The Special joint Committee of the Senate and the House of Commons that considered the Indian Act between 1946 and 1948 provided a clear signal that the end was nigh. By appointing the committee, the government recognised that its policy, essentially unchanged since the 1880s, was untenable, and that it did not know what to put in its place. The minister responsible for Indian Affairs acknowledged in 1944 that 'the whole Act needs a thorough revision,' and representations from Native and sympathetic non-Native groups at war's end also supported the idea of a thorough overhaul of the legislation.

      Education occupied a more prominent role in the deliberations of the Special Joint Committee than the government expected, or perhaps wanted. What Native groups wrote and said underlined the view expressed by Joseph Dreaver, a spokesman for the Union of Saskatchewan Indians: 'Our greatest need to-day is proper education.' The numerous and forceful criticisms that the Special Joint Committee heard were directed at education in general and at residential schools in particular. In marked contrast to Indian Affairs and church views, almost all Indian representatives rejected the underlying assimilationist aim of both day and residential schools.

       Natives laid more pointed comments about residential schooling before the Special Joint Committee. A strong and repeated criticism of the custodial institutions was that they separated the children from their communities, causing anguish in both while failing to prepare the graduates for life anywhere else. A 'child who returns from a Residential school at the age of 16 or 17 is invariably unable to fit into the life of the reserve,' noted The Pas band's brief, while inadequate training in the schools and racist attitudes in Euro-Canadian society made it impossible for them to find jobs. The Indian Association of Alberta highlighted another complaint when it characterised the half-day system as 'equivalent to child labour' and rightly said that 'such practice seriously interferes with their education.' Some objected to an excessive emphasis on religious instruction in the denominational schools.