Deal reached?

Page 1

First Nations leaders may have hit on an agreement that works for them regarding the controversial draft First Nations Fiscal Institutions act. The question now is whether the minister is willing to listen.

At the end of a two-day special chiefs' assembly on Nov. 20, an "accommodation" resolution was passed that called on Indian Affairs Minister Robert Nault to have his officials re-write the legislation so it would apply only to First Nations that want it. That formula was previously employed by the minister when the First Nations Lands Management Act was brought into force.

Alistair Mullin, the minister's communications chief, told Windspeaker the re-write doesn't seem likely to happen. He said the minister didn't believe the approximately 100 chiefs in attendance constituted a large enough number to convince him a majority of chiefs across the country want him to revisit a piece of legislation that was scheduled to be introduced for first reading the following week.

Mullin said First Nations leaders who want to change the bill can make a presentation to the standing committee on Aboriginal affairs after the bill received first reading.

Don Kelly, AFN spokesman, said there were a total of 136 voting delegates at the assembly, including proxies. The Assembly of First Nations is comprised of 633 First Nations.

Events at the assembly were relayed to this publication by phone by a number of political sources who did not want to be named.

The accommodation resolution was passed late on the second day of the two-day gathering. That was after the chiefs approved another resolution that morning that rejected the national draft legislation as it is now written, an AFN source said.

The motion calling for "accommodation and respect for our diversity" was moved by Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs president Stewart Phillip and seconded by Six Nations of the Grand River Chief Roberta Jamieson, both central players in a faction of chiefs called the implementation committee.

"We're not going to get in the way of any First Nations that want to pursue the legislation as it is. The chiefs simply don't want a piece of national legislation created for it. They want something like the First Nations Lands Management Act, written specifically for the First Nations that want to sign on to it," is the way the source summed up the resolution.

Another source said the chiefs committee on fiscal relations had already responded to some of the criticisms levied by the implementation committee as a gesture of good faith, agreeing to put in a non-derogation clause and strengthening the preamble in the draft bill to accommodate First Nations that had concerns.

The relatively peaceful solution came after the two sides-those for and those against the creation of four fiscal institutions-had engaged in a number of spirited and even occasionally angry debates at a series of meetings during the last 18 months. The chiefs who support the fiscal institutions insist this is a First Nation-driven process that was initiated by First Nations technicians long before the First Nations governance initiative was conceived. The side that opposes the draft bill believes it is an assault on basic Aboriginal rights.

While the chiefs-in-assembly have rejected Nault's First Nations governance initiative, chiefs in favor of the fiscal institutions say their act is not part of governance. The fight has been over whether they can convince a majority of the chiefs on that point. Nault didn't make that task any easier when he stated that fiscal institutions were part of governance. But one AFN source said that's not necessarily the case.

"The minister is tying this in with his governance package. Well, this pre-dates the minister. So he's trying to take credit and all he's doing is doing more harm than good," the source said.