Act a threat to reserve lands

Page 1

Natives across Canada are outraged with the federal government over a controversial new land act.

Organizations opposed to the First Nations' Chartered Land Act include the Assembly of First Nations and the Union of B.C. Indian Chief. The proposed act is a direct threat to First Nations' Aboriginal and treaty land rights, opponents claim.

"The government has had a long-standing policy of termination from our point of view," B.C. union head Saul Terry said. "We wish to make it known that (the act) should not be introduced at all. It's one more nail in our coffin from a government of a genocidal nature."

The act proposed turning over management of Indian reserve lands to First Nations. Bands exercising their "inherent authority" to manage lands under the act can opt out of the land administration section of the Indian Act and adopt their own land charter.

Under the act, First Nations would develop and adopt their own land charters according to their own specific needs. The authority to manage land would include the power to grant any rights or interest in chartered land, subject to limits set by each First Nation.

Chartered lands could include any reserve or special reserve of the First Nations, or, with the consent of the Crown, and treatment entitlement land, claim settlement land or First Nation fee simple land.

The FNCL Act would not affect Aboriginal or treaty rights but the Crown would still hold legal title to the chartered lands.

Bands opting into the act would be able to find adequate funding for land development and management, said Robert Louie, Westbank First Nation chief and chairman of the First Nation's land Board.

"It would give them complete control of the land, the authority to manage the land."

The union is concerned, however, that bands seeking control and management of their own reserves risk losing their land base if they get into financial trouble.

"Land is being privatized," Terry said. "And it becomes capable of being taxed, or mortgaged, or both."

Bands could, however, protect their land base by outlining restrictions on financing in their individual charters, Louie said.

"First Nations members decide if they want that or not. They can say in the charter 'there is no risk.' They can say 'we'll do certain things, but they'll be restricted.' It all depends on the community."

But similar land charter legislation in the United States led to hopelessness for many Native groups because they mismanaged funds, Terry said. When the time came to repay loans taken out on mortgaged reservations, their lands were simply taken away.

The union is also concerned that the move to privatize reserve land would jeopardize treaty negotiations with Canadian governments.

"This is by-passing the whole process of negotiations. This is getting right down to the land base. They're fracturing the efforts of our people to negotiate the unfinished businesses of land claims."

The Coalition Against First Nations Genocide, a group of Natives from treaty and traditional territories across Canada, has also formed to fight the introduction of new legislation.

Penticton Indian band council member and coalition spokesman Stewart Phillips said the group is concerned with the legal content of the act and the way it is being introduced.

"In our view, it's being driven through quickly and without any community involvement," he said. "We never had time for bands to seek legal counsel and have discussions. Things promoted in that manner are doomed to failure."

The act has drawn a lot of fire from several other Native groups across Canada.

In March, chief Richard Maracle of the Mohawk Nation Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy registered an unofficial protest with Canada's Governor General.

The Okanagan Nation Elders also blasted the federal government for trying to undermine and extinguish Aboriginal title and rights within traditional territory."

The act is tentatively scheduled to be introduced in the House of Cmmons in June.