We pay while Indians live in luxury

[Riverwind]

not because I'm trying to be politically correct, but because it is derogatory.

Then why is the law governing Indians in Canada still called the "Indian Act"? http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/I-5/

Why is there a government department called "Indian and Northern Affairs? http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ch/rcap/sg/sg25_e.html

Why would the government run an "Indian and Inuit Art Centre Acquisition Program 2007-2008"? http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/art/ap07-08_e.html

Indian is accepted as a neutral term in the language today. Inisting it is 'derogatory' is an exercise in political correctness.

Edited April 11, 2008 by Riverwind

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I have had enough political correctness. It is time to call a spade a spade. The people that call themselves First Nations need to be dealt with. All land claims need to be settled immediately, and an end to this foolish legal wrangling.

To that end, I will suggest that all funding for First Nations be eliminated pending the court decisions on land claims. Any band, nation or tribe that decides to pay taxes and receive the benefits of citizenship must be allowed to do so. All others should be granted self government and have the right to self determination. All mineral rights should revert to the Government of Canada where self government is not desired.

There, and end that is fair and reasonable. Get a freaking job and support yourselves like everyone else, or choose to live in grass huts and worship the sun if you want. You can't have it both ways. Either the First Nations want to preserve their heritage, and desire to keep their own language;hunt and fish while living without central heating and plumbing or they don't. If they desire to live under our terms in our society they are free to do so, but then they will be required to live like us and pay taxes like us. They will only be allowed to hunt and fish like us.

[Who's Doing What?]

I have had enough political correctness. It is time to call a spade a spade. The people that call themselves First Nations need to be dealt with. All land claims need to be settled immediately, and an end to this foolish legal wrangling.

To that end, I will suggest that all funding for First Nations be eliminated pending the court decisions on land claims. Any band, nation or tribe that decides to pay taxes and receive the benefits of citizenship must be allowed to do so. All others should be granted self government and have the right to self determination. All mineral rights should revert to the Government of Canada where self government is not desired.

There, and end that is fair and reasonable. Get a freaking job and support yourselves like everyone else, or choose to live in grass huts and worship the sun if you want. You can't have it both ways. Either the First Nations want to preserve their heritage, and desire to keep their own language;hunt and fish while living without central heating and plumbing or they don't. If they desire to live under our terms in our society they are free to do so, but then they will be required to live like us and pay taxes like us. They will only be allowed to hunt and fish like us.

I second this proposal.

Can we start a petition or something?

[charter.rights]

I second this proposal.

Can we start a petition or something?

Not including any lands claims now under way or in the future, Canada owes Six Nations over $1 trillion dollars in a trust fund Canada holds on behalf of the Six Nations. The interest alone on that equals $3.5 billion per year based on Indian Affairs posted interest rates. How do you suppose we will pay that back?

Considering that there are other First Nations with trusts accounts and lands claims, how do you think we would manage?. Or do you merely suggest that we ignore our obligations and steal that money for our own use?

The underlying title to all lands follows this simple line:

Land deeds (which are nothing but an indication of possession - we don't truly "own" the land)

Municipal proprietorship.

Crown interest

Aboriginal title.

At the end of the day we owe them for being able to use the lands and resources which we profit from. I know that many of you will try to deny we are indebted to First Nations, but the Crown and Canada recognize the reality that we do, and that is why as the supreme law of Canada, aboriginal rights are protected above all else.

[myata]

At the end of the day we owe them for being able to use the lands and resources which we profit from. I know that many of you will try to deny we are indebted to First Nations, but the Crown and Canada recognize the reality that we do, and that is why as the supreme law of Canada, aboriginal rights are protected above all else.

Well what about the benefits of tax free citizenship that's been going on for quite awhile now? In my ignorance, I thought one (the free benefits) was supposed to pay for the other (right to use the land)? Wasn't that the essence of the deal? And now, with those mega claims (Edmonton; Missisauga) it appears that some of us want it both ways; i.e the land, especially after it's been tilled and cultivated for a few generations (see below); AND the cash, free services, social assistance, yada, yada.

(BTW: while pricing the land shouldn't one take the value of x-00 years ago, when it was barren and barely sustaining spare populations, and not today's value, after it's been built up, enriched and cultivated by many generations of people who worked it? Unless of course, it was written into a legal contract, in which case it's a legal obligation that must be observed.)

I kind of agree that Jarry's idea should be the long term direction of this whole business; ie no tax free paradise forever... at one time, as in real life, one's expected to "graduate"; and the graduation can be either, full and responsible citizenship, with all the rights, and obligations, of a regular normal citizen; or independent and self sustained life whatever way on own territory and understandably, with no handouts (other than regular international aid through normal international channels);

I agree that it's in all likelihood a long and ternuous process and won't discount any obstacles including those of financial nature that you described; but at some point this should be stated clear and unequivokely, that eventually there will be no two sorts of citizens, discriminated by ethnicity.

[charter.rights]

Well what about the benefits of tax free citizenship that's been going on for quite awhile now? In my ignorance, I thought one (the free benefits) was supposed to pay for the other (right to use the land)? Wasn't that the essence of the deal? And now, with those mega claims (Edmonton; Missisauga) it appears that some of us want it both ways; i.e the land, especially after it's been tilled and cultivated for a few generations (see below); AND the cash, free services, social assistance, yada, yada.

(BTW: while pricing the land shouldn't one take the value of x-00 years ago, when it was barren and barely sustaining spare populations, and not today's value, after it's been built up, enriched and cultivated by many generations of people who worked it? Unless of course, it was written into a legal contract, in which case it's a legal obligation that must be observed.)

I kind of agree that Jarry's idea should be the long term direction of this whole business; ie no tax free paradise forever... at one time, as in real life, one's expected to "graduate"; and the graduation can be either, full and responsible citizenship, with all the rights, and obligations, of a regular normal citizen; or independent and self sustained life whatever way on own territory and understandably, with no handouts (other than regular international aid through normal international channels);

I agree that it's in all likelihood a long and ternuous process and won't discount any obstacles including those of financial nature that you described; but at some point this should be stated clear and unequivokely, that eventually there will be no two sorts of citizens, discriminated by ethnicity.

Yes you aren't uptodate on the real costs....

The tax free status of some First Nations "individuals" is a result of their "First Nation" status, meaning that they do not fall under the Crown and are exempt from purchases on the reserve (or used on the reserve). In all other cases natives pay taxes just like you and I. In another thread we already determined that Six Nations industries paid over $120 million in excise taxes alone last year and their return in federal transfers was about $36 million. No matter how you swing it, they do not receive nearly as much as they put out.

The cost of land that is determined through negotiations has nothing to do with the improvements made to the land since the sale. The case in point is the Six Nation lands that were flooded for the Welland Canal, in Ontario. The land value of the day was about $13 900 that was equal to what other land owners and farmers received for their land. Since that original amount was never paid to Six Nations, the value is compounded forward, using Indian Affairs set interest rates and today that "fund" is worth over $1 million. The longer we wait to pay off our debts the more we will have to pay. That is a simple economic solution that is known to everyone who holds a loan, or a mortgage.

There have been no handouts to First Nations, ever. The money that is transferred to them from the federal reserves doesn't even dent the interest on the monies that we owe them. Our fiduciary responsibility is a debt that we owe because we borrowed their lands and displaced them in order to have access to land for exploration, ressource extraction and development. However, the fact that most Canadians are ignorant of this relationship, does not negate the debt that we actually owe them.

If we truly want "equality" then they first thing we have to do is to pay them what we owe them in full, let them manage their own accounts and then ask them if they want to join us. I highly suspect that with that much money and power there will be many of us wanting to join them as they prosper not only in what we pay them back for their trusts, but also for the lands that they have an absolute claim to that we occupied against the law.

[charter.rights]

I should add that since Parliament has accepted the United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples, it will further obligate us towards resolving lands claims and trust misappropriations. It is no longer the Crown that holds that responsibility but all of us through our democratically elected Parliament.

[myata]

If we truly want "equality" then they first thing we have to do is to pay them what we owe them in full, let them manage their own accounts and then ask them if they want to join us. I highly suspect that with that much money and power there will be many of us wanting to join them as they prosper not only in what we pay them back for their trusts, but also for the lands that they have an absolute claim to that we occupied against the law.

As I said, the past debts must be paid, no question about that. The issue is that as citizens we all contribute to the common benefits we receive. Benefits like health, education, housing, infrastructure, etc, etc, yada yada, surely your 36 million figure doesn't account for a drop of that? Eventually, and certainly after all past debts are paid, there should be no exceptions from this rule; it's just doesn't work if some of are entitled to use, while others have to contribute. BTW what's the situation with income tax? Every citizen have to pay it, for sure?

That why Jerry's idea carries some sense with me: those who don't want to contribute should be free to pursue their interests outside, but certainly without counting on "free" services by Canada; and those who are "in" will have all rights, but also, responsibilities of a regular citizen.

[White Doors]

What exactly do you mean by equal?

My take, is that we are equal under the law and under the charter. As we are now, we are not.

That is racist irrespective of any land ownership or not.

It is a wrong that needs to be changed.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Like I said before, enough of the political correctness, deal with the situation. That simple fact is that there are outstanding land claims, they need to be resolved. The simple fact is that the natives have decided they want self government, they should have it if they want it. The simple fact is that it is costing the government of Canada and therefore the citizens of Canada billions of dollars a year the run the Indian and Northern Affairs Department, we need to realize that this is a bullshit department and abolish it immediately and eliminate that portion of budget resources dedicated to it. It is a bottomless money pit that provides no benefit to citizens at all.

All First nations that want to receive any benefit from the Government of Canada need to start paying taxes, period. All First nations lands occupied by tax paying citizens must revert their mineral resources to the Federal Government. All First nations desiring self government can pay there way as any other nation on this earth must do. Wake up people, this is serious business.

For now, they way to begin to deal with the problem each band, group tribe must be polled to determine their chosen status as either citizens of Canada or as citizens of the First Nations. Canadian citizens have all the benefits of citizenship, First Nations citizens have all the benefits that they can provide for their own citizens at their own expense.

I say these things not to infuriate the natives but to impress upon all the urgency of the situation and the reality of the circumstances. The time has come to grow up and make some decisions, and that applies to both groups. We have treated the First Nations people like children for far to long, its time to treat them like adults. We need to force the decision making process into a resolution instead of this incessant bickering which serves no purpose to the people of Canada.

[gc1765]

Then why is the law governing Indians in Canada still called the "Indian Act"? http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/I-5/

Why is there a government department called "Indian and Northern Affairs? http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ch/rcap/sg/sg25_e.html

Why would the government run an "Indian and Inuit Art Centre Acquisition Program 2007-2008"? http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/art/ap07-08_e.html

Indian is accepted as a neutral term in the language today. Inisting it is 'derogatory' is an exercise in political correctness.

Just because the government does something, does not mean that it's OK.

[Drea]

In 1492 an idiot thought he sailed to India... and he called the natives "Indians".

He was wrong.

Indians are people who come from or reside in India. A friend of mine from India laughed and said "But I'm not from Eastern India!".

[Jerry J. Fortin]

There are no shortages of idiots, then or now. Witness the state of affairs we now find ourselves in. Fools have been acting as our representatives for many years and it is time to act in the interests of all.

End the foolishness and solve the problem.

[Riverwind]

Just because the government does something, does not mean that it's OK.

Our government is the epitome of political correctness and would have changed the names of the department and programs if there was any basis to your claim that the term 'indian' is widely recognized as derogatory term. Edited April 11, 2008 by Riverwind

[charter.rights]

Like I said before, enough of the political correctness, deal with the situation. That simple fact is that there are outstanding land claims, they need to be resolved. The simple fact is that the natives have decided they want self government, they should have it if they want it. The simple fact is that it is costing the government of Canada and therefore the citizens of Canada billions of dollars a year the run the Indian and Northern Affairs Department, we need to realize that this is a bullshit department and abolish it immediately and eliminate that portion of budget resources dedicated to it. It is a bottomless money pit that provides no benefit to citizens at all.

All First nations that want to receive any benefit from the Government of Canada need to start paying taxes, period. All First nations lands occupied by tax paying citizens must revert their mineral resources to the Federal Government. All First nations desiring self government can pay there way as any other nation on this earth must do. Wake up people, this is serious business.

For now, they way to begin to deal with the problem each band, group tribe must be polled to determine their chosen status as either citizens of Canada or as citizens of the First Nations. Canadian citizens have all the benefits of citizenship, First Nations citizens have all the benefits that they can provide for their own citizens at their own expense.

I say these things not to infuriate the natives but to impress upon all the urgency of the situation and the reality of the circumstances. The time has come to grow up and make some decisions, and that applies to both groups. We have treated the First Nations people like children for far to long, its time to treat them like adults. We need to force the decision making process into a resolution instead of this incessant bickering which serves no purpose to the people of Canada.

A noble epistle. But that is not reality.

Reality is:

80% of Canadian territory has not been ceded. That means that the majority of the natural resources and timber in which we support our economy doesn't belong to us. It belongs to native people.

The misplaced trusts and unpaid treaty payments equal in the $10 trillions. Paying off natives just for their trusts would most certainly put a strain on our government and our economy. When we add the loss due to straightening up with the natives over lands claims, we become bankrupt.

For the most part First Nations, supported by a number of Supreme Court decisions, want consultation and accommodation. If we truly want a relationship that is built on equality and trust we must accept that legal responsibility and risk that development will no longer be a free-for-all. If we properly consulted with them it would be likely that they want the same things the average citizen wants but are often over-ruled by municipal planning authorities and big corporate interests.

Are we willing, yet...to give up our authority over everything that isn't ours and get out of the way of First Nations rights over their lands? The UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights says we must. If not, then are we willing to endure escalating protests evictions and reclamations, while First Nations recover what we all know to be theirs and have a moral and legal right to collect?

It isn't so easy. Our only hope is negotiation - honest and truthful face to face talking. The problem is that our government bureaucrats have proven themselves repeatedly to be neither truthful or honest in dealings with First Nations. Our problem legally and morally is that our side of the negotiations is at a deficit and it is pretty hard to maintain our present standard of living when natives hold the upper hand. The point is we are going to lose ~something~, the weight of which depends on how willing we are to give up our power and money to end up with ~anything~.

We can begin by at least supporting them "equally". As it stands First Nation communities are funded at less than 10% of our urban communities. Their water, social systems and infrastructure is crumbling or non-existent. At least we owe them that to prove that we are sincere about our obligations.

[Riverwind]

80% of Canadian territory has not been ceded. That means that the majority of the natural resources and timber in which we support our economy doesn't belong to us. It belongs to native people.

The supreme court has made it clear time and time again that it wants fair compromise that reconciles the rights of the immigrants from 10000+ years ago with the rights of the more recent immigrants. A fair compromise does not include handing over anything close to 80% of the natural resources to a small minority of the population. The deadlock in the negotiation right now is a result of unrealistic expectations on the part of many native activist groups.

[myata]

Reality is:

80% of Canadian territory has not been ceded. That means that the majority of the natural resources and timber in which we support our economy doesn't belong to us. It belongs to native people.

That's a bit of a jump of logic, isn't it? Just because it wasn't ceded doesn't mean it belongs to native people outright. What if there was nobody who could cede it, for example? Any claim to the land that wasn't ceded must be proven, and with more than songs and legends. E.g scientists routinely do arheological searches; if land is claimed, it should bear some evidence that it was actually used.

We can begin by at least supporting them "equally". As it stands First Nation communities are funded at less than 10% of our urban communities. Their water, social systems and infrastructure is crumbling or non-existent. At least we owe them that to prove that we are sincere about our obligations.

However, its "we", not some abstract government who's paying for our urban communities; with our taxes; and I don't see, in the principle of things, why it should be different with any other communities?

[noahbody]

The misplaced trusts and unpaid treaty payments equal in the $10 trillions. Paying off natives just for their trusts would most certainly put a strain on our government and our economy. When we add the loss due to straightening up with the natives over lands claims, we become bankrupt.

$10 trillions? Citation please.

[AngusThermopyle]

Reality is:

80% of Canadian territory has not been ceded.

Could you show me a citation or perhaps the methodology you used to arrive at this figure?

[charter.rights]

That's a bit of a jump of logic, isn't it? Just because it wasn't ceded doesn't mean it belongs to native people outright.

This is the law:

Royal Proclamation 1763

And We do hereby strictly forbid, on Pain of our Displeasure, all our loving Subjects from making any Purchases or Settlements whatever, or taking Possession of any of the Lands above reserved. without our especial leave and Licence for that Purpose first obtained.

And. We do further strictly enjoin and require all Persons whatever who have either wilfully or inadvertently seated themselves upon any Lands within the Countries above described. or upon any other Lands which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us, are still reserved to the said Indians as aforesaid, forthwith to remove themselves from such Settlements.

Land not ceded belongs to the First Nations and it between them to determine which territory is under their jurisdiction.

[charter.rights]

$10 trillions? Citation please.

I'm speculating using the 1$ Trillion value of the 6 Nations' trust and projecting that the remaining 250 nations in Canada are owed in the billions each.... It is a discussion not a frigging court case....

[AngusThermopyle]

I'm speculating

Yes, you do that a lot, then try to pass it off as fact. Pretty much everything you post is based on that razor sharp methodology.

[JCAN]

I agree. with AngusThermopyle

Most of this stuff is being dug up from before Canada itself was ruled by Canadians and not the British empire. Listening to the bickering over 200yr old documents I think I know why they left it all behind. If someone has stats on just what the king sold or had given away I would like to see them because from the looks of the above document the King was saying they could keep what he did not want and I am sure he wanted a lot.

The fact is if the British came to Canada in the 1800's the natives would get nothing I believe that what they are asking for is less about history and more about greed.

I am quite sure the original treaties did not promise them all the benefits the are getting now, these came about by later revisions yet if there is any talk about revisions other than what they want there is an uproar.

I have heard that in traditional native believe the idea is prevalent that know one can own the land yet they claim too, so where does the interest in maintaining culture start, and financial gain begin. Because if this is about financial gain then we need to treat this like a business deal.

(just some food for thought)

But I digress the fact is much has changed since the time our ancestors arrived here and people need to start taking that into account this is not the same world it was when these original documents were written some things just do not apply. there has been a lot of development done to this country by many different people and you can not apply inflation of that scale to the original treaty.

Our government did not sign that paper a King did we are no longer a Monarchy things change and all must accept that.

[charter.rights]

I agree. with AngusThermopyle

Most of this stuff is being dug up from before Canada itself was ruled by Canadians and not the British empire. Listening to the bickering over 200yr old documents I think I know why they left it all behind. If someone has stats on just what the king sold or had given away I would like to see them because from the looks of the above document the King was saying they could keep what he did not want and I am sure he wanted a lot.

The fact is if the British came to Canada in the 1800's the natives would get nothing I believe that what they are asking for is less about history and more about greed.

I am quite sure the original treaties did not promise them all the benefits the are getting now, these came about by later revisions yet if there is any talk about revisions other than what they want there is an uproar.

I have heard that in traditional native believe the idea is prevalent that know one can own the land yet they claim too, so where does the interest in maintaining culture start, and financial gain begin. Because if this is about financial gain then we need to treat this like a business deal.

(just some food for thought)

But I digress the fact is much has changed since the time our ancestors arrived here and people need to start taking that into account this is not the same world it was when these original documents were written some things just do not apply. there has been a lot of development done to this country by many different people and you can not apply inflation of that scale to the original treaty.

Our government did not sign that paper a King did we are no longer a Monarchy things change and all must accept that.

Wrong. The Royal Proclamation 1763 was re-affirmed in the Constitution Act 1982. It is not "history" but current and applicable law today.

Treaties were never revised.

Land rights are entrenched in the Constitution.

All the written and oral agreements made 200 years ago still apply today. That is the law.

[charter.rights]

Yes, you do that a lot, then try to pass it off as fact. Pretty much everything you post is based on that razor sharp methodology.

I read a lot and most of the texts are not available for the lazy armchair critics who want links for everything.

I guess being razor sharp is much better than your dull thuggery. Just get over yourself already. If you don't like the discussion then move on but stop trying to troll and take it off topic. You do that a lot.