How do Indigenous peoples in Canada view the progress made on reconciliation, their representation in government, and their role in the country’s future?
Our latest survey explores these perspectives, revealing a mix of optimism, reservations, and differing expectations about the issues shaping Indigenous communities across Canada.
Key Highlights
-
71% of Indigenous respondents believe at least a moderate amount of progress has been made on reconciliation since the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s final report, although only 17% believe a great deal of progress has been achieved.
-
55% believe matters affecting the day-to-day lives of Indigenous peoples in Canada are getting better, compared to 27% who believe they are getting worse.
-
64% believe provincial First Nations or Métis organizations do a good job representing Indigenous interests, compared to 38% for the federal government and 36% for provincial governments.
-
63% support Prime Minister Mark Carney’s plan to significantly increase Canada’s natural resource development, while 22% oppose it.
-
51% are confident that Indigenous perspectives and concerns will be taken into account when major new projects are undertaken, although only 14% are very confident.
How do Indigenous peoples view progress on reconciliation?
More than a decade after the Truth and Reconciliation Commission released its 94 Calls to Action, the survey suggests that many Indigenous respondents recognize progress, but remain measured in their assessment of how much has been accomplished. This distinction matters because recognizing improvements does not necessarily mean respondents are satisfied with the pace or extent of reconciliation efforts.
The findings also point to differing expectations about what meaningful reconciliation looks like in practice. Land acknowledgements offer one example: 47% believe they continue to carry important meaning and help advance reconciliation, while 41% feel they have become overused to the point of losing their meaning. The relatively narrow gap suggests that even established reconciliation practices are not viewed uniformly among Indigenous respondents.
These differences echo the diversity of perspectives captured in our previous research on truth and reconciliation. Taken together, the findings highlight the importance of looking beyond general perceptions of progress to understand how specific actions and initiatives are received.
Who do Indigenous peoples trust to represent their interests?
Indigenous organizations receive more favourable assessments than federal and provincial governments, suggesting that respondents distinguish between political leadership and the organizations they believe best represent their interests.
While the federal government led by Prime Minister Mark Carney receives a majority satisfaction rating, confidence in political leaders to protect and promote Indigenous rights is more limited. Carney is trusted by 48% of respondents on this issue, compared with 25% each for Pierre Poilievre and Justin Trudeau. Trust in other leaders varies considerably, although high levels of uncertainty about some individuals make direct comparisons more difficult.
The distinction between overall government satisfaction and perceived effectiveness in representing Indigenous interests is particularly noteworthy. A respondent may hold a relatively favourable opinion of the federal government without necessarily believing it is the institution best positioned to advocate for Indigenous communities.
Regional differences add another dimension to these findings. Indigenous respondents in Eastern Canada are more likely than those in Western Canada to believe conditions affecting their day-to-day lives are improving. This suggests that perceptions of progress may also be shaped by regional experiences, reinforcing the importance of considering geographical differences when interpreting national results.
What role should Indigenous peoples play in Canada's resource development?
Support for expanding Canada’s natural resource sector does not necessarily translate into confidence in how future projects will be approved. While respondents express considerable support for increased development, their expectations about Indigenous involvement appear more measured.
This distinction is particularly relevant as the federal government pursues a faster approval process for major projects. The proposed reforms under the Building Canada Strong Act include measures intended to streamline federal approvals while coordinating consultation with Indigenous communities. The survey suggests that confidence in how Indigenous perspectives will be considered remains an important consideration alongside support for development itself.
The results also provide insight into the potential role of Indigenous ownership. Nearly half of respondents (45%) say having some Indigenous ownership in a major resource project would make them more likely to support it. For a similar proportion (42%), however, ownership would make no difference to their position. This suggests that while ownership may influence attitudes toward development, it is not necessarily a deciding factor for everyone.
Preferences regarding economic benefits further illustrate the different ways respondents envision participation in major projects. Direct payments to community members are preferred by 45%, while 34% favour dedicated employment opportunities and 21% prefer payments to local governing organizations. These differences highlight that economic participation is not viewed through a single lens, with respondents placing varying importance on individual financial benefits, employment, and collective community resources.
Overall, the findings suggest that understanding Indigenous perspectives on resource development requires looking beyond general levels of support. How communities are involved in decision-making, the role of ownership, and the distribution of economic benefits are all relevant considerations when assessing attitudes toward future projects.
Methodology
Our survey was conducted online from October 8 to 16, 2026, among 503 self-identified Indigenous Canadians aged 18 and older, using the LEO panel. The results were weighted by gender, age, and region to reflect the Canadian Indigenous population.
No margin of error can be associated with a non-probability sample. For comparison, a probability sample of 503 respondents would have a margin of error of ±4.4 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
