09) FLANAGAN NATIONAL PETROLEUM OWNERSHIP ACT: STOP BIG OIL LAND GRAB

Dr. Pamela D. Palmater is a Mi'kmaw lawyer, who teaches Indigenous law, politics and governance at Ryerson University. This commentary is excerpted from her Aug. 7 blog posting at www.indigenousnationhood.blogspot.ca.

     By now most of you have heard about the Harper government's intention to introduce legislation that will turn reserve lands into individual holdings called fee simple. The legislation has been referred to as the First Nation Property Ownership Act (FNPOA). Some media outlets have referred to it as "privatization" but what the legislation would really do is turn the collective ownership of reserve lands into small pieces of land owned by individuals who could then sell it to non‑First Nations peoples, land‑holding companies and corporations, like Enbridge for example....

     Here are some of the questions asked of me by the media and my answers in very brief form:

1. First Nations hate the Indian Act, why would they object to Harper amending or repealing the Act?

     The abolishment of the Indian Act was the central feature of the 1969 White Paper ‑ the federal policy that would assimilate "Indians" once and for all. It is up to First Nations to decide when and how they want to amend or repeal the Indian Act ‑ Canada has done enough damage under the guise of "what is good for the Indians".

     Harper specifically promised at the co‑called Crown‑First Nation Gathering that: "To be sure, our Government has no grand scheme to repeal or to unilaterally re‑write the Indian Act". This legislation would be a significant and unilateral amendment to the Indian Act.

2. But First Nations can't access mortgages or start businesses without owning land in fee simple?

     That is simply not true. Individual band members have been working with their First Nations and the major banks to obtain mortgages to build homes on reserve for many years. Many band members and bands have also been able to receive loans from banks to start businesses without leveraging their homes. One must also remember that owning a home doesn't mean you can open a business on your land ‑ there are zoning and other laws on reserve as there would be in any neighbourhood.

3. But Canadians get to own land in fee simple?

     Canadians have the option to own land in fee simple only if they are wealthy enough to buy land or qualify for a mortgage. Thousands of First Nations people also own land in fee simple all over the country. Some First Nations people also hold land via Certificate of Possession on reserve which is very similar to fee simple, except that it can't be sold to non‑First Nations people.

4. But if First Nations could own land in fee simple, wouldn't that cure the housing crisis?

     This ability to own land in fee simple has not cured homelessness in Canada and in fact, it is on the rise. The ability to hold reserve lands in fee simple would not qualify any individual for a mortgage. Part of getting a mortgage is being able to get insurance ‑ who would insure a mold‑infested, asbestos‑contaminated home without running water or sanitation services? This sounds like more of a cure for the economy and mortgage lenders than it does for First Nations.

5. But commentators have said this would cure First Nation poverty?

     The origins of the current crisis of poverty in First Nations are in the theft of our lands and resources, the genocide committed against our people, the federal strangulation of our governments and the refusal to properly recognize and provide space for our treaty, Aboriginal, and inherent rights and laws. Fee simple has nothing to do with it. There is absolutely no evidence that fee simple ownership has cured poverty. In fact, the studies have shown that the chronic underfunding of essential social services by the federal government is the primary cause of the current levels of poverty in First Nations.

6. But Manny Jules and eight other First Nations want this legislation?

     With all due respect, Manny Jules heads a federal government organization ‑ he is not a First Nation leader or community spokesperson. If there are a handful of First Nations who truly want to divide their reserves into individual parcels of fee simple lands, they can do so via current processes under the Indian Act or self‑government negotiations for example. There is no way that eight First Nations should set national law or policy for 633 First Nations. Treaty implementation and the resolution of land claims are far more critical to First Nation well‑being.

7. But isn't the legislation optional? What's the harm?

     With INAC, even optional laws and policies are never truly optional. Once the government decides it wants First Nations to behave in a certain way, they use a series of financial and political incentives and punishments to ensure First Nations act as the government deems appropriate....

     Plus, the element of volunteerism does not apply in a situation of duress. Is it truly optional to sell one's land if one is already impoverished and suffering from a lack the basic necessities of life? Even Manny Jules admitted that one of the challenges of this bill is that all reserve land could be lost.

Jules wants First Nations people to prove to banks that they are "worthy" of owning a home. WOW!....

     There is simply nothing good about this bill and much to be lost from it. People need to stop coming up with ideas about how to "fix" us as we always end up worse off for it.

     Canadians are not required to understand or even support our inherent, treaty, domestic and international rights ‑ they just have to accept that this is the law, not unlike any of the laws they cherish.

     Canada needs to stop trying to assimilate us and instead focus on fulfilling its legal and treaty obligations instead of trying to find ways around them. I think we have suffered enough ‑ let us go about the hard job of healing and rebuilding our Nations and enjoy our fair share of what is ours.

(The above article is from the September 1-15, 2012, issue of People's Voice, Canada's leading communist newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited. Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50 CDN per year. Send to People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 706 Clark Drive, Vancouver, BC, V5L 3J1.)