Free Bill Dispute Letter Template

							DRAFT TEMPLATE LETTER TO PRIME MINISTER
[INSERT YOUR LETTERHEAD]

Prime Minister Stephen Harper
[Mail may be sent postage-free to the Prime Minister at the following address:]
House of Commons
Parliament Buildings
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada
K1A 0A6

Re:    Bill C-3 (McIvor amendments to the Indian Act) and Bill S-4 (Matrimonial Real Property
       on Reserves)

Dear Prime Minister Harper:

On behalf of __________ First Nation, I am writing to express our concerns with the afore-noted
bills currently before the House of Commons.

With respect to Bill S-4, we assert that the areas of First Nations family issues and lands remain
within the un-ceded jurisdiction of First Nations. The 1996 Report of the Royal Commission on
Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP), a Conservative government initiative, clearly stated that family law
is within the jurisdiction of First Nations and can be exercised without need of approval or
agreement from either the federal or provincial government. First Nations governments are fully
capable of exercising their jurisdiction in this core area and therefore a broad based federal law
should not be imposed on First Nations.

The duty to consult and accommodate First Nations interests in the Matrimonial Real Property
(MRP) issue has not occurred across Canada and especially within Ontario. The requirement is
to consult with and accommodate the interests of the “rights holders” who are the First Nations
communities, represented by their governments. Your government hired Wendy Grant-John as a
Ministerial Representative in 2006 to consult with aboriginal groups. She met with several
aboriginal organizations and in March 2007 issued her report and recommendations. Key
recommendations made by Ms. Grant-John are that the federal government recognize the
jurisdiction of First Nation governments in the area of family law and empower First Nation
institutions in the development and implementation of any MRP law. Rather than follow these
recommendations, bill S-4 attempts to create a “delegated” form of law that does not respect the
inherent jurisdiction of First Nations. Further, Ms. Grant-John recommended that the federal
government not impose provincial family laws on First Nations, but clearly this is another
recommendation your government has chosen to ignore. At its core, bill S-4 imposes provincial
courts, tribunals, orders and processes on First Nations rather than empowering First Nations
Tribunals, Elders Councils, Courts and Alternative Dispute Resolution processes.

The imposition of a “Verification Officer”, the modern day “Indian Agent,” would be imposed
on First Nations to oversee us and ensure we comply with the government. Further the
requirement to hold a referendum to pass a law is not imposed on any other level or type of
government in Canada. Why then should First Nations governments be subjected to this

                                                                                                 1
requirement? Further, S-4 would, for the first time in law, create a right for a “non-Indian” to
exclusively occupy First Nations lands on a temporary or even a permanent basis. Reserve land
was intended for the exclusive use of “Indians” not settlers and their descendants.

I would urge you to direct your Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to
withdraw this misguided, inappropriate and unacceptable Bill and to start fresh by engaging in a
true process of consultation, accommodation and consent with the First Nations of this country.
When Canada wanted access to our lands they negotiated Treaties with our Nations. This
relationship still forms the basis for all of our interactions - therefore Canada must now consult,
accommodate and obtain our consent.

With regard to Bill C-3, some discrimination found within the Indian Act, is addressed within the
proposed legislation however First Nations will also feel many detrimental effects. As you know,
the Indian Act is an antiquated, flawed, paternalistic and colonial piece of legislation. It has
served as a suffocating box for First Nations and yet we have come to rely on many provisions
within this legislation in the context of our daily lives. Sadly, during the past few centuries of
colonization the term “Indian status” has come to form part of the identities of many First
Nations individuals. Although this term did not originate from within Indigenous traditions, it
has now come to have a critical role in the identities of many people. It will take work within
both First Nations and Canadian society to escape this situation. Unfortunately, the government
of Canada most often chooses to make legislative amendments of offending provisions in its
efforts to fix flaws within the Indian Act. This causes only greater conflicts within First Nations,
as the Bill C-31 project demonstrates.

With respect to the proposed information gathering sessions to address the “broader issues” of
First Nations citizenship, we feel that government recognition of our basic collective human right
to control our own identities and citizenship would be a more effective approach. This should
include a period of capacity building amongst First Nations. The determination of our
citizenship/membership and issues of collective identity are internal First Nations matters and do
not require negotiation with the settler state. First Nations need to direct the future of their
collective identities – this is a key aspect of the decolonization process. The Chiefs in Ontario
call upon the Government of Canada to fully support the collectively held human right of
First Nations to determine and control our own identities and citizenship.

The combined effect of Bill C-3 and the repeal of s.67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act will
serve to undermine the authority of First Nations over their citizenship and identities. Although
there was no mention within the McIvor decision of the necessity to amend band membership
lists, clause 3 of Bill C-3 seeks to add additional members with no promise of additional funding
to First Nations to cover those new members. This will impose an additional burden of unknown
magnitude on already impoverished First Nations. Added to this, those First Nations controlling
their own membership lists will be, in June 2011, subject to legal challenges under the Canadian
Human Rights Act for decisions relating to their membership codes.


I strongly urge you to withdraw Bill C-3 and Bill S-4 in the spirit of reconciliation.



                                                                                                      2
Sincerely,




Chief _______


cc:    Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief
       Shawn Atleo, National Chief, Assembly of First Nations
       John Duncan, Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
       Michael Ignatieff, Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada
       Jack Layton, Leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada
       Gilles Duceppe, Leader of the Bloc Quebecois




                                                                     3
4