Chiefs want self-government based on Treaties

Page 1

Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs John Munro, on a cross-country tour seeking support from Indian First Nations for the government's proposed federal legislation process, received an unfavorable reaction from Alberta chiefs meeting in Edmonton March 19.

Munro disclosed the intentions of the federal government to introduce in parliament legislation which will recognize the status and powers of the Indian First Nations for those who wish to be self-governing.

The minister said this new proposed legislation is a parallel, non-constitutional process with the first ministers constitutional talks.

"It is a bilateral process, involved with the Constitution, between the Government of Canada and Indian leadership discussing possible legislative framework that we can bring in based on the recommendations of the Penner Report," said Munro.

Explicitly stating the failure of the First Ministers' Conference of the March 8 and 9 to have Indian self-government entrenched in the Constitution, Munro said there is a non-constitutional process which can address the question of Indian self-government, if given the support of Indian First Nations, through parliamentary legislation.

"This legislation should be developed in close consultation with Indian First Nations themselves, and that it should reflect certain basic principles," stated Munro.

He assured Alberta's chiefs that this new parliamentary legislation will use Section 91(24) of Canadian Constitution Act, formerly the British North America Act of 1867 as guideline which empowers the federal government to legislate amendments to the Indian Act as agreed to and supported by the Indian First Nations.

Making pleas to the Alberta First Nations, Munro said the new proposed legislation will only legislate changes that are supported by the Indian First nations.

Munro's opening statements on the proposed legislation were severely criticized by the Treaty 6 Alliance, representing eight Alberta chiefs from the Treaty 6 area.

Rone Lameman, delegated spokesman for treaty 6 Alliance chiefs, lambastes the federal government's proposed legislation saying the government of trying to diminish the legal interpretations of the signed treaties.

Reading from a prepared text, Lameman said, "We reject any legislative framework which proposes to put Indian government in concert with the provincial and municipal governments in Canada."

Lameman bluntly informed Munro that treaties signed with the Crown are documents protected under the Royal Proclamation of 1763, Section 91 (24) of the British north America Act of 1867, now under the Constitution Act of 1982, and no way should the federal government be permitted to legislative any changes without the consent of the Indian First Nations.

The proposed legislation process is "not acceptable to the treaty process as understood by our forefathers and treaty 6 Alliance will not allow government to push legislation contrary to those treaties," said Lameman.

He further stated that the Treaty 6 Alliance will not accept or be a part of any legislative changes that involve the "consultation process" between the federal government and the provinces.

"We are not purchased Indians and we will not be subjected to blackmail tactics," said Lameman.

He Accused the Indian Affairs department of freezing bad funds and imposing economic sanctions on Indian First Nations that are not supporting the proposed legislation.

Munro strongly denied these charges after a closed meeting with the chiefs.

The Treaty 6 Alliance, while addressing the equality rights clause, stated that " individual rights" should not override "collective rights".

Chief Jim Omeasoo of the Samson Band, delegated spokesman for the four bands of Hobbema, read a band council resolution, stating "we do not recognize this meeting as a consultation, and further that these meetings are in any way to be interpreted as consent for the minister's federal legislation proposal. Therefore, we wantIndian self-government entrenched in the Canadian Constitution as a distinct form of government. Once that is established, then the citizenship will be determined by each Indian First Nation, as well as other areas of jurisdiction."

Although evidence of strong opposition toward the federal legislation process was shown at the meeting, Alberta chiefs John Snow (Stoney Tribe) and Walter Twinn (Sawridge Cree Tribe) Accept principles involved in the legislation.

Both chiefs want powers to deal with provincial government on matters such as education, health and rights to control resource revenue (royalties from Indian-owned lands) with no interference from the Department of Indian Affairs.

The Assembly of First nations is in support of Munro's legislation, however, the Indian Association of Alberta (IAA) a member of the AFN is not committed at this time.

Wilf McDougall, IAA president said, "there's a general consensus among Alberta chiefs to weigh all possible avenues before supporting this legislation.

"The chiefs are questioning the system of delegated authority (self-government) and they're concerned with the fact that the chiefs further down the line with negotiate for further powers.

"We question the involvement with the provinces, the consultation process with the provinces and type of government proposed, as municipalities; Indian First Nations are not looking at this type of self-government."

McDougall said the Alberta chiefs are "very careful with the proposal and will have further discussions on the matter and individual council and chiefs must provide the direction. There's where the power lies."