What is good about our people still being here, is not going to be, by our choice, up for discussion before a committee.

What is up for discussion should be taking place at a conference table on governance, not as supplicants, appearing before you after the fact.

First Nations of the Ojibway, Mohawk, Oneida, Delaware, Pottawatami and Mississauga Peoples are members of the Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians

I am Christopher McCormick, Grand Chief, I am a member of the Batchewana First Nation.

With me are members of the Chiefs’ Council, our governing body. Our members include eight First Nations these are:

• Batchewana First Nation of Ojibways
• Caldwell First Nation
• Delaware First Nation
• Mississaugas of the New Credit
• Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte
• Oneida Nation of the Thames
• Wahta Mohawks

The Chiefs’ Council receives its direction directly from community Members and from resolutions passed at our annual assemblies.

We are members of the Chiefs of Ontario, and I am representative on its’ Political Confederacy.

Our First Nations are members of the Assembly of First Nations.

We are here as self-governing peoples.

From time immemorial, we lived as sovereign nations in harmony with Mother Earth. Our political system is old and, with due respect, at least as democratic, if not more so, than that enjoyed by the people of Canada.

The Association of Iroquois and Allied Indian member Nations reject Canada’s continuation of colonialism. We find it insulting that the Government of Canada, assisted by this Standing Committee acting for Parliament, would continue with its colonial mentality and policies. Canada, as a colonizer, cannot presume to offer us lessons and try and impose regulations upon us.

At our last assembly, the following resolution was passed, and I read it into your record:

“Therefore be it resolved that AIAI Member Nations gathered in assembly in Oneida this 25th day of May 2002 hereby oppose and reject the proposed “First Nations Governance Act” as well as the proposed “First Nations Fiscal Institutions Act” as violations of our inherent right of self-determination and self-government.”

When we use the word “Peoples”, we use it, as defined in International Law.

Generally speaking, a People is a body of persons united by a common culture, tradition, language, institutions, territory, and that is politically organized.

Article 1 of the Montevideo convention of 1933 which is the leading international treaty on statehood (signed in Uruguay), declares that the four essential elements which define a “state” are the possession of:


I. a permanent population;

II. a defined territory;

III. a Government; and

IV. the capacity to enter into relations with other states.

First Nations have been independent sovereign Nations for thousands of years before the arrival of the Europeans. We retain our inherent right of self-government, which flows from the creator.

This right exists naturally for us as the original owners and custodians of this land. First Nations, historically and today, still meet the definition of state in the 1933 Montevideo Convention.

At the international level, Canada is a signatory to three International Covenants as standards of law and civilization which expressly support the right of all Peoples to self-determination, namely:

1) Universal Declaration of Human Rights

2) International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, s-1(2)

3) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
s-1 (2)

Our Treaties are founded on principles that recognize the supremacy of the Creator, the sacredness of the pipe and our sacred obligation as caretakers of the land. Also our Treaties were on a Nation-to-Nation basis between First Nations and representatives of the British Crown. We entered into the Treaties as free and independent Nations with our own well-defined territory, laws, governments, languages, spiritual beliefs and traditions. All the ingredients necessary for identifying fully functioning independent nations were present and we were recognized as such by various European states.

Also our forefathers incorporated the length of existence of the Treaties by a concept they understood, that is the Treaties would endure for “as long as the rivers flow, as long as the grass shall grow, as long as the sun shines...”

From this background and context, we address your mandate to receive information on the matter of Bill C-7, the First Nations Governance Act.

In addition to the rejection of Bill C-7, AIAI Chiefs Council makes the following objections:

First of all, this is not a First Nations Governance Act.

We weren’t asked if we wanted this bill;

We weren’t asked if we agreed with the content of the bill;

We were denied the right to be a part of the information gathering process this committee is undertaking;

We will not be part of the process to review the information that our Peoples have presented to this Committee;

We will not be making the final decision on what we want included in the bill; and,

Canada does not include a non-derogation clause that Bill C-7 will not abrogate or derogate from the protection provided by the Constitution Act, 1982 section 35.

We ask you, if we were to define what colonialism would look like in these modern times would Bill C-7 not be an excellent starting point?

The Supreme Court decision requires the Crown to consult with Aboriginal Peoples of Canadian legislation or policies are going to infringe on Aboriginal or Treaty Rights.

The government of Canada has a binding fiduciary obligation to First Nations which is founded in the 1763 Royal Proclamation and the pre-existing Aboriginal rights. The recognition and affirmation of Aboriginal and treaty rights in the 1982 Constitution Act is a solemn promise and the Honour of the Crown depends upon the fulfillment of those promises.

When treasury board allots the monies to the original peoples of this land it is for the betterment of our peoples and our communities. The Minister and I share something in common in this regard as both of us receive our salaries from these monies and both of us have a responsibility to work in the communities best interests.

Minister Nault has a lead fiduciary responsibility to the First Peoples’ of Canada, to act in our best interests

All Minister’s of the Crown upon entering office take an oath which in part reads as follows;

“I Robert Nault do solemnly and sincerely promise
And swear that I will truly and faithfully, and
to the best of my skill and knowledge, execute
the powers and trusts reposed in me as Minister of Indian Affairs
and Northern Development”
So help me god.

At our National assemblies on more than five occasions the Chiefs’ in assembly have passed resolutions calling for the withdrawal of Minister Nault’s Governance Bill

I would like to speak about the Indian Act which is what Bill C-7 is all about.

First, without our consent, the Federal Government made the first Indian Act in 1876. This act is a product of section 91.24 of the British North America Act of 1867. It remains a puzzlement to us where the Crown received the authority to write into the constitution what is contained in section 91.24.. which states that the Government of Canada shall have full legislative authority over “Indians” and “lands reserved for Indians” and then proceed to draft it’s own notion of “Indian Government” into an act, and then call it the “Indian Act”.

Where and when did the Ojibway, the Cree, the Mohawk, the Oneida’s etc. cease to exist as separate nations and become “Indians” under the Indian Act?

How can the Government of Canada bring forward such a derogation of our rights and our sovereignty and claim to be attempting to build a relationship with First Nations.

Bill C-7 is a contravention of the creator’s natural law which states that all mankind is created equal. The rights given the people of South Africa are being denied to us. How can the Government of Canada rationalize that?

Here in Canada, let’s examine our history. Canada has treated Quebec and First Nations in a contradictory way.

Quebec was given self-government, a partnership in confederation when it was defeated in 1759.

In contrast, First Nation Peoples who, I remind you, were allies of the British and helped form Canada are not recognized as Nations.

We were asked to offer our suggestions as to what must be done.

With all the violations against our rights as Peoples it is interesting to note. The opening statement under Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982 states: “Where as Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law. If this country believes in the supremacy of God then our rights as “Peoples” have to be recognized.

Our response: as a start amend Canada’s constitution.

What we need in this country is an amendment to the constitution which will recognize the existence of a third order of Government.

A constitution that recognizes that there are not two but three founding nations. A constitution which recognizes our languages as official languages of this land.


Withdraw Bill C-7. In it’s place, recommend that Government of Canada and the representatives of Canada’s First Nations meet together to discuss, not only governance, but also Canada’s fiduciary responsibilities with regard to health care, education, social services employment and the opportunity for First Nations peoples to be full-fledged partners with the rest of Canada.

Such a meeting, if conducted openly and fairly, would produce an outcome that everyone - the Government of Canada, First Nations and Canadians - would accept and be proud of.

Thank you for hearing our concerns here today. We ask that you respond in an honorable way and recommend to the Canadian Government that this Bill be withdrawn.

Chimiigwech