Document Information

Date: 1980-08-26
By: Native Council of Canada
Citation: Sub-Committee of the Continuing Committee of Ministers, Presentation to the Sub-Committee of the Continuing Committee of Ministers, Doc 830-85/002 (26 August 1980).
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

DOCUMENT: 830-85/002

Native Council of Canada
Le Conseil National des Autochtones du Canada

PRESENTATION
TO
SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE CONTINUING COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS
BY

HARRY W. DANIELS
PRESIDENT
NATIVE COUNCIL OF CANADA

AUGUST 26, 1980

MR. CHAIRMAN, MINISTERS, FELLON NATIVE
PRESIDENTS, LET ME PREFACE MY REMARKS BY SAYING FRANKLY
THAT I AM PUZZLED AT HON THIS FORM OF OUR PARTICIPATION
IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW PROCESS HAS COME TO PASS
AND WHY WE ARE BEING ASKED TO COMMENT ON A LIST OF PRIORITY
ITEMS DISTILLED FROM OVER TWO YEARS OF FEDERAL AND PROVIN-
CIAL MEETINGS AND NEGOTIATIONS.FROM WHICH WE HAVE BEEN
EXCLUDED. SUCH IS THE STATE OF CURRENT DISCUSSION THAT
WE NOH UNDERSTAND MOVEMENT ON THESE ISSUES BY GOVERNMENTS
HAS REACHED A STAGE WHERE A FIRST MINISTERS CONFERENCE IS
SCHEDULED FOR EARLY NEXT MONTH.

AGAINST THIS TIMETABLE THE VERY RECENT DECISION
TO HEAR OUR VIEWS APPEARS ANOMALOUS AND WE ARE COMPELLED
TO ASK WHAT EXACTLY IS OUR STATUS IN THE PROCESS? HOW,
IN OTHER WORDS; WILL WHAT WE HAVE TO SAY HERE INFLUENCE
RATIFICATION? ARE WE TO TAKE IT AS AN ARTICLE OF FAITH .
THAT THE FIRST MINISTERS WILL ALTER THEIR POSITIONS ON
THE ITEMS UNDER DISCUSSION TO ACCOMODATE US?

WE HAVE MADE IT CLEAR ON MANY PREVIOUS OCCASIONS
THAT BEING TREATED AS JUST ANOTHER INTEREST GROUP WHOSE
VIEWS ARE TO BE CONVENIENTLY CANVASSED IN THE ELEVENTH
HOUR IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE. AND WE HAVE BEEN PROMISED

…/2

-2-

REPEATEDLY THAT SUCH WAS NOT THE INTENTION OF GOVERNMENT,
IN CONSEQUENCE OF OUR SPECIAL RIGHTS AND OUR SPECIAL
POSITION IN CONFEDERATION, WE HAD EXPECTED TO BE FULL
PARTICIPANTS IN THE NEGOTIATIONS LEADING TO CHANGES IN
THE CONSTITUTION. BUT AT THIS LATE STAGE IN THE DISCUSSION
OF A DOZEN HIGHLY IMPORTANT ISSUES, WHAT IS THE REALITY
OF OUR PARTICIPATION? IT WAS ONLY THIS MONTH THAT THE
PROMISED FUNDING FOR OUR INVOLVEMENT WAS FORTHCOMING.
FURTHERMORE IT WAS ONLY LAST MONTH THAT THE MASS OF FEDERAL
DOCUMENTS TABLED BEFORE THE CCMC OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS
HAS BECOME AVAILABLE TO US. WE HAVE YET TO RECEIVE MANY
OF THE PROVINCIAL POSITION PAPERS, APPARENTLY BECAUSE THEY
ARE FOR “PARTICIPANTS ONLY” AND CAN NOT BE CIRCULATED TO
US WITHOUT CONSENT OF THE ORIGINATING GOVERNMENT.

CANADA HAS A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THE
WORLD THAT GENUINE ACCOMODATION AND INVOLVEMENT OF INDIGENOUS
PEOPLES IN THE FRAMING OF ITS CONSTITUTION IS A FUNDAMENTAL
NECESSITY IF JUSTICE IS TO BE ITS AIM. SO I BEGIN THIS
BRIEF WITH A SPECIAL PLEA. DO NOT FORCE US TO CONCLUDE
THAT WHAT IS WITHIN THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY AND ACCOMPLISH-
MENT HAS IN REALITY DEGENERATED INTO A TOKENISM BECAUSE OF
NARROWLY CONCEIVED PROVINCIALISM. DO NOT FORCE US TO
CONCLUDE THAT BECAUSE OF THIS PROVINCIALISM THE PAST INJUSTICES
SUFFERED BY US ARE TO BE PERPETUATED IN ANY NEW CONSTITUTION.

…/3

-3-

OUR PARTICIPATION HERE TODAY IS WITH THE HOPE
THAT OUR VIEWS WILL BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY AND ACTED UPON.
LACKING THE TIME AND RESOURCES WHICH YOU HAVE AT YOUR
DISPOSAL OUR REMARKS ON THE TWELVE ITEMS WILL BE TENTATIVE,
SUBJECT TO MUCH MORE RESEARCH THAN HE HAVE HAD TIME TO
COMPLETE AND DISCUSSIONS WHICH WE HOPE TO INITIATE ACROSS
THIS LAND OVER THE NEXT MONTHS WITH OUR PEOPLE.

I MUST EMPHASIZE THAT HE ARE HERE TO BEGIN
NEGOTIATIONS, NOT CAP OFF ALREADY PREDETERMINED CONCLUSIONS
ARRIVED AT BY GOVERNMENTS AT MEETINGS FROM HHICH WE HERE
EXCLUDED. WHILE I DO NOT HISH TO BE DISCORDANT AND HARP
ON THE PAST, I DO HOPE WE ARE ABLE TO AVOID THE KIND OF
FRUITLESS MEETINGS HE HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO OVER THE
YEARS, HHERE HE ARE ASKED FOR OUR VIEHS, HE GAVE THEM,
ONLY TO RECEIVE THE RESPONSE “DON’T CALL US WE’LL CALL
YOU”. WE ARE HERE TO BECOME INVOLVED IN A PROBLEM SOLVING
DIALOGUE AND NOT A JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE VERSION OF
A DEBATE OR OTHER FORMS OF THE ADVERSARY SYSTEM.

1 NOW TURN TO THE TWELVE ITEMS ON YOUR AGENDA.
OUR COMMENTS ARE BASED ON THE FEDERAL PROPOSALS AND ARE
OF NECESSITY BRIEF, GIVEN THAT ONLY THREE HOURS HAVE BEEN
ALLOCATED BY YOU FOR ALL THREE NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS TO
MAKE REPRESENTATIONS ON ITEMS WHICH YOU HAVE TAKEN MONTHS

…/4

-4-

TO DISCUSS NITH THE HELP OF EXPERT ASSISTANCE AND
ENORMOUS RESOURCES.

A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES

THE LIST OF PRIORITY ITEMS BEGINS ON THE MATTER
OF FORMULATING THE PRINCIPLES ON WHICH CANADA IS AND SHALL
BE FOUNDED.

AS A TENTATIVE STATEMENT OF THESE PRINCIPLES,
THE FEDERAL PROPOSAL HAS LITTLE TO RECOMMEND IT TO NATIVE
PEOPLES. IT IS AMBIGUOUSLY WORDED, UNINSPIRED IN TONE
AND MISLEADING IN CONTENT. NOWHERE IS IT STATED THAT THE
CONSTITUTION IS PREMISED ON AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN PEOPLES
INDICATING HOW THEY WISH TO LIVE AND BE GOVERNED. THAT
IS, A SOCIAL CONTRACT IN WHICH THE FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
OF THE VARIOUS PEOPLES OF CANADA CAN BE MET FOR THEM TO I
FLOURISH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE VALUES THEY CHERISH.

SURELY IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT THE BASIS OF
CANADIAN FEDERALISM HAS SUFFICIENT APPEAL AND DURABILITY
TO ENLIST ALL PEOPLES, TO AROUSE THEIR RESPECT FOR EACH
OTHER AND THE COMMON ENDEAVOUR, AND TO STIMULATE AN
OVERRIDING SENSE OF DISTINCTIVE IDENTITY. WHAT IS IT

…/5

-5-

THAT WE AS CANADIANS WISH TO ACCOMPLISH TOGETHER IN
THIS LAND?

THIS QUESTION DOES NOT FIND EXPRESSION IN
THE FEDERAL PROPOSAL. WORDED AS IT IS LIKE A LEGAL
CONTRACT BETHEEN GOVERNMENTS, IT GIVES ALL THE SENSE
OF DURABILITY AND DISTINCTIVE PURPOSE THAT A FIVE-YEAR
TAX-SHARING AGREEMENT MIGHT.

NOR DOES THIS DOCUMENT BREAK WITH THE PATTERN
OF REFERRING TO US IN A PATERNALISTIC, PATRONIZING WAY.
WHO NATIVE PEOPLE ARE IS NOT SPECIFIED, AND WHAT
REFERENCE THERE IS, MAKES US APPEAR TO BE PASSIVE, IF I
NOT IRRELEVANT ONLOOKERS TO THE IMPLIED HARMONIOUS
FOUNDING OF THIS COUNTRY BY THE FRENCH AND ENGLISH -WHO
HISTORY RECORDS, HERE CONSTANTLY AT ONE ANOTHER’S THROATS.

WITHOUT WISHING TO ENTER THE DEBATE ON WHETHER-
CANADA IS TO BECOME A MELTING POT LIKE THE U.S.A., OR
REMAIN A MOSAIC IN WHICH DISTINCTIVE CULTURES MAY FLOURISH,
I WOULD SUGGEST A REWORDING OF THE OPENING SENTENCE IN I
THE FEDERAL STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO REFLECT
THE REALITY OF CANADIAN CULTURAL PLURALISM. I WILL LEAVE
ASIDE FOR A LATER MEETING THE REPUBLICAN IMPLICATIONS OF

…/6

-6-

THE OPENING PARAGRAPH WHICH GIVES PRECEDENCE TO “THE
PEOPLE” RATHER THAN THE MONARCH AND MERELY POINT OUT
THAT CANADA IS COMPOSED OF MANY PEOPLES.

ASSUMING THE TERM NATIVE WOULD BE DEFINED
LATER, THE FRAMERS OF THE FEDERAL DRAFT WOULD HAVE MORE
ACCURATELY REFLECTED THE TRUTH IF THEY HAD SAID:

BORN OF A MEETING OF NATIVE PEOPLES WITH
THE ENGLISH AND FRENCH ON NORTH AMERICAN
SOIL, THE HOMELAND OF NATIVE PEOPLES FROM
TIME IMMEMORIAL……

DISAPPOINTMENT ASIDE WE DO SUPPORT THE NEED
FOR A PREAMBLE IN WHICH AS AN ABSOLUTE MINIMUM THE PLACE
OF NATIVE PEOPLE MUST BE GIVEN PROMINANCE. WE WOULD OF
COURSE WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITY TO HELP DRAFT A STATEMENT
OF PRINCIPLE TO THIS END.

CHARTER OF RIGHTS

WE SUPPORT THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF
ALL CANADIANS IN THE CONSTITUTION BUT AT THE SAME TIME
INSIST THAT OUR SPECIAL ABORIGINAL RIGHTS SHOULD NOT BE

…/7

-7-

SUBSUMED UNDER ANY GENERAL HUMAN RIGHTS PROVISIONS.
INSTEAD WE WANT OUR ABORIGINAL RIGHTS ENTRENCHED
SEPARATELY IN THE CONSTITUTION.

THE PATRIATION OF THE CONSTITUTION

THE PATRIATION OF THE CONSTITUTION IS AN
OBJECTIVE WHICH WE CAN SUPPORT BUT ONLY IF THE AMENDMENT_
FORMULA FULLY INVOLVES US. OTHERHISE SPECIFIED RIGHTS
GAINED TODAY COULD BE ABOLISHED TOMORROW UNILATERALLY
BY GOVERNMENTS. WE ARE PREPARED TO WORK OUT WITH YOU
AN AMENDMENT CLAUSE WHICH HOULD GUARANTEE THAT OUR RIGHTS
ARE FULLY PROTECTED AND ONLY AMENDED WITH OUR CONSENT.

A NEW UPPER HOUSE

WE BELIEVE THAT A NEW UPPER HOUSE WHOSE COMPOSITION
WOULD REFLECT THE HETEROGENEITY AND REGIONAL DIVERSITY OF
THE COUNTRY CAN STRENGTHEN CONFEDERATION. HOWEVER, NO
REFERENCE IS MADE TO GUARANTEED REPRESENTATION FOR NATIVE
PEOPLES IN THIS NEW HOUSE. AS HISTORIC NATIONAL MINORITIES
WITH SPECIAL RIGHTS IN CONFEDERATION, NATIVE PEOPLES
SHOULD BE GUARANTEED REPRESENTATION IN ALL LEGISLATIVE
BODIES, INCLUDING THE NEW UPPER HOUSE.

…/8

-8-

SUPREME COURT

IN MANY CASES, METIS AND NON-STATUS INDIANS
HAVE BEEN ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE UNIVERSAL APPLICATION
OF THE LAW THROUGHOUT THE LAND. THE CONTEMPORARY LEGAL
SYSTEM DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SPECIAL LEGAL
PROBLEMS NOR THE SPECIAL ABORIGINAL RIGHTS OF METIS AND
NON-STATUS INDIANS. WE PROPOSE THAT SERIOUS CONSIDERATION
BE GIVEN TO A JUDICIAL SYSTEM AT THE HEAD OF WHICH A
SPECIAL PANEL COULD RULE ON CASES INVOLVING THE RIGHTS,
CUSTOMS AND BELIEFS OF OUR PEOPLE IN THE SAME WAY THAT
A SPECIAL PANEL FROM QUEBEC IS EMPOWERED TO RULE ON CASES
BASED ON CIVIL LAW.

FISHERIES AND OFFSHORE RESOURCES

THE RIGHT OF NATIVE PEOPLE TO FISH INLAND AND
IN COASTAL WATERS AS WELL AS THEIR RIPARIAN AND OFFSHORE
RESOURCE RIGHTS SHOULD BE GUARANTEED IN THE CONSTITUTION.
WE WOULD PREFER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GUARANTEE OUR
RIGHTS AND SHARE WITH US THE POWER TO INTERVENE IN ANY
DISPUTES OVER THESE WITH PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS.

POWERS OVER THE ECONOMY

OUR PEOPLE HAVE COMMON ECONOMIC PROBLEMS ACROSS

…/9

-9-

THE COUNTRY. WE REQUIRE NOT ONLY A CO-ORDINATED BUT
SPECIAL APPROACH TO THE PROBLEMS HHICH HAVE LED TO OUR
IMPOVERISHMENT.

WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
DID NOT REFER TO OUR SPECIAL NEEDS IN ITS POSITION PAPER
ON THE ECONOMY. IT SEEMS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT –
WISHES TO RETAIN KEY ECONOMIC POWERS IN ORDER TO RE-
DISTRIBUTE WEALTH AND REDUCE SOCIAL INEOUALITIES AS WELL
AS REGIONAL DISPARITIES YET IT DRAHS NO REFERENCE TO THE
DISPARITIES BETHEEN NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE PEOPLES. DOES
THIS OMISSION MEAN THAT OUR ECONOMIC PROBLEMS ARE SIMPLY
VIEWED AS PART OF THE GENERAL PROBLEM OF SOCIAL INEOUALITIES
AND REGIONAL DISPARITIES? IF THIS IS SO WE MUST POINT OUT
THAT PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS TO DEAL WITH US THROUGH THE PROVINCES
AS A PART OF A LARGER PROBLEM HAVE NOT WORKED BECAUSE
WE BECAME LOST IN THE SHUFFLE. ANY AGREEMENT ON POWERS
OVER THE ECONOMY MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SPECIAL NEED
TO REDUCE THE DISPARITIES BETWEEN NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE
PEOPLES.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WISHES TO GUARANTEE THE
FREE FLOW OF GOODS, SERVICES,LABOUR AND CAPITAL ACROSS
PROVINCIAL BOUNDARIES. WHILE NATIVE PEOPLES CAN SUPPORT
THE SAFEGUARDING OF THE CANADIAN ECONOMIC UNION, SERIOUS

…/10

-10-

CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO EXEMPT NATIVE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT FROM THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION,
EESPECIALLY IN REMOTE AREAS WHERE THEY HAVE SO OFTEN IN
THE PAST BEEN DISPLACED BY SOUTHERN BUSINESS AND LABOUR
INTERESTS. WITH REGARDS TO THIS MATTER WE WISH TO KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE INCLUDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS FOR WHICH THE GOVERNMENT
IS PLANNING EXCEPTIONS.

DEDICATION TO SHARING AND/OR TO EQUALIZATION:
REDUCTION OF REGIONAL DISPARITIES

THE CONCEPT OF SHARING IS INTRINSIC TO NATIVE
CULTURES AND LIFESTYLES AND IS ONE TO WHICH NATIVE PEOPLE
CAN FULLY DEDICATE THEMSELVES DURING THE PROCESS OF
CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW. NATIVE PEOPLE HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED
IN SHARING THE WEALTH OF THE LAND AND THE BULK OF CANADA’S
NATURAL RESOURCES ARE EXTRACTED FROM HINTERLAND AREAS
WHERE NATIVE PEOPLE FORM A SIGNIFICANT PROPORTION OF THE
POPULATION. HOWEVER, NATIVE PEOPLE HAVE ENJOYED FEW OF
THE ADVANTAGES ACCRUING FROM THE EXPLOITATION OF THEIR
LANDS AND SUFFERED ALMOST ALL THE DRAWBACKS.

THE PROPOSALS FOR ENTRENCHMENT OF EQUALIZATION
IN THE CONSTITUTION DO NOT PROVIDE FOR A MEANINGFUL

…/11

-11-

EQUALIZATION OF WEALTH. THE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT
THE FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS CONTINUE TO TREAT
REGIONAL DISPARITIES AS DISPARITIES BETWEEN “HAVE” AND
“HAVE NOT” PROVINCES INSTEAD OF “HAVE” AND “HAVE NOT”
REGIONS. THE ECONOMIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE NORTHERN
AND SOUTHERN PARTS OF PROVINCES ARE AS GREAT IF NOT
GREATER THAN THOSE BETWEEN PROVINCES, YET THE EQUALIZATION
SYSTEM IS STILL SEEN AS A PROCESS BY WHICH PAYMENTS ARE
TRANSFERRED LATERALLY FROM ONE PROVINCE TO THE NEXT BY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THIS INTER-PROVINCIAL RATHER
THAN INTER-REGIONAL OR INTRA-PROVINCIAL FOCUS HAS MEANT I
THAT “HAVE” PROVINCES TRANSFER WEALTH TO THE SOUTHERN
BASED GOVERNMENTS OF “HAVE NOT” PROVINCES. THESE WHICH
ARE VIEWED BY NATIVE AND PERHAPS OTHER NORTHERNERS AS
BEING AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE INTRA-PROVINCIAL DISPARITIES
PROBLEM, NOT THE SOLUTION. LIKEWISE THE “HAVE NOT”?
REGIONS WITHIN THE “HAVE” PROVINCES ARE EXCLUDED
ALTOGETHER FROM EQUALIZATION PAYMENTS. AS HE ALL KNOW
“CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME”. IN BOTH BRITISH COLUMBIA AND
ALBERTA FOR EXAMPLE, A SIGNIFICANT PROPORATION OF
PROVINCIAL WEALTH COMES FROM THE EXPLOITATION OF THE
RESOURCES IN THE “HAVE NOT” REGIONS OF THE PROVINCE,
REGIONS TRADITIONALLY USED AND OCCUPPIED BY NATIVE PEOPLE.

…/12

-12-

THE PROPOSALS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
TO REDUCE DISPARITIES BETWEEN REGIONS SUGGEST A CONTINUATION
OF FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL AGREEMENTS SUCH AS DREE WHICH TOO
OFTEN HAVE BEEN LESS SENSITIVE TO THE NEEDS AND RIGHTS OF
NATIVE PEOPLE IN “HAVE NOT” REGIONS.

AT THE SAME TIME THAT FEDERAL AND PROVINCIALV
GOVERNMENTS AGREE TO PROMOTE EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES, ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT, AND ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICES OF REASONABLE
QUALITY OF ALL CANADIANS, THEY MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT
THE NEED TO REDUCE THE DISPARITIES BETHEEN NORTHERN AND
SOUTHERN REGIONS. THE CONSTITUTION SHOULD PROVIDE FOR
THE DIRECT TRANSFER OF EQUALIZATION AND REGIONAL DEVELOP-
MENT PAYMENTS INTO THESE “HAVE NOT” REGIONS. CLEARLY
NATIVE REPRESENTATION MUST BE PART OF ANY PROPOSED
REGIONAL DISPARITIES REVIEW PROCESS.

RESOURCE OWNERSHIP

AS THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THIS LAND WE
BELIEVE THAT THE CONSTITUTION SHOULD MAKE CLEAR REFERENCE
TO OUR RIGHTS TO LAND AND RESOURCES. ANY AGREEMENT

…/13

-13-

BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS ON “OWNERSHIP” OF RESOURCES MUST
RECOGNIZE THE SPECIFIC NATURE OF, AND MAKE PROVISION
FOR, OUR RIGHTS TO AN EQUITY INTEREST IN ANY RESOURCE
DEVELOPMENTS INCLUDING SHARING THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR
THE MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES.

COMMUNICATIONS

IF WE ARE TO MAINTAIN A DISTINCT IDENTITY WE
MUST HAVE THE RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE MODERN MASS MEDIA
THROUGH WHICH WE CAN COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER AND
WITH OTHER GROUPS IN CANADA. WE MUST ALSO HAVE ACCESS
TO ALL NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS,
FOR THESE TOO ARE VITAL MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. AS THE
SITUATION NOW EXISTS IT IS DIFFICULT FOR METIS AND
NON-STATUS INDIANS TO REPRESENT THEMSELVES THROUGH THESE
CHANNELS, ESPECIALLY WHEN INSTITUTIONS LIKE THE NATIONAL
MUSEUM USE A RESTRICTED INDIAN ACT DEFINITION OF WHO IS
A NATIVE PERSON AND CONSISTENTLY IGNORE IN ITS RESEARCH
AND EDUCATIONAL FUNCTIONS THE CULTURAL CONTRIBUTIONS OF
THE METIS AND MON-STATUS INDIANS IN THE HISTORY AND
DEVELOPMENT OF CANADA.

…/14

-14-

THE CONSTITUTION SHOULD PROVIDE NATIVE PEOPLE
WITH THE RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE RADIO AND TELEVISION,
THAT IS, THOSE MEDIA UNDER GOVERNMENT REGULATION. AT
THE SAME TIME IT SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED THAT NATIVE
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS ARE INTER-PROVINCIAL, IN THAT
THEY ARE FULFILLING THE NEEDS AND INTERESTS OF NATIVE
GROUPS SPANNING PROVINCIAL BORDERS, AND THEREFORE
SHOULD FALL WITHIN FEDERAL JURISDICTION.

FAMILY LAM

FAMILY LAW COMPRISES A NUMBER OF SUBJECTS,
SOME OF WHICH ARE PARTS OF OTHER MAJOR FIELDS OF LAW.
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY IS OFTEN THOUGHT OF AS PART OF
FAMILY LAW; BUT IT IS ALSO AN ASPECT OF CRIMINAL LAW.
SEPARATION AGREEMENTS ARE CONSIDERED PART OF FAMILY LAW
BUT THEY ARE ALSO AN ASPECT OF CONTRACT LAW. THIS
POINT SHOULD BE BORNE IN MIND WHEN DISCUSSING A RE-
DISTRIBUTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS.

THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS OF FAMILY LAW THAT
MIGHT BE CONSIDERED “PROBLEM AREAS” INSOFAR AS METIS
AND NON-STATUS INDIANS ARE CONCERNED BUT IT IS NOT
EVIDENT THAT THE PROBLEMS RELATE TO WHO HAS THE POHER

…/15

-15-

TO MAKE THE LAW. IT MAY BE AS MUCH A QUESTION OF THE
ATTITUDE OR LACK OF CONSIDERATION THAT WENT INTO THE
FORMULATION OF, AND ADMINISTRATION OF, THE STATUTE.

THE OBVIOUS PROBLEM AREAS FOR US ARE:

– LOSS OF CULTURE THROUGH ADOPTION OF CHILDREN
BY, OR PLACING OF CHILDREN IN, HOMES WHERE NO
CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO ABORIGINAL ANCESTRY
OF CHILD, INCLUDING CASES OF SEPARATION WHERE
A WHITE PARENT RETAINS CUSTODY OF CHILDREN OF
MIXED MARRIAGE.

– RELATED ISSUE OF RECOGNITION OF CULTURAL
DIFFERENCES IN METHODS OF RAISING CHILDREN IN
CHILD WELFARE CASES; INCLUDING CHILD ABUSE, ETC.

– QUESTION OF INHERITANCES OR PENSIONS IN CASES
OF MIXED MARRIAGES OR RELATIONSHIPS THAT MAY
BE ACCEPTABLE IN METIS COMMUNITIES BUT THAT DO
NOT MEET PROVINCIAL TESTS OR FEDERAL TESTS OF
A ‘VALID’ MARRIAGE.

– ENFORCEMENT OF MAINTENANCE ORDERS AGAINST
ITINERANT HUSBANDS AND FATHERS; A PROBLEM
WHICH CUTS ACROSS CULTURAL BOUNDARIES.

…/16

-16-

MORE STUDY IS REQUIRED ON THESE PROBLEM AREAS
BEFORE WE CAN COMMENT DECISIVELY ON THIS ITEM.

FINALLY, I WISH TO SAY, WE SHALL HAVE MUCH
MORE TO ADD TO ALL THE ITEMS AT A LATER TIME, HOPEFULLY
BY THE DATE SUSOESTED TO ME IN A RECENT LETTER FROM THE
PRIME MINISTER.

THE PRIME MINISTER RECENTLY FOUND CAUSE TO
PREMISE HIS DEMAND FOR PATRIATION ON THE NEED TO BREAK
THE LAST VESTIGES OF CANADA’S COLONIAL TIES TO BRITAIN
THE NEED TO ENTRENCH OUR RIGHTS IN THE CONSTITUTION
ALSO FLOWS FROM A DESIRE TO BREAK THE INTERNAL-COLONIAL
TIES TO WHICH WE HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED THIS PAST HUNDRED
OR SO YEARS.