FACT SHEET #7
First Nations Are Not Rejecting Everything

1. First Nations have been criticized for opposing everything. This accusation has been made by INAC in defence of the FNGA and by some in defence of the FNFSMA. The point seems to be that First Nations should be more positive and let the FNFSMA go through.

2. Just because First Nations oppose the FNGA, they should not be pressured to be more up-beat about the FNFSMA. The fact is that both Bills are key components of a “suite” of legislation being promoted by INAC. They both promote the financial micro-management of First Nations and the collection of local taxes and own source revenue. Both Bills let the federal government off the hook in terms of its fiscal responsibilities to First Nations. Therefore, it is completely rational to be critical of both the FNGA and the FNFSMA.

3. The fact that the FNFSMA is supported by a few First Nations is acknowledged. The FNFSMA is entitled to respectful consideration. This has been the case. The fiscal institutions resolution at the Halifax Assembly in 2001 was invalid; however, the proponents were allowed to continue, as long as they brought any draft Bill back to an Assembly for decision making. The proponents have only very reluctantly honoured this undertaking. The limited First Nation support for the Bill entails respectful consideration, not blind acceptance. First Nations are still entitled to exercise due diligence and decide if the Bill is a good or bad thing.

4. In 1988 First Nations generally supported the Kamloops amendments to sec. 83 of the Indian Act. There was a recognition of the special taxation problems faced by BC First Nations. First Nations have not interfered with localized statutory arrangements (egs. Nishga and the Quebec Cree). So, it is not fair to say that First Nations are opposed to all legislative measures.

5. Presenting the Bill as a “fait accompli” that First Nations must accept is not appropriate. That is what INAC is doing with the FNGA.