We saw in the previous chapter that Indians
To understand the origin of this particularity, we have to go back to the Conquest, at which time the British Crown wanted to ally itself with Indians, given their importance on a military and strategic level. In an official document, the Royal Proclamation of 1763, the King affirmed his desire to ensure the “protection” of the “Nations
However, by the time the Government of Canada adopted its first Indian Act in 1876, a shift had clearly occurred in the administration of Indian affairs. These “nations and tribes” whose “protection” had to be assured would be placed under the guardianship
Within the context of the Indian Act, the concept of guardianship takes on a unique meaning as it applies not only to individuals but also to entire communities. The lawyer Renée Dupuis, author of a book on First Nations issues in Canada, summarizes this guardianship regime well: “Revised in 1951, the federal Act clearly constitutes a regime of guardianship of Indians (both individually and collectively) and of the lands reserved for them. Actually, the Indians have a status equivalent to that of a minor child, since they are subject to the control of the government, which has the authority to make decisions on their behalf. All aspects of the lives of individuals and communities are supervised, from an Indian’s birth to his death, from the creation of a band to the cessation of a reserve.”
Note that several First Nations in Canada, including the Cree and Naskapi nations in Québec, are no longer subject to the Indian Act.
The lawyer Renée Dupuis, author of a book on First Nations
Thus, a person might say that they’re from the Naskapi First Nation of Kawawachikamach, or the Atikamekw First Nation of Manawan, or the Mohawk First Nation of Akwesasne, etc., identifying both the nation to which they belong and their place of origin or residence.
Revised in 1951, the federal Act clearly constitutes a regime of guardianship of Indians (both individually and collectively) and of the lands reserved for them. Actually, the Indians have a status equivalent to that of a minor child, since they are subject to the control of the government, which has the authority to make decisions on their behalf. All aspects of the lives of individuals and communities are supervised, from an Indian’s birth to his death, from the creation of a band to the cessation of a reserve. Responsible for this regime on behalf of the government, the Minister of Indian Affairs holds all powers in this regard. The guardianship regime determines Indian status, as well as band membership, the political and administrative structure, reserve management, tax exemptions, and financial administration, while making Indians wards of the State.
Up to 1985, the renunciation of Indian identity was the price to be paid for acquiring all the attributes of citizenship. The Act provided that an Indian or even an entire Indian community
The enfranchisement clause was removed from the Indian Act in 1985.
Despite amendments made in 1985 and a government policy advocating greater autonomy for First Nations, the Indian Act is still in force. And it is wrongly perceived to be a regime of privileges that exists to the detriment of Non-Aboriginal society.
The So-Called “Equality” Granted by the 1969 White Paper
In 1969, Jean Chrétien, who was then Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development under the Pierre Elliott Trudeau government, released the Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy. This White Paper was unanimously rejected, and it led to the unprecedented mobilization of all Aboriginal organizations throughout Canada.
According to the authors of the document, the “just society” promised by the Liberal government required that federal guardianship be abolished. In return, the Liberal government would make all citizens equal and terminate special status for Aboriginal people, as attested by the following two extracts from the White Paper:
This Government believes in equality. It believes that all men and women have equal rights. It is determined that all shall be treated fairly and that no one shall be shut out of Canadian life, and especially that no one shall be shut out because of his race.
[…] In the long term, removal of the reference in the constitution would be necessary to end the legal distinction between Indians and other Canadians. In the short term, repeal of the Indian Act and enactment of transitional legislation to ensure the orderly management of Indian land would do much to mitigate the problem.
Generous in appearance, this proposal of equality instilled anger and indignation. The reaction was all the stronger given that in the previous year many Aboriginal leaders had agreed to participate in provincial “advisory committees” formed by the Department of Indian Affairs. The response of the Aboriginal groups was immediate and virulent. An Aboriginal leader from Alberta, Harold Cardinal, immediately responded with the publication of a book that has since become well-known: The Unjust Society. The Tragedy of Canada’s Indians. From the first page, the author affirmed that, once again, Canada’s First Nations had been betrayed by a program that offered nothing less than cultural genocide. The policy presented in June 1969 was a thinly veiled program of extermination by way of enfranchisement. Not mincing his words, Cardinal added that in order to survive, an Aboriginal person had to become a good little white person with dark skin. The author went on to affirm that even though Americans living to the south had invented the adage “The only good Indian is a dead Indian,” Canadians were prepared to modify the expression slightly to “The only good Indian is a non-Indian” (Cardinal 1969).
A little further on, Cardinal underlined the strange resemblance between the White Paper’s proposal and the “policy of termination” espoused by the United States in the early 1950s. That policy, established by the Eisenhower government, had disastrous results, in particular on Aboriginal lands, and was eventually abandoned (ibid.).
In June 1970, the Indian chiefs of Alberta responded in turn by releasing their Red Paper, entitled Citizens Plus, at a meeting in Ottawa with Prime Minister Trudeau and the Minister of Indian Affairs (standing, right, in photograph). The chiefs reiterated on their behalf one of the principal recommendations of the Hawthorn–Tremblay report, published in 1966. In their investigation of the situation of Canada’s Indians, the authors of the report had recommended that “Indians should be regarded as ‘citizens plus’; in addition to the normal rights and duties of citizenship, Indians possess certain additional rights as charter members of the Canadian community” (Hawthorn and Tremblay 1966, 1: 13).
The signatories of the Red Paper were especially concerned because they represented nations that had signed treaties in 1876, 1877 and 1899. This was the perfect opportunity to remind the government of the solemn promises expressed by the representatives of the Crown during the negotiation of these agreements. The treaty
In Canada, there are two types of treaties with Indigenous peoples: peace and friendship treaties, and land treaties, i.e., those specifically dealing with land and land titles.
The government’s objective with land treaties was to remove obstacles to colonization and to encourage First Nations members to abandon their lands and lifestyles and assimilate.
The policy proposed in the White Paper was eventually abandoned. One of the positive consequences of the whole affair was the development and consolidation of Aboriginal political organizations in each of the provinces and throughout Canada. In 1970, the National Indian Brotherhood was established. In 1980, it would become the Assembly of First Nations, at the time of discussions pertaining to the patriation of the Canadian Constitution. The work of these new organizations paid off. In 1982, the Canadian Parliament adopted constitutional provisions designed to better protect the fundamental rights of Aboriginal peoples
There are 11 Aboriginal nations recognized in Québec: Abenaki (Waban-Aki), Algonquin (Anishinabeg), Atikamekw Nehirowisiwok, Cree (Eeyou), Huron-Wendat, Inuit, Maliseet (Wolastoqiyik), Mi’gmaq (Micmac), Mohawk (Kanien’kehá:ka), Innu (Montagnais) and Naskapi. Across Canada, there are nearly sixty Aboriginal nations.