1. Government Control Of First Nations People in Canada

2. The Indian Act of 1876: gave the Canadian government total power over First Nations and their land. gave the Canadian government total power over First Nations and their land. was paternalistic and treated the people as wards of the state or as children that needed parents. was paternalistic and treated the people as wards of the state or as children that needed parents. took power away from bands to practice own forms of government and gave the federal government the power to change ways chiefs and councils operated. took power away from bands to practice own forms of government and gave the federal government the power to change ways chiefs and councils operated.

3. Defined who was an “Indian” Status Indians – people entitled to name listed on official Indian Register of federal government; entitled to certain rights and benefits under law Status Indians – people entitled to name listed on official Indian Register of federal government; entitled to certain rights and benefits under law Non-Status Indians – people who consider themselves Indian but government does not, so they have no special rights or benefits Non-Status Indians – people who consider themselves Indian but government does not, so they have no special rights or benefits Treaty Indians – Status Indians who belong to First Nation that signed treaty with government Treaty Indians – Status Indians who belong to First Nation that signed treaty with government

4. Impact of Indian Act Dictated specific duties and responsibilities of chiefs and councils i.e. women lost power! Dictated specific duties and responsibilities of chiefs and councils i.e. women lost power! Disregarded the traditional line of heredity that many First Nations followed in choosing their leaders. Disregarded the traditional line of heredity that many First Nations followed in choosing their leaders. Gave federal government officials the power to remove a chief for dishonesty, intemperance, immorality*, or incompetence. Gave federal government officials the power to remove a chief for dishonesty, intemperance, immorality*, or incompetence. *included living common-law, child out of wedlock, extra- marital affair *included living common-law, child out of wedlock, extra- marital affair

5. 1922 Ceremonies Are Illegal: Alert Bay Potlatch. B.C. 45 people, including an aboriginal chief, are arrested for attending a potlatch. 17 are put in jail and their ceremonial regalia is illegally seized.

6. First Nations’ cultures and peoples were reduced to nothing in British Canadian society (why were French Canadians allowed to keep theirs?) First Nations’ cultures and peoples were reduced to nothing in British Canadian society (why were French Canadians allowed to keep theirs?) First Nations people did not have citizenship and were controlled by a government with little understanding of their needs, traditions and cultures. First Nations people did not have citizenship and were controlled by a government with little understanding of their needs, traditions and cultures.

7. Why was Indian Act followed? Blackmail! Blackmail! If the policies were not carried out, the government refused to honour treaty payments! If the policies were not carried out, the government refused to honour treaty payments!

8. 1862 Smallpox kills 33% of the First Nations in BC.

9. 1950s Even the Inuit Impacted: Inuit relocated In a bid to “protect” Canada’s sovereignty over the high north, federal government relocates Inuit families from northern Quebec to the Arctic. Must wear “dog tags” with identity number. Many die.

10. Quick Summary of the Indian Act Influences all aspects of First Nation’s life from birth to death. Created “Status” Indians, a status you could lose by: Voting… if you voted you gave up Indian status or marrying a non-status Indian Created Indian Bands and Indian Agents. Is still being amended to this day!

11. 1969 White Paper Under Pierre Trudeau, the Canadian government released its White Paper on Indian Policy: called for the complete assimilation of First Nation’s People into Canadian society by eliminating special status and Indian Act etc. The National Indian Brotherhood successfully lobbied Parliament and the public to defeat the White Paper and responded with own Red Paper

12. “Red Paper” of 1970 Harold Cardinal led Alberta Indian Association with Aboriginal response to the White Paper. Harold Cardinal led Alberta Indian Association with Aboriginal response to the White Paper. It was a counterattack that argued for treaty Indians, "there is nothing more important than our treaties, our lands and the well-being of our future generations." It was a counterattack that argued for treaty Indians, "there is nothing more important than our treaties, our lands and the well-being of our future generations." This paper successfully caused the government to change its policies on Aboriginal affairs. This paper successfully caused the government to change its policies on Aboriginal affairs.

13. Bill C-31 In 1985, Bill C-31 was passed in Canada to legally eliminate discrimination against Indian women as originally prescribed in the Indian Act (they would lose their status, and their children as well if married non-status male) Background: Parliament amended the Indian Act to make it compliant with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The rules for determining entitlement to Indian status are now set out in section 6 of the Indian Act. Under subsection 6(1), a person is entitled to be registered as an Indian if:

14. that person was registered or entitled to be registered immediately prior to April 17, 1985; that person is a member of a Band created on or after April 17, 1985 by the Governor-in-Council. the name of that person was, for a variety of reasons, omitted or deleted from the Indian Register or from a band list; their parents are entitled to be registered or, if their parents are dead, they would have been entitled to be registered under s. 6.

15. As a result, Indian women who married out (at any time) had their status and membership restored and those persons (i.e. not just Indian woman) affected by the double mother rule were also eligible to be re- instated to status and membership. Subsection 6(2) of the Indian Act extends Indian status to a person with one 6 (1) Indian parent, but does not allow such a person to pass on Indian status to his or her own children unless they parent with another person who is entitled to Indian status (referred to as the “second generation cut-off”).

16. Current Appeal to Bill C-31 The proposed plan for legislative amendment known as McIvor v. Canada Decision: The amendment concept under consideration would provide Indian registration under s. 6(2) of the Indian Act to any grandchild of a woman: (a) who lost status due to marrying a non-Indian; and (b) whose children born of that marriage had that grandchild with a non- Indian after September 4, 1951 (when the "double mother" rule was first included in the Indian Act). This means that, if the proposed amendment is enacted, the children of women who lost status as a result of their marriage would be amended to a 6(1) registration allowing for the first-time 6(2) registration of their children. (Appendix D)

17. Entitlement to band membership would flow to those gaining the right to registration under the Indian Act for those bands whose membership is determined according to Section 11 of the Act. For First Nations that control their own membership codes under Section 10 of the Indian Act, eligibility for band membership would follow the First Nation’s rules. * No one will lose status as a result of the McIvor decision.

18. 1982 Constitution recognizes First Nations land claims. Acknowledges treaty rights. 1990 Sparrow Decision (Supreme Court) Musqueam people in B.C. argue that they have the right to fish and have ceremonial food. Supreme court agrees.

19. 1990 Oka Confrontation Stand-off in Quebec over land at Oka. Armed Mohawks vs. Quebec police and army. One officer killed.

20. 1995 Gustafson Lake Standoff Shuswap nation in B.C. want their sacred land and recognition of their sovereign rights. RCMP launch large military operation, firing 77,000 rounds of ammo, killing a dog and injuring a woman. 15 people sent to jail.

21. 1995 Ipperwash, Ontario Dudley George was one of 2 dozen unarmed Native protestors shot at by 7 OPP officers when trying to protect ancestral burial grounds Dudley George was one of 2 dozen unarmed Native protestors shot at by 7 OPP officers when trying to protect ancestral burial grounds Stony Point First Nations got their land back from the government after 50 years of illegal use (first for army, then as Ipperwash Provincial Park) and a 2 year inquiry Stony Point First Nations got their land back from the government after 50 years of illegal use (first for army, then as Ipperwash Provincial Park) and a 2 year inquiry Then Premier Mike Harris denied his responsibility in the death Then Premier Mike Harris denied his responsibility in the death

22. 1996 Nisga’a Treaty B.C. and Nisga'a people sign an agreement for disputed lands.

23. Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples 1991-1996 400 Recommendations: 400 Recommendations: Restructuring the Indian Act; Restructuring the Indian Act; Self-determination through self-government; Self-determination through self-government; Creation of Aboriginal government; Creation of Aboriginal government; Dual citizenship as Aboriginal nations and Canadians; Dual citizenship as Aboriginal nations and Canadians; An Aboriginal system of taxation; An Aboriginal system of taxation; Aboriginal economic initiatives through provision of more land…etc. Aboriginal economic initiatives through provision of more land…etc.

24. Nunavut 1999!

25. Métis Recognized in Ontario and Canada In 2003 Premier McGuinty asks Harper government to consider signing the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous of of Indigenous People In 2003 Premier McGuinty asks Harper government to consider signing the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous of of Indigenous People Regarding the METIS Regarding the METIS

26. The Powley Case On September 19, 2003, the Supreme Court of Canada delivered its landmark decision in R. v. Powley which recognized and affirmed the existence of Métis as a distinct Aboriginal people with existing rights protected by s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 On September 19, 2003, the Supreme Court of Canada delivered its landmark decision in R. v. Powley which recognized and affirmed the existence of Métis as a distinct Aboriginal people with existing rights protected by s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982

27. Caledonia Dispute

28. Who has status now? In the past, if you were a status Indian you automatically qualified for band membership. In the past, if you were a status Indian you automatically qualified for band membership. Now, there are two dimensions of identifying “Indians.” The federal government maintains a list of all status Indians who qualify for federal services and benefits; Now, there are two dimensions of identifying “Indians.” The federal government maintains a list of all status Indians who qualify for federal services and benefits; each local band also retains a list of band members eligible for band entitlements. Under Section 10 of the Indian Act, bands may develop their own membership codes. each local band also retains a list of band members eligible for band entitlements. Under Section 10 of the Indian Act, bands may develop their own membership codes. That creates a situation where an Indian may qualify for federal Indian status but be denied band membership because they fail to meet local criteria! That creates a situation where an Indian may qualify for federal Indian status but be denied band membership because they fail to meet local criteria!

29. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ For many reserves, up to 95 per cent of revenue comes from federal transfers and services are funded by Ottawa. Due to legal obstacles preventing on-reserve business, little independent sources of wealth are produced in the community. For many reserves, up to 95 per cent of revenue comes from federal transfers and services are funded by Ottawa. Due to legal obstacles preventing on-reserve business, little independent sources of wealth are produced in the community. In 1993, Menno Boldt, author of Surviving as Indians: The Challenge of Self-Government, observed bands adopted very conservative membership codes to protect the per capita share of their benefits. Evidence of this tendency, he said, was demonstrated by reluctance on the part of First Nations to accept Bill C-31 women and their descendants. Indian status is not solely about culture; it is about entitlement to resources. Accepting new members, says Boldt, means, “Cutting an already inadequate ‘pie’ into smaller pieces.” Evidence of this tendency, he said, was demonstrated by reluctance on the part of First Nations to accept Bill C-31 women and their descendants. Indian status is not solely about culture; it is about entitlement to resources. Accepting new members, says Boldt, means, “Cutting an already inadequate ‘pie’ into smaller pieces.”

30. 2008 Stephen Harper apologizes PM says residential schools were a “sad chapter” in our history. Today, we recognize that this policy of assimilation was wrong, has caused great harm, and has no place in our country