Harper won’t revisit Indian Act

Ottawa sees no need to abandon incremental approach

The Indian Act will not be repealed or rewritten, said Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the opening of a special one-day meeting between the Crown and First Nations in Ottawa on Tuesday. The government’s approach will be to replace parts of the Indian Act in tandem with provinces and First Nations, the prime minister said. Harper said that “aggressive” action is needed to address the living standards of Canada’s First Nations, but did not announce new government initiatives. Shawn Atleo, national chief of the Assembly of First Nations, struck an equally unambitious note, saying the meeting is about rebuilding trust and renewing the relationship between First Nations’ chiefs and Ottawa. Other chiefs in attendance criticised the prime minister for a failure to take any novel concrete steps.

Globe and Mail




Browse

Harper won’t revisit Indian Act

  1. Aboriginal discontent: An attitude of entitlement or a legacy of prejudice? . . . Despite efforts to reach out to the Aboriginal community to gain a better understanding of their positions, only one leader responded to my invite agreeing to talk, as long as it was off-line from their social media discussion stream and went through their appointed website.  Hardly the open dialogue for which I had hoped. (http://wp.me/p1h552-d3)

  2. The First Nations Property Ownership
    Act

    (draft
    11-PMO)(secret)

    Definition: An act to ensure that each aboriginal is provided with land
    which he already jointly owns.

    Clause 1: The maximum amount of
    said land per aboriginal is not to exceed 100 acres.

    Clause 2: The Federal government
    shall be the sole and final authority in respect of a decision to transfer any
    particular tract of land to any individual.

    Clause 3: Lands will be transferred
    without payment except for those fees which may be charged for similar,
    non-aboriginal transactions by the members of the Bar Association in each
    province or territory.

    Clause 4: Lands for which at
    present, logging rights, or stated mineral rights exist, shall not be
    transferred.

    Clause 5: irrespective of individual
    ownership the Crown shall retain exclusive mineral rights over all lands
    transferred.

    Clause 6: Access
    requirements to or across said lands for the purposes of national           infrastructure,(roads, pipelines,
    hydro easements, resource exploitation, etc.) shall be the subject of
    negotiation solely between the Crown and the individual landowner.

    Clause 7: The aborigional “buyer”,
    upon acceptance of land under this agreement promises and warrants that he/she
    will not involve his/her band, tribe, etc., in any future negotiations in
    respect of clauses 4, 5, and 6.

    Clause 99: The Crown in no way
    warrants that said land as transferred is fit for any purpose whatsoever.

     

     

    • Why would they divide property up into 100 acres, when the standard survey is for 160 acres?  Wouldn’t it be easier to divide it up to fit with the standard survey in the west and north?

      I also don’t think I like clause 4, since first nations should keep mineral and logging rights to determine their own industrial and resource development on reserves.

      The rest would be good though.  Not allowing private property and expecting communism to work in isolated pockets of our country is backwards and cruel.  It is time to free the first nations from their true oppressors, sociologists and bureaucrats.

Sign in to comment.