in the vote, at least 251 of the votes must be in favour of a transition and the proposed membership code. If both criteria are met, the double majority voting threshold is fulfilled.

The double majority voting threshold can be a barrier for some First Nations to transition to section 10 membership for several reasons.

For example, it may be difficult for eligible electors who live outside of the community to participate in a vote taking place in the community or in-person, since online voting has not been commonly used for assuming control of membership.

On the other hand, some may not have up-to-date contact information resulting in electors being unaware of a vote occurring.

In other cases, a double majority-vote approach to decision-making may not reflect a First Nation's traditional governance practices, autonomy and distinctiveness.

Why is this issue up for consultation alongside the second-generation cut-off?

Many individuals who are non-entitled due to the impact of the second-generation cut-off may become newly entitled once a solution is introduced, increasing the number of eligible electors in a First Nation.

With an increase in eligible electors, it may become challenging for a First Nation to meet the double majority voting threshold when transitioning to section 10. Therefore, it is important to consider how changes in registration may also impact First Nations' ability to assume control of their membership and establish their own rules.

Indigenous Services Canada has launched a collaborative process to develop solutions to the second-generation cut-off, assess the implications for the section 10 double majority voting threshold, and discuss challenges related to membership. To learn more and get involved, please visit our website.

Projected registration impacts of removing the second-generation cutoff

Statistics Canada developed demographic projections estimating the number of individuals who would become newly registered if the second-generation cut-off was removed and the one-parent rule were implemented. The projections run from April 1, 2028 to March 31, 2066. Three projection scenarios (low, medium, and high growth) were prepared to model future registration estimates under the one-parent rule.

To learn more, visit Demographic projections of the effect of the removal of the second-generation cut-off.

Timeline

The Collaborative Process

The collaborative process consists of 2 phases:

Phase 1: co-development and information sharing

Indigenous advisory process

The Indigenous Advisory Process was established to provide advice and recommendations to Indigenous Services Canada to help ensure that Indigenous perspectives are considered in the design and delivery of the collaborative process.

The Indigenous Advisory Process membership consists of 1-2 appointed representatives from 17 national, regional, youth and women's Indigenous organizations that represent individuals or communities across Canada affected by the second-generation cut-off.

Indigenous Organizations Table:
  • Assembly of First Nations, British Columbia
  • Assembly of First Nations, Manitoba
  • Assembly of First Nations, National
  • Anishinabek Nation
  • Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi'kmaq Chiefs
  • Congress of Aboriginal Peoples
  • First Nations Summit of British Columbia
  • Indigenous Bar Association
  • National Association of Friendship Centers
  • Native Women's Association of Canada
  • Union of British Columbia's Indian Chiefs
Women's and Youth Caucus:
  • Warriors Rising Youth Society
  • Feminist Alliance for International Action (The Indian Act Sex Discrimination Working Group)
  • Indigenous Youth Council for the National Association of Friendship Centers
  • Ontario First Nations Young Peoples Council
  • Ontario Native Women's Association
  • Quebec Native Women's Association

The work of the Indigenous Advisory Process was ongoing throughout the collaborative process, with members actively engaged in co-developing consultation materials and offering guidance on the design of consultation events and activities for rights-holders.

Rights-holders information sharing kit

A Rights-Holders Information Sharing Kit was developed to support First Nations and impacted Indigenous rights-holders in preparation for consultation events on the second-generation cut-off and section 10 voting thresholds.

The Kit aimed to support rights-holders' readiness for consultation by providing a robust description of the issues, namely, the second-generation cut-off and section 10 voting thresholds. The Rights-Holders Information Sharing Kit underwent a broad distribution strategy by mail, email and is accessible online.

Community-specific data has been shared in a variety of formats as part of this initiative to highlight the impact of the second-generation cut-off on each First Nation's registered population across Canada. This data is available on:

Information sessions

Information sessions on the Rights-Holders Kit are offered throughout the Collaborative Process. Sessions were held virtually through Zoom and were approximately 60 minutes. The session covers the key issues for consultation and is followed by a question and answer period.

Information sessions are still available by request. For more information or to schedule a session, visit the Information Sessions Page.

Consultation readiness form

A consultation readiness form was also available during this phase of information-sharing. To achieve the thresholds of free, prior, and informed consent and the need for deep and meaningful consultation and cooperation as set out in the United Nations Declaration Act, First Nations were encouraged to self-assess their readiness prior to participating in consultation events.

Consultation plan

A consultation plan was co-developed with the Indigenous Advisory Process to further develop the consultation events and activities phase of the Collaborative Process on the Second-Generation Cut-off and Section 10 Voting Thresholds. It outlines:

  • the shared objectives
  • legal rationales for consultation
  • lessons learned from previous consultation processes
  • the consultation methods
  • opportunities for funding
  • anticipated timelines

What we heard

Using an overview of the key themes, findings and recommendations heard from the Indigenous Advisory Process, ISC developed a report on what we heard during the process. The report is organized 6 six key themes, including:

  • honouring Indigenous experiences and moving forward
  • acknowledgement of sex-based discrimination
  • legal and human rights obligations
  • equitable resourcing and financial support
  • inclusivity and accessibility
  • timing and duration

To read the full report, visit What We Heard: Indigenous Advisory Process Final Recommendations and Feedback.

The feedback received from the Indigenous Advisory Process in their final reports has also been visually depicted in artwork created by Indigenous artist Tiaré Lani.

To view the artwork, and read the artist's statement, visit What we heard: Artwork and artist statement from Tiaré Lani.

Phase 2: consultation activities and events

Call for proposals: Indigenous-led options for solutions

Proposal-based funding was made available to support First Nations and Indigenous organizations in developing and submitting options for solutions to the Second Generation Cut-Off and Section 10 voting thresholds. Funding up to $10,000 was made available for single-issue proposals that focus on one of the issues for consultation, and up to $20,000 was made available for proposals that address both issues. For more information or details visit the Call for Proposals webpage.

Individual feedback form

An individual feedback form was available for impacted individuals to provide feedback on the impacts of the second-generation cut-off and section 10 voting thresholds and to propose options for solutions to these two issues. Feedback helped to shape future discussions and consultation materials for the next stages of the Collaborative Process on the Second-Generation Cut-off and Section 10 Voting Thresholds.

Reference Guide

The Registration Reform and Legal Solutions Committee conducted a legal viability and impact assessment of each proposed solution received from the call for proposals for Indigenous-led options for solutions. The proposed solutions have an analysis that includes:

  • their legal viability
  • whether they align with the United Nations Declaration Act and other frameworks
  • implementation considerations

The reference guide offers a summary of these findings.

To learn more, visit The Collaborative Process on the Second-Generation Cut-off and Section 10 Voting Thresholds: Reference Guide.

Summer 2026 engagement

While Indian Act amendments are seen as a necessary next step to address inequities in registration and membership, Indigenous Services Canada has heard that, in addition to addressing the second-generation cut-off, enhancing First Nation jurisdiction of membership outside of the Indian Act is also a priority. Through engagement sessions in June and July 2026, ISC is seeking input on:

  • how to implement solutions to the second-generation cut-off
  • what First Nations need to implement jurisdiction over determining First Nation members according to their own traditional systems and codes
  • developing options for a legislative framework towards a self-determined approach for First Nations to determine their members away from the Indian Act

For additional details, see Options to Support Broader First Nation Jurisdiction: Summer 2026 Engagement Plan

For further information, please contact: citoyennetepn-fncitizenship@sac-isc.gc.ca

About First Nation jurisdiction

Currently, the Indian Act is the primary legal framework to determine who is a First Nation person, or registered status Indian, in Canadian law and this definition is used for many purposes by the Government of Canada, other governments and organizations as the basis for access to programs and services and eligibility. Although some First Nations determine their own membership, through section 10 of the Indian Act or through Modern Treaty or Self-Government agreements, no First Nation currently determines who is eligible for status under the Indian Act. Legislative changes would be needed to recognize First Nation authority to self-determine who their members are, including registration, separate from the Indian Act.

Measure 2.9 of Canada's United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act Action Plan is to consult First Nations and other impacted Indigenous groups to support the co-development of opt-in alternatives to Indian Act registration and membership (First Nation citizenship). This consultation will include a broad spectrum of Indigenous demographic groups, such as:

  • women and girls
  • 2SLGBTQI+ people
  • Elders
  • Treaty groups

Measure 2.9, is a key driver for this work in support of United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples articles 3, 18, 19 and 33.

To learn more about how registration under the Indian Act and First Nation membership currently works, visit: Applying for registration under the Indian Act, First Nation membership and status cards, what's the difference?

Stay informed

To find out more about the Collaborative Process on the Second-Generation Cut-off and Section 10 Voting Thresholds, or to be added to our distribution list for email updates, please contact Registration Reform: Reforme-de-linscription-Registration-Reform@sac-isc.gc.ca.

Related links

Did you find what you were looking for?

What was wrong?

You will not receive a reply. Don't include personal information (telephone, email, SIN, financial, medical, or work details).
Maximum 300 characters

Thank you for your feedback

Date modified: