Standing committee on Bill C-7 heads to Manitoba

Winnipeg and Thompson slated for public hearings

By Len Kruzenga

While previous attempts to amend the Indian Act in 1968 and then again in the late 1990s ended up in the parliamentary equivalent of a landfill site, INAC Minister Robert Nault's legislative foray appears to have an increasing sense of inevitability to it.
This even as the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs winds its way across the nation to conduct public hearings on the proposed Bill C-7 legislation, commonly referred to as the First Nations Governance Act (FNGA).

In fact, INAC appears confident that the legislation package will avoid any significant changes and has been conducting a series of technical briefings on the bill, including one in Winnipeg, only weeks before the committee was scheduled to arrive in Manitoba where it will conduct two days of hearings-one in Winnipeg and one in Thompson.

While careful to couch the rationale for the briefing as little more than a detailed introduction to the media of the specifics of the legislation and a chance to field various media "what if" scenarios.

However, the standing committee's hearings thus far have not yielded a lot of public support for the bill as it stands, since Nault kicked off the hearings with his presentation to the committee last month. (See edited transcript of Minister Nault's presentation to the committee on Page 14)

While Nault continues to hammer home the message that the proposed legislation is a sincere attempt by the federal government to provide first nations with the legislative tools to effect the day to day administrative and political control over their communities' futures and to provide greater accountability to their people, a stream of first nations groups and leaders have appeared before the committee slamming the intent and measure of the legislation. (See edited transcripts of AFN National Chief Coon Comes presentation to the committee on Page 14)
And the hearings in Thompson on March 18 and in Winnipeg on March 19 are expected to witness a host of the province's sharpest critics of Nault take aim at the legislation.

Southern Chiefs Organization Grand Chief Margaret Swan, Peguis First Nation Chief Louis Stevenson, former Sagkeeng Chief Jerry Fontaine, and Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakinak Grand Chief Francis Flett are all slated to address the committee and are expected to deliver an unequivocal rebuke of the proposed legislation.

Swan has been the province's most active and vocal opponent and recently took her message to Europe in an attempt to bring international pressure to bear on the federal government. She was able to address a United Nations workshop where she underscored her group's insistence that Bill C-7 is a direct threat to inherent aboriginal and treaty rights as protected under the Canadian Constitution.
Swan's trip, estimated to have cost approximately $15,000 for a party of three persons that included herself and two SCO chiefs was roundly criticized in the press as lavish.

But the combative leader quickly defended the mission as "necessary" and well within the "political advocacy responsibilities of her office."

Some standing committee members have already taken the position that the bill is inherently flawed (See NDP member Pat Martin's op-ed piece on Page 12) and are using the results of the hearings for political mileage, according to critics of the make-up of the hearings themselves.

"He Martin is trying to use the statements made thus far to discredit the legislation and increase his own and his party's political profile," fumed Andy Ross, an off-reserve college student who's been following progress on Bill C-7 closely. "The committee is stacked with those groups and individuals with some public profile and with the time and logistical support to arrange to appear before the committee, but ordinary people, the ones who this legislation will benefit the most, we're not going to be heard."

But the list of presenters isn't entirely stacked with opponents to the bill, in fact, at least one of the province's most vocal proponents will also be speaking.
First Nations Accountability Coalition member Leona Freed says she won't mince any words at the hearings and will be taking direct aim at the opponents to the bill.

"It's 100 percent clear that the majority of first nations leadership is terrified of being held accountable, of having to be responsible to the people, of the people being able to demand information and access to the administration and governance of their communities I'll be speaking on behalf of all the ordinary first nations people, who are sick and tired of their excuses, of the corruption and waste that is literally stealing the future of the ordinary man, woman and child on and off-reserve," she said.
But the composition and selection process for presentations before the committee continues to come under attack.

While such standing committees are obliged to allow any citizen or group to request to appear or make a statement the overlap and duplicity of the list of witnesses is obvious to even the most casual observer.

"Look at the list we have presentations by tribal councils, by the SCO and MKO and then by a number of chiefs who are members of both these groups. They're stacking the deck and jamming the hearings up so that ordinary people can't get their voices heard public ally," said Ross. "These people and organizations represent the same interests and people but, the appearance is that there are all these different groups and people against the bill."

And Ross also criticizes groups such as the Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) for occupying an already scarce spot on the witnesses list.

"The MCC won't be taking any independent position on the legislation. They form their positions and opinions based on what the various first nations political groups and power brokers tell them. It's the typical white liberal apologist guilt motive but, they (MCC) haven't held any hearings on the issue for ordinary first nations people to determine what our people really want.

"That's exactly why the majority of opinion expressed at the hearings thus far has been anti-FNGA it's orchestrated and stacked against the individual. Groups like the MKO, SCO, the chiefs and the MCC have the resources, time and money to apply to this effort."

Repeated calls by the Drum to Clerk of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs were not returned.