 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
|
December 2002 FNFSMA Fact Sheets |
|
1. Proponents of the FNFSMA have accused First Nation opponents of applying a double standard. First Nations have generally not opposed other pieces of federal legislation dealing with particular First Nations, such as the Nishga and Quebec Cree statutes. Why should they be opposed to the FNFSMA, which is clearly supported by some First Nations, albeit a minority across Canada? With respect, this criticism is unfair, for the reasons stated below. 2. The FNFSMA is not localized legislation like the statutes dealing with the Nishga and the Cree. The Bill is national legislation and it affects all First Nations. The Statistical Institute has access to all First Nation data. The Bill stands for the proposition that the inherent right to self-government does not include jurisdiction over local financial management and revenue collection. Laws in relation to those subject matters can only be passed pursuant to federal delegation. This is a very damaging position and it affects the inherent right of all First Nations, whether they opt in or not. 3. As the FNFSMA affects all First Nations, all have the right to express their position. It is not like First Nations intervening in relation to localized legislation, like the Nishga and Cree statutes. This is national legislation with a national effect. All First Nations have the right to decide if they support or reject the Bill. 4. The proponents of the Bill decided to develop a national, as opposed to a localized, model. They cannot avoid reasonable scrutiny of the Bill based on the assertion that it is opt-in. This is national legislation and it requires national support to proceed. If that national support cannot be secured at the Special Assembly in Ottawa, the proponents of the Bill should withdraw it for the time being. Deferral will permit the negotiation of a more comprehensive approach to the bilateral fiscal relationship. It will also permit First Nations to focus their attention on the attempt by INAC to ram through the FNGA. |
|
|
|