Senate committee on Aboriginal Peoples reviewing Indian Act with meetings with First Nations
Opinions of First Nations sought in review of Indian Act
May 25, 2009
The standing Senate committee on Aboriginal Peoples is holding public hearings in Winnipeg and Dauphin this week.
It is hearing from First Nations peoples on issues such as self-governance, political accountability and election reform.
Senator Gerry St. Germain, originally from the Winnipeg neighbourhood of St. Boniface, said many First Nations organizations want radical reforms to the Indian Act.
He expects they'll be raising concerns about how elections are carried out under the act, and whether the present two-year fixed term for chiefs and council should continue.
He also expects some people will want to get rid of the act altogether, and start from scratch.
"I think the Indian Act is one of the major stumbling blocks that First Nations have to deal with. [It is] cumbersome, slow, and impedes their ability to do things economically and in various other areas," he said.
Germain is optimistic the federal government will take note of the recommendations put forward by the committee.
It will be months, possibly a year, before a final report is presented to the government. The committee will spend the summer and fall crossing the country, holding the public hearings and taking the recommendations from First Nations.
Recent studies by the committee have also addressed issues ranging from safe drinking water for First Nations to the implementation of modern treaties.
"Our only hope is that the government, whoever is in government, reacts the way the present government has [in accepting other recommendations]. They virtually mirrored the report in their legislation and in safe drinking water. Our recommendations were taken very seriously," said Germain.
The committee was in Winnipeg Monday morning, listening to presentations from First Nations organizations. It will travel to Dauphin later in the week.
++++++
In response to this article about the review of the Indian Act, Ernest Chookomolin wrote the following two very important messages from his perspective. He gave his permission to share these with everyone with this KNEWS iteam. Brian
From: Ernest Chookomolin [mailto:pe.chkmln@yahoo.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: The Indian Act
Good afternoon! Mr.Beaton,
Sure go on ahead and post it along with the story of the senate committee if you like.
I recently read a story in The Wawatay Newspaper. The contents of that story is definitely a concern of what it would mean for one like me.
As I stated the last time I sent you an e-mail I would write back.
My father told me of the how the land was passed from generation to generation.
He started with his father's
Grandfather (1)
Grandfather (2) of Grandfather (1)
Grandfather (3) of Grandfather (2)
Grandfather (4) of Grandfather (3)
Grandfather (5) of Grandfather (4)
Grandfather (6) of Grandfather (5)
He told me it was done like this with the eldest son always to succeed their father. He also told me our family has been doing this for a lot longer than this. The land belonged to a different branch of the Chookomolin Family. He said they had died off and when unforeseen circumstances in life such as what had happened to this other branch happens a successor is chosen with the land always belonging in the Chookomolin Family.
This is why I was kind of concerned with the story I had read in Wawatay's newspaper. Chiefs and Councillors are having meetings, setting up committees to decide how these lands and the resources these lands have should be governed.
I, my father and my grandfather never have had any prior notification of any sort of we no longer have any say in the matter.
One example I would like to share is the fishing camps being run on Chookomolin Traditional Territory.
My grandfather was asked by his son if he could run a fishing camp. No lands was exchanged by the two. Only permission was granted under the condition it would used for the sustanence of his family.
My grandfather was then asked by his younger brother if he could run a fishing camp. Again no lands was exchange by the two. Under the same condition he had mentioned to his son, permission was granted.
My grand father had stated to my father that on;ly two fishing camps are to be allowed, no more. Now, another fishing camp is being run and the person or persons running this fishing camp just do not have the permission of this bloodline I represent and the person or persons do not have the Chookomolin last name. They have lands of their own. Most of the families have lands of their own or traditional territory if you will.
This is where my concerns are. Just who do these Chiefs represent? Themselves?
They have never given me, my father or my grandfather any information of any kind as to how they themselves were going to decide the future of these lands.
I have plans with my traditional territory.
One has to do with making a wildlife management plan of my own. And if they are as traditional as they claim to be, they would have respect for it should they not?
Today's younger generation are just to trigger happy. They seem to believe what makes them great hunters are the numbers of wildlife they kill rather than the fact they have had a successful hunt when they came home not empty handed.
________________________________________
From: Ernest Chookomolin [mailto:pe.chkmln@yahoo.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 9:56 AM
Subject: The Indian Act
Good morning Brian.
As real as it may be, the Indian Act is a joke. Do you know of any other Acts such as this in Canada ? Is there another race within Canada that has to put up with something as cruel as this?
What about the treaty? Is there another race within Canada being ripped off time and time again?
The English have made some assumptions about our people when they came to make this treaty with our people in the past.
The one assumption I get a giggle at is when they assumed we had chiefs. All we had was heads of families scattered out over large areas of land. The elections for chiefs came after the so called signing of their treaty. Anyways, Every family you see has their own traditional territory. They use this land for fishing, hunting, and trapping. They did not inherit these lands in the form of a trapping license issued by MNR. These lands are passed down from generation to generation. Usually the eldest son is chosen. This is why I giggle at the treaty.
Even if we had a chief back then, he would have never signed away any area of land because he knows he does not have any right to sign away lands that do not belong to him. Look at how many chiefs we have today? Are there this many signatures on the treaty? My father would talk of the treaty. He also told me we had a relative attend this meeting. I don't know his name because my father never gave me a name. This relative told stories of people being hauled off somewhere because they did not want to sign anything. Yes, our race had concerns which had to do with mining, forestry and anything which threatened to destroy the ecosystems which we have come to depend on. It's funny none of these concerns are not mentioned in anyway within the treaty.
Hey I have to go now. I'll write you another letter later on today.