AN ASSESSMENT OF THE FIRST NATIONS GOVERNANCE ACT

March 25, 2002

INDEPENDENT REVIEW COMMISSIONED

The Chiefs of Ontario commissioned Peter Elias, Ph.D., to conduct an independent review of the INAC consultation process for the Governance Initiative of Minister Robert Nault. Some of the key points from the 16 page Elias analysis are summarized below.

UNSCIENTIFIC SAMPLING TECHNICS USED

The INAC consultation was not based on scientific sampling techniques. Rather, there was an unscientific or "nonprobability" collection of opinions and anecdotes. Many of the background or contextual factors (eg. the difficult relationship between INAC and First Nations) only served to increase the unreliability of the INAC data. This kind of anecdotal data can be used to justify any pre-determined result.

MANAGEMENT DATA UNRELIABLE

At the start of the consultation, in May of 2001, Minister Nault promised a comprehensive consultation open to all First Nations and First Nation citizens. Such a consultation would have been appropriate given the profound effect the governance legislation is certain to have on First Nations. The conclusion of Doctor Elias is that in the end the INAC consultation failed to produce useful and reliable management data.

OVER REPRESENTATION AND PREDETERMINED OPINIONS

The INAC sampling method encouraged self-selection or over-representation by individuals and groups with pre-determined opinions about First Nation governance issues. This problem was increased by the use of internet sampling, which effectively excluded many communities.

WHO PARTICIPATED

The consultation record does not establish that key groups (youth, Elders, women) participated in any meaningful way.

INAC AWARE OF INADEQUACY

The inadequacy of the consultation record was acknowledged by INAC officials in December of 2001. Nevertheless, the Minister’s handpicked Advisory Committee (JMAC) was instructed to proceed to the formulation of detailed legislative proposals.

SERIOUSLY FLAWED

The consultation was seriously flawed and did not produce reliable management data. The process was not consistent with the respectful and open-ended consultation/consent model recommended by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP). Rather, the process is reminiscent of the pre-determined consultations of the bad old days (eg. the 1969 White Paper).

GOODWILL DAMAGED

The flawed INAC consultation cost a lot of money and wore out a lot of goodwill. No doubt, in the future it will be much more difficult to convince people of goodwill to participate in valid consultation. The Minister has tainted consultation as feared by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.