{"id":122,"date":"2012-07-16T20:05:40","date_gmt":"2012-07-16T20:05:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/aboriginalawarenesscanada.com\/?p=122"},"modified":"2018-05-24T16:51:35","modified_gmt":"2018-05-24T16:51:35","slug":"trying-hard-to-be-equal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/indigenousawarenesscanada.com\/fr\/indigenous-awareness\/trying-hard-to-be-equal\/","title":{"rendered":"S'efforcer d'\u00eatre \u00e9gal"},"content":{"rendered":"

Trying Hard To Be Equal<\/h1>\n

What is this First Nations compulsion to keep talking about agreements that are hundreds of years old? Why can\u2019t they just forget all this treaty garbage and why do they continue to insist on being treated special, with special rights and benefits, and specific laws just for them?<\/p>\n

Why don\u2019t they just adjust, adapt, fit in, go to work and be like everybody else?<\/p>\n

These are questions I hear from Canadians all across the country.<\/p>\n

Well, I can tell you that most First Nations in this country are more than ready to forget the treaties, including all the unfulfilled promises. All Canadians have to do is give them their land back. They are ready when Canada is ready.<\/p>\n

Sounds harsh, doesn\u2019t it? We\u2019ll get back to that later. First, let\u2019s look at some history to put it all into context.<\/p>\n

Sacred Contracts to some but not to others.<\/h2>\n

Over the past five centuries, hundreds of treaties and military pacts have been signed between the British and Canadian Crowns, with hundreds of First Nations signatories on these treaties meaning that all Canadians are if fact treaty people..<\/p>\n

The treaties \u2013 contracts, really \u2013 are considered sacred by the First Nations that entered into them. Unfortunately, our federal government doesn\u2019t feel the same way. All of these contracts, literally every one of them, have been dishonoured in a variety of forms. Our federal government is in \u201cbreach of contract\u201d under every treaty they ever signed.<\/p>\n

Treaty 11, signed in 1921 to cover the Northwest Territories, was never implemented. Our government decided which terms of every treaty were to be fulfilled and which parts would simply be ignored. Many discrepancies exist due to a misinterpretation of what the First Nations initially said and what actually found its way into the documents.<\/p>\n

Many hundreds of First Nations lawsuits are before the courts in their efforts to have the government honour promises made when the treaties were signed.<\/p>\n

As MacDonald J. stated in Pasco v. Canadian National Railway Co., [1986] 1 C.N.L.R. 35 (B.C.S.C.), at p. 37: \u201cWe cannot recount with much pride the treatment accorded to the native people of this country.\u201d
\nThe Crown did not enter into treaties in respect of most of the territory in what is now British Columbia, and, accordingly, Aboriginal title issues arise in this province in a very stark way.<\/p>\n

Today, about 80 per cent of Canada\u2019s land mass is covered by treaties, historically numbered treaties and the comprehensive land claims settlements sometimes referred to as modern treaties.<\/p>\n

Other claims cover most of British Columbia, parts of Quebec, three unsettled tracts of land in the Yukon and, of course, the Deh Cho lands of the Northwest Territories. The B.C. Treaty Commission began it\u2019s work 20 years ago, has cost $1 billion so far with very little measurable outcomes and most agree this system is a complete failure in making treaty with the 50 or so groups in various phases of negotiations. I suggest the hundreds of lawyers involved have no incentive to reach conclusion and closure.<\/p>\n

Specific Land Claims are well over 800 today and when we calculate the total costs of resolving all the claims our governments are looking at a $15 Billion liability.<\/p>\n

There are some significant and very specific reasons why there can be no equality between non-aboriginal Canadians and aboriginal Canadians.<\/p>\n

Supreme Court Position<\/h2>\n

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that original Aboriginal title exists on land where no treaties have yet been made. These negotiations have been going on for many decades.<\/p>\n

Aboriginal rights short of title are the primary means by which the traditional cultures and activities of First Nations (and particularly those that are nomadic or semi-nomadic) are protected; it is essential that those rights be taken seriously. Any interference with those rights (apart from trivial ones) demands legal protection. Such infringements must be justified. (Honourable Mr. Justice Groberman)
\nThere are no issues of inequality here.<\/p>\n

Progress has been painstakingly slow and has cost taxpayers \u2013 you and me \u2013 hundreds of millions of dollars. This continues to bring great uncertainty about encumbrances on the Crown\u2019s title and levels of Aboriginal jurisdictions. The only way to get rid of this original Aboriginal title is to make treaty, but there continues to be much disagreement about this point as well.<\/p>\n

Of the 700,000-registered status Indians who are also registered \u201cband\u201d members, only 50 per cent are considered treaty Indians because of the geographic location of their home reserves. If your home reserve is located in an area of land that is part of a treaty, then you are considered treaty and are eligible to receive treaty benefits and have the treaty rights agreed to in the original treaty.<\/p>\n

If, on the other hand, you are a registered member of a reserve that is not located on land covered by a treaty (the other 50 per cent), then you are a non-treaty registered Indian. You can still be a status Indian because you are on the Indian registry maintained by Aboriginal and Northern Development department.<\/p>\n

How are we doing so far? I know \u2013 the terminology can get confusing and that is not your fault.<\/p>\n

Now, if you happen to be a treaty Indian, you receive whatever treaty benefits the government chooses to give you. If you happen to be a non-treaty Indian, meaning your community did not make treaty with the federal Crown, the government has decided to give you the same benefits as those that did make treaties, but not the annual treaty cheque.<\/p>\n

What huge amount of cash does that entitle you to as a treaty Indian? Twenty grand a year? Two thousand bucks? Not even close.<\/p>\n

Treaty cheques come in at the paltry lump sum of $5 a year \u2013 sometimes just $2 or $3 \u2013 and this figure has not changed in a century or more since the treaties were signed. (By the way, the governments won\u2019t send it in the mail, either \u2013 you have to go back to your home reserve and pick it up.)<\/p>\n

Some people might wonder why non-treaty Indians receive treaty benefits (but not that $5 cheque). Well, apparently the government decided at some point to put selected treaty benefits under the Indian Act, which governs the lives of most First Nations people. Therefore, all registered Indians are eligible to receive these treaty benefits whether they are treaty or not. When I asked why, the federal government representatives told me to \u201cexpedite administration\u201d and this decision only costs Canadians $3 billion a year.<\/p>\n

To ensure equality I suppose every Canadian, seeing that we are all treaty people, should be getting the same benefits as First Nations people. Does the reader think that could ever happen or should all these beneifts be discontinue? Should all the treaty benefits our government committed to be under treaty\/contract be denied to aboriginal peoples or should all Canadians be included?<\/p>\n

Back to the Land<\/h2>\n

Now, let\u2019s get back to how we started this \u2013 the part about giving the land back.<\/p>\n

Wait a minute, you say. Canada can\u2019t return the land to First Nations. It\u2019s not practical and makes no sense. There was no \u201cconquering\u201d done in Canada On one hand Canadians are saying forget the treaties, then they say we want all the land and resources and forget our contract obligations. Does that mean Canadians want their cake and eat it too?<\/p>\n

But this has nothing to do with equality, reason, logic or fairness.<\/p>\n

It wouldn\u2019t be so difficult to comprehend if the government actually honoured the contracts and fulfilled its treaty obligations. For many decades now, the Supreme Court of Canada has been insisting that our federal government live up to its promises and behave \u201chonourably\u201d and that it is liable for choices and actions, past and present. There has been much effort to restore the honour of the Crown. Apparently this hasn\u2019t worked, as there seems to be great resistance to the concept. Does that mean when we say \u201cHonourable Member of Parliament\u201d that that is a true oxymoron.<\/p>\n

Today in Canada, the ability to hunt, fish and gather are considered rights for Aboriginal people. We also know that 80 per cent of our country\u2019s land allows for treaty rights, while the other 20 per cent is covered by original Aboriginal title.<\/p>\n

But understanding what these rights are, whom they belong to and where these rights can be applied is a daunting and at times onerous task. Most provincial governments and corporate leaders in Canada are making an honest effort to learn about these rights, because they know infringement, without the full informed consent of these Aboriginal rights holders is now against the law and has been proven very costly indeed.<\/p>\n

Some Aboriginal groups have Aboriginal rights, but don\u2019t have treaty rights \u2013 such as the nation\u2019s M\u00e9tis citizens, who share a mixed-blood heritage with early European settlers, voyageurs and fur-traders and First Nations peoples. Their Aboriginal rights are on par with First Nation Aboriginal rights \u2013 and one does not want to ignore any potential Aboriginal rights holders.<\/p>\n

First Nations people also have Treaty rights on top of their Aboriginal rights, and many have original Aboriginal title as well.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a complicated scenario rooted in centuries of misunderstanding \u2013 misunderstanding that Canadians are only now beginning to grasp.<\/p>\n

My Rights and Yours<\/h2>\n

I would like to clarify that I am an Aboriginal person, but not a First Nation person. Nor am I an Inuit person. All Canadian Aboriginal people are Canadian citizens, although I know of some who don\u2019t want to be. They don\u2019t actually have any place to \u201dgo back home\u201d to if they don\u2019t like it.<\/p>\n

First Nations people actually became Canadian citizens in 1960, but M\u00e9tis have always been considered Canadian citizens.<\/p>\n

Most Canadians tell me they believe we are all equal under the rule of law in Canada. Our federal Constitution, our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and our laws protect my rights as a Canadian citizen, same as you.<\/p>\n

However, since I am an Aboriginal, I do hold Aboriginal rights, while 95 per cent of other Canadians don\u2019t.<\/p>\n

Could this mean that I am a citizen-plus? Am I now more equal than other non-Aboriginal Canadians? How does that make Canadians feel about having fewer\/less rights than Aboriginal people? A First Nations person with treaty rights would be even more equal than I am, and might therefore be considered a citizen-plus-plus.<\/p>\n

It is important to me that non-Aboriginal Canadians see me as their equal under the law, not their \u201cmore equal.\u201d I choose not to exercise any of my Aboriginal rights, so I can be as equal a Canadian as the rest of you.<\/p>\n

Whenever many Aboriginal people say they want to be equal to all Canadians, they are not saying they are willing to forfeit any of their rights or benefits. But they do want to enjoy the same standards of living as the average Canadian.<\/p>\n

Under \u201cspecial\u201d current laws, legislation and policy, this is all but impossible.
\nAboriginal peoples in Canada are subject to all the same laws as every other Canadians; however there are all these other laws that apply to them that do not apply to non-Aboriginal Canadians. Some times it is difficult trying to be equal.
\nFull equality is simply not possible. That is how our laws are stated.<\/p>\n

How does one go about getting equal?<\/p>\n

When the Aboriginal demographics show that the Aboriginal peoples standard of living is the same as the average Canadian, then I predict most Aboriginal people will kiss their special laws \u2013 such as the widely loathed federal Indian Act \u2013 goodbye. It is interesting to note that as the numbers of registered status Indians leaving the reserves increases yearly, they are already forfeiting access and use of many of their rights.<\/p>\n

Canadians have an international reputation as honest fair-minded people and expect our governments to treat Aboriginal people with kindness, compassion and fair play. Unfortunately that is simply not happening.<\/p>\n

They can\u2019t wait any longer for the demographics to change or catch up to them. They are seeking certain levels of equality right now in most urban centres; however, equality is an elusive dream for most.<\/p>\n

My circumstances allow me to choose not to take advantage of my Aboriginal rights because I don\u2019t need them. I choose not to participate in race-based laws because I have this choice. I want to be equal with my fellow citizens \u2013 not more equal \u2013 and it is vitally important to me that my fellow citizens know that.<\/p>\n

But it\u2019s just as important that we all understand the reasons why many Aboriginals have not done the same<\/p>\n<\/div><\/section>\n

\t\t\t
\n