Derek Nepinak

A personal reflection on the Bill C-33 conundrum...

The resistance to bill C-33 flows from the same arguments that have existed since the Constitution was
repatriated in 1982. I live today to say that the box of rights, under s.35 of the Constitution is full of my
inherent and treaty rights. Its not an empty box.. Its not empty because my ancestors didn't surrender our
inherent rights, nor rights flowing from Treaty, to anyone...ever...
The governments of Canada (federal & provincial) work from the presumption that we surrendered
everything to their discretion and their final authority, hence they work from the premise that the box is
empty, except for those rights which we leave to have defined in Canadian court systems. Each time the
courts come out with a decision, they feel that they are filling the box of rights...... That is not the case....
Each time we go to court as indigenous peoples, we are not creating freedoms for ourselves, we are
narrowing the scope of our plenary freedoms under inherent and treaty rights authorities to a Canadian
domestic court. This is a secular and adversarial means of dealing with spiritual responsibilities and reflects
our inabilities at this time to live in the spirit and intent of our treaty relationships. Unfortunately, we have
very minimal alternative means of bringing our matters into earshot of those who will listen. This is the
vital link that the courts are playing now. They are listening, but only to those who can pay for their
services.
When the Indian act minister states that Bill C-33 reduces his authority over first nations education, he is
working from a premise that suggests he currently has a plenary authority and discretion over indigenous
peoples, which is not true. We have never consented to the discretion he/she thinks he has under the Indian
Act and therefore it is an illegitimate expression of power and control over us. There is no legitimacy in the
Minister's expression of plenary control over First Nations education. The only thing that gives him or her
any power is through use of money to influence decisions and shape policy. This has been the case now for
several years as we are living with an escalating deficit in education funding, furthering the divide between
on-reserve opportunities for youth, with off-reserve opportunities. This government has put money towards
encouraging communities to hand over their education programs to provincial systems and this devolution
is now being accelerated through bill C-33.
Some Chiefs from some regions want to accept the bill because they think that there is 'new money'
attached to it.. There isn't.. Governments oftentimes set up short term funding arrangements so that they can
be seen as announcing 'new money' for programs and services, when in fact it is an extension of an old
funding program or a re-profiling of old money with a new name. Being that this is the established way that
we have seen governments to operate, we have no reason to believe that there is any new money coming
into the system for First Nations education.
The real issue however is that after 140 years of an indian Act minister working from a false premise of
plenary authority over first nations education, some Chiefs are now willing to validate that by giving
consent to the Minister to write himself into laws that will bind our families in our communities and will
provide the Minister with express discretion in the Canadian legal framework over education for our young
ones. We should be speaking together as loud as we possibly can against this intrusion into the delicate
space where our children learn.