Transcript Slide 1

Presented by: Sharon Venne
Language
Culture
Land
Territory
People
Education
Health
Housing
Ability to make
agreements
T
R
E
A
T
I
E
S
•Royal proclamation of
1763, says no entrance
into indigenous
territory with out a
treaty.
•Created Canada in
1867, Canada never
made treaties.
•British North America
Act created provinces.




Short Title: “Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act”
Passed by Senate June 18, 2012
 1st Reading – February 29, 2012
 2nd Reading – April 25, 2012
 3rd Reading – June 18, 2012
House of Commons
 1st Reading – June 19, 2012
 2nd Reading- November 01, 2012
Link to Legislation:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISINFO/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&
billId=5409479




The government of Canada says that the legislation is to
“addresses health and safety issues” on reserved lands.
The act is to provide for regulations to govern drinking water
and waste water treatment in First Nations communities.
HOWEVER
Regulations will be made on a province-by-province basis to
mirror existing provincial regulatory regimes, with
adaptations to address the circumstances of First Nations.
This moves away from National Standards and puts the
provinces and their standards in place on the reserved lands.
• Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867
grants to the federal government exclusive
jurisdiction over “Indians and lands reserved
for the Indians,” provincial regulatory water
standards do not apply to on-reserve First
Nations communities.
•
There has been no federal legislative
framework governing drinking water and waste
water in First Nations communities beyond
what is set out in federal policies,
administrative
guidelines,
and
funding
arrangements.





The federal government says that there is no
standards or framework for water and waste
water?
Why not?
The federal government has not recognized the
treaty rights to water and has not assisted the
Nations maintain clean water or develop and
maintain standards related to water.
Now, the federal system wants to turn this
mater over to the Provinces.
Where is the treaty relationship?




It does not stipulate funding commitments and funding roles for
the government departments responsible for water on First Nation
reserves (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Health Canada and
Environment Canada).
With the lack of funding commitments, there is a real concern it
could lead some communities to privatize their water systems.
The Bill gives the federal government the power to force First
Nation communities to allow private companies to build, operate
and manage their water services.
First Nation communities were not consulted in the development
of the bill and the legislation does not require consultation in
developing regulations on safe drinking water for First Nation
communities.
The Bill is a framework that can be used by the federal
government to download its responsibilities to First Nations onto
provinces.

Short Title: “Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act”

Passed by Senate December 1, 2011




House of Commons



1st Reading – September 28, 2011
2nd Reading – November 1, 2011
3rd Reading – December 1, 2011
1st Reading – December 8, 2011
2nd Reading – November 01, 2012
Link to Legislation:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISINFO/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&
billId=5138145



Canada’s law -the Indian Act does not contain
any laws that apply to MRP on reserve land.
The Indian Act does not control the reserved
lands.
When a marriage or relationship ends, couples
who live on reserve cannot use the non-Indian
laws to help them carry out their plans if they
agree on how to deal with their matrimonial
real property.



Subject to the terms of any treaty and any other
Act of Parliament, all laws of general
application from time to time in force in any
province are applicable to and in respect of
Indians in the province, except to the extent
that those laws are inconsistent with this Act…
This used to be section 87 of the Indian Act –
first introduced into the Act in 1951.
Introduced without the consent of Treaty
Peoples



Since the White Paper of 1969, Canada has been
trying to get the “reserved lands” into the
provincial jurisdiction.
There were a number of court cases to get
section 88 of the Indian Act to apply on
reserved lands.
Section 88 of the Indian Act was never applied
to the reserved lands. Section 88 was used to
apply to individuals but not to the lands.




This legislation has been introduced on
previous occasions when there was a minority
government.
The draft law gives rights on the reserve to a
spouse whether they are an Indian or not.
The provincial family law judges will make
decisions based on their values and will be
applied on the reserved lands
The reserved lands will come under the
provincial laws via this proposed law.


Proposed as a Private Member’s Bill by Conservative MP Rob
Clarke
House of Commons



1st Reading – June 4, 2012
2nd Reading – October 18, 2012 – it was announced that the Conservative
Party have adopted the Bill – now has the weight of a majority of the
Members of Parliament.
Link to Legislation:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?billId=5618344
&Mode=1&Language=E



The Bill is to remove two key parts of the
Indian Act.
It is going to remove the provisions on wills
and estates. Without the provisions in the
Indian Act, the provinces’ wills and estates will
use provincial laws and applied on the
reserves.
The provisions on schools will also be
removed.



The Intestate provisions of the Indian Act
would allow provincial laws to make decisions
on property of Indians who die without a will.
The decisions made on the property will be
based on provincial standards not our
standards.
The removal of the parts on education leaves a
hole for the proposed Education Act that was
rejected by the Chiefs in October 2012.



Short Title: “First Nations Jurisdiction over
Education in British Columbia Act”
Royal Assent – December 12, 2006
Link to Legislation:
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-11.75/FullText.html





There is a background to this legislation.
In British Columbia, there was first a bilateral
committee on education to discuss many issues
then the committee was expanded to include the
province of British Columbia.
This trilateral group went to Ottawa to ask for this
Act.
The legislation lifted the lands and schools out of
91 (24) .
The Act was in place for seven days when the
province passed legislation to accept the
jurisdiction.
•
•
•


This legislation is a companion to the federal act.
In the five years since the legislation was enacted, there has been problems with
implementation.
At the education meeting held in early October 2012, the delegates from British
Columbia were saying that the federal government is telling them that they must
come up with their own source revenue to make the acts work.
Link to Legislation
http://www.leg.bc.ca/38th3rd/3rd_read/gov46-3.htm




This legislation was passed seven days after the
federal legislation.
The legislation needed to wait for the federal
legislation so as to accept the transfer of the
authority from the federal system to the
province.
The jurisdiction was completed and amounts to
a constitutional amendment.
Now, there is a problem with education




The transfer of the Schools and the lands have
come from the federal government without the
matching funds.
In the five years, there has been no funds from the
federal government to implement.
The federal government has recently told the
Indians in B.C. that they need to come up with
own source revenue(OSR) and the feds might
match them.
The B.C. and Maritime Indians think that National
legislation will solve their funding problems.


WHY
WOULD
THE
FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT FUND THIS PROCESS
WHEN THEY GOT THEM TO AGREE TO
TRANSFER THE JURISDICTION FROM THE
FEDERAL TO THE PROVINCE?
THE
FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT
HAS
GOTTEN
THE
WHITE
PAPER
TO
IMPLEMENTED IN EDUCATION IN B.C.
WHY WOULD THEY GO BACKWARDS?


Made as of the 13th day of October, 2011
Link to Document: http://www.hcsc.gc.ca/fniahspnia/alt_formats/pdf/pubs/services/tri
partite/framework-accord-cadre-eng.pdf





In October 2011, there was a transfer from
National Health and Welfare to a newly
created and provincially incorporated body of
380 million dollars for health care delivery
The super board will make decisions on health
funding.
This is done on a provincial wide board rather
than treaty area.
No treaty right in the transfer
Next attack on the treaty right



Short Title: “First Nations Financial Transparency Act”
House of Commons
 1st Reading – November 23, 2011
 2nd Reading – June 21, 2012
Concurrence at Report Stage 2012-11-26



Read more:
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Conservatives+putting+First+Nations+accountability+bill+fast/7589564/
story.html#ixzz2DOFzhGTQ
Link to Legislation:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISINFO/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=5258273


First Nation have to pay for the services of the
auditor to meet the standards set by the
government of Canada. If the Auditor does not
provide this accounting to government, the First
Nation will be paying back money or not receiving
money in the future. How audits are conducted,
under GAAP, is carefully laid out in agreements
First Nations sign with the federal government
and;
Bill C-27 requires that all the money that is the
First Nation’s must be placed in the financial
statements that become information that is in the
public domain


The money regulated in the Indian Act and
with this Bill, the Minister seeks to broaden
that authority to any money the First Nation
receives, not just money from INAC
But from the First Nation’s own source
revenues, grants from organizations, provincial
governments and any other entities.
Those sources of revenue would not be
considered “Indian Moneys” nor can it be
considered money from the Federal
government.
The Federal Government does not have
jurisdiction over moneys received from
other sources and cannot compel the First
Nation to be providing this information to
the public.


The Indigenous Nations are not going to
account for funds derived from sources other
than the federal monies.
The
Minister be challenged in the
government’s attempt to implement the
legislation that is considered unconstitutional
and a violation of the treaties.



Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan said
Wednesday (Nov. 21) his party is forcing a vote to shut
down debate on a financial transparency bill that will
require First Nations chiefs and councillors to publish
their salaries and expenses.
The move means the bill will pass the House of
Commons —over the objections of chiefs, as well as
the federal NDP and Liberals.
This legislation is far too broad including money which
the Federal Government has no jurisdiction over.

Amendments to: An Act respecting the environmental
assessment of certain activities and the prevention of
significant adverse environmental effects
 Affects environmental and water reviews related to reserved lands
 The Nations should start asserting their inherent rights over their
territory as the federal system has vacated the field.

Link to Legislation:
http://parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Lan
guage=E&Mode=1&DocId=5524772&Col=1&File=4



Short Title: “Jobs and Growth Act, 2012”
House of Commons
 First Reading – October 18, 2012
 Second Reading – October 26, 2012
 Finance Committee hearing – November 21, 2012
 Report to the House of Commons – November 26, 2012
 Third reading – December 05, 2012
 Next step – goes to the Senate
Link to Legislation: http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=5754371&View=0
Sections of Concern (s. 206 – 209) - Amendments to the Indian Act
According to Government Official:

The amendments would allow First Nations communities to lease
designated reserve lands based on a majority of votes from those in
attendance at a meeting or in a referendum, instead of waiting for a
majority vote from all eligible voters. The onus would be on the First
Nation members to turn out if they wanted to have a say.
 The Indian Affairs Minister would be given the authority to call a band
meeting or referendum for the purpose of considering a surrender of
the band's territory. The Minister could also accept or refuse the land
designation after receiving a resolution from the band council.



(Source:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/10/19/pollist-2nd-omnibus-bill.html)
Link to Legislation:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Mode=1&Lan
guage=E&billId=5258273&View=0

Letter sent to Chiefs and Councils – October 22, 2012 (re: s. 206-209 of Bill
C-45).
 “Our Government is responding to these concerns by finding ways to
streamline internal processes for granting land designations, without
detracting from the quality of service provided to First Nations or the
ability of First Nations to provide their informed consent to a land
designation. Consequently the proposed amendments will:
 Reduce the voting threshold from a “majority of a majority” to a
“simple majority vote” (majority of those who show up to vote in
favour), and
 Reduce the red tape involved in getting final approval by the
Department by changing the requirement for Governor in Council
approval to ministerial approval
 Both of these initiatives are anticipated to cut down on the length of
time that it takes to bring forward land designations on reserve by
several months, thereby increasing the rate of economic development
opportunities on reserve.
(Source: Letter sent by Minister John Duncan of AAND to Chiefs and Council)

Coming legislation from Federal Government

The Harper government will consult with native leaders before
introducing the legislation. Manny Jules, who heads the First Nations Tax
Commission, has drawn up a template for legislation, but the word in
Ottawa is that a bill is not expected to arrive until 2013. (Source:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/do-opponents-ofnative-property-rights-think-things-are-okay-now/article4468909/)

The Conservative government will introduce legislation that would allow
First Nations members living on reserve to own their property, a radical
change that aims to spur economic development in native communities
that choose to embrace the new law.
It’s all part of an ambitious Conservative agenda to bring fundamental
changes to relations between Ottawa and the First Nations – on property
rights, on matrimonial rights, on financial transparency and on education.
(Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harpergovernment-to-introduce-law-to-allow-private-property-onreserves/article4464434/)



Introduced on 21 November 2012
FIRST NATIONS GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT



2005, c. 19, s. 3(1) 421. The definition “administration agreement” in subsection 2(1) of the First
Nations Goods and Services Tax Act is replaced by the following:
“administration agreement” in Part 1, means an agreement referred to in subsection 5(2) and entered
into with the authorized body of a first nation and, in Part 2, means an agreement referred to in
section 22 and entered into with a council of the band.


2005, c. 19, s. 5
422. Subsection 3(1.1) of the Act is replaced by the following:


Section 89 of Indian Act
(1.1) A first nation law, as defined in subsection 11(1) or 12(1), or an
obligation to pay an amount that arises from the application of section 14, may, despite section 89 of
the Indian Act, be administered and enforced by Her Majesty in right of Canada, by an agent of the
first nation or, if the first nation law is administered by the government of a province under an
agreement entered into under section 7 of the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, by Her
Majesty in right of the province.


423. Subsection 4(9) of the Act is replaced by the following:


Reporting and payment of tax(9) Tax that is imposed under a law of a first nation enacted under
subsection (1) in respect of the bringing of property onto the lands







of the first nation shall become payable by the person who brings it onto the lands at the time it is brought onto the lands
and
(a) if the person is a registrant who acquired the property for consumption, use or supply primarily
in the course of commercial activities of the person, the person shall, on or before the day on or before which the person’s
return in respect of net tax is required to be filed under the law of the first nation for the reporting period in which tax
became payable,
(i) report the tax in that return, and
(ii) pay the tax to the Receiver General, or, if the law of the first nation is administered by the
government of a province under an agreement entered into under section 7 of the Federal-Provincial Fiscal
Arrangements Act, to the appropriate minister for that province; and
(b) in any other case, the person shall, on or before the last day of the month following the calendar
month in which the tax became payable,
(i) file with the Minister of National Revenue or, if the law of the first nation is administered by the
government of a province under an agreement entered into under section 7 of the Federal-Provincial Fiscal
Arrangements Act, with the appropriate minister for that province a return in respect of the tax, in the manner and in the
form authorized by the Minister of National Revenue and containing information specified by that Minister, and
(ii) pay the tax to the Receiver General or to the appropriate minister for that province, as the case
may be.


424. (1) Paragraphs 5(2)(e) and (f) of the Act are replaced by the following:



(e) for the administration and enforcement of the first nation law by the Government of Canada or, if the first nation law is
administered by the government of a province under an agreement entered into under section 7 of the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act,
by the government of the province and for the collection, by the Government of Canada or the government of the province, as the case may be, of
amounts imposed under that law;
(f) for the provision by the Government of Canada or, if the first nation law is administered by the government of a
province under an agreement entered into under section 7 of the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, by the government of the province to
the first nation of information acquired in the administration and enforcement of the first nation law or, subject to section 295 of the Excise Tax Act,
of Part IX of that Act, and for the provision by the first nation to the Government of Canada or the government of the province, as the case may be,
of information acquired in the administration of the first nation law;


(2) Subsection 5(5) of the Act is replaced by the following: