In Canada 60% of all first nation children live in poverty, with benefits not being seen on or off the reserves. The Indian Act, created in 1876 is an act which covers native land, education, health care, governing, and eligibility for having status. The “act to amend the Indian act”, Bill C-31 was introduced in 1985 and was created to regulate gender equality within native communities under the act. The Indian Act is the root of many problems in the Native community and the act does not protect and provide for natives as it is thought to among the majority of the Canadian population. Special Status for natives should not be enshrined in the constitution.
The Indian Act, which gives special status to Natives, is the root of many problems
…show more content…
in native communities across Canada. Firstly, the Indian Act was created in 1876 and is based on the assimilation of natives as well as conservative and racially bias.
When created, it was under policies of the federal government calling for assimilation and “civilization”. The act was made so that Natives would become “civilized” and lose their status coming apart of Canadian society. The fact that a native becoming a part of the military, becoming a doctor or lawyer or receiving a university degree would take away their Indian status shows that the goal of the Indian Status of was to keep natives improvised and only given status based on social class rather than compensation for their race. Next, not all Native people have special status under the Indian Act in Canada. The Act applies only to status natives, despite Métis and Inuit both being indigenous to Canada. Also many other Natives who are not registered status due to conditions under the act. The act not being able to apply to all indigenous people of Canada shows the issues with the act since it was created to compensate for the taking of aboriginal …show more content…
land and rights. Lastly, Indian Status is a class system based on race and gender. Before 1985’s Bill C-31, Status was based on gender and the status of a partner. For example, if a man of status married a non status woman she would gain status, while if women of status married a man of non status she would lose status. This evidence suggests that the past flaws in the act show that just in the acts recent history, the gender inequalities were corrected but other still remain based on racial makeup and aboriginal purity of children. In all, the Indian Act which gives Natives special Status is itself, is itself the root for many problems in the Native community. The Indian Act does not protect Natives as it is thought to by majority of Canadians.
First off, Status does not give free post secondary education to Native status holders. Education is given in treaties under section 35(1), but do not serve non-status natives, the Inuit or Métis people, education provided is through Native Bands who usually don’t receive the amount requested , leading to waiting lists and restricted access. The misconception that Natives have free university and college opportunities causes many Canadians believe that natives are well off and support the Native special status under the Indian Act. Secondly, Special status for natives does not relieve those given it of taxes. A status native living and working on the reserve does have to pay taxes, which is more than half of all status natives, paying federal and provincial taxes. Income, goods and services are only tax free on the reserve. Once again a common misconception among most Canadians is the idea that natives live tax free and this causes many Canadians to support the act believing it benefits Natives. Lastly, the current status system has many problems, therefore it should not be enshrined, but revisions of the act may correct the bills. Bill C-3l had revisions which separated band membership and created equal rights for women and since, slow revisions of the Act have happened. That fact that revisions of the Act have happened, specifically through Bill C-31, shows that through revisions the act
can be beneficial, but as of right now the act should not be enshrined in the constitution due to its current state and effects. Therefore, though many misconceptions, the Indian act in fact does not protect and serve natives as is thought to. In conclusion, special status for Natives under the Indian Act should not be enshrined in the constitution. The fact that the Indian Act is the root of most issues in Native communities and that it does not provide for and protect for Natives as it is thought to. The Indian Act is a direct link between the poverty and current struggles of Natives today and the role of the federal government.
#8 I think the main goal of this act was to control Natives and assimilate them into Canada, and to bring First Nations’ status to an end. The act brought together all of Canada’s legislation governing First Nation people, which defined who Aboriginals were under Canadian law and set out the process by which people would cease to be Aboriginals. Under the act, the Canadian government assumed control of First Nation people’s governments, economy, religion, land, education, and even their personal lives.
Imagine being taken from your family at the age of six. Being referred to as a number rather than a name. Receiving brutal and cruel punishments for speaking the only language you were taught. How would it impact your life? Unfortunately, this is the reality for millions of Canada's Indigenous population. The nation of Canada is known to the world for being a country of peace, love and equality. Individuals originating from different nationalities immigrate to Canada, in hopes to improve their standard of living and escape the horrors of their country. Moreover, Canadians have not always been as supportive and welcoming of new ethnicities populating Canadian territory as they portray themselves to be today. Indian Horse is known to be an insightful
The history of Indian Child Welfare Act derived from the need to address the problems with the removal of Indian children from their communities. Native American tribes identified the problem of Native American children being raised by non-native families when there were alarming numbers of children being removed from their h...
Canada likes to paint an image of peace, justice and equality for all, when, in reality, the treatment of Aboriginal peoples in our country has been anything but. Laden with incomprehensible assimilation and destruction, the history of Canada is a shameful story of dismantlement of Indian rights, of blatant lies and mistrust, and of complete lack of interest in the well-being of First Nations peoples. Though some breakthroughs were made over the years, the overall arching story fits into Cardinal’s description exactly. “Clearly something must be done,” states Murray Sinclair (p. 184, 1994). And that ‘something’ he refers to is drastic change. It is evident, therefore, that Harold Cardinal’s statement is an accurate summarization of the Indigenous/non-Indigenous relationship in
The history of Indian Child Welfare Act derived from the need to address the problems with the removal of Indian children from their communities. Native American tribes identified the problem of Native American children being raised by non-native families when there were alarming numbers of children being removed from their h...
After several generations of Indian people being subjected to discrimination, abuse, and neglect by government authorities. It is hard to deny that in many ways the government policies set in place generations ago to eliminate Canada of Indian culture, have been successful.
Our Indian legislation generally rests on the principle, that the aborigines are to be kept in a condition of tutelage and treated as wards or children of the State. …the true interests of the aborigines and of the State alike require...
celebration among the First Nations an the Pacific Coast) for they believe it was a corrupt
The Indian act, since being passed by Parliament in 1876, has been quite the validity test for Aboriginal affairs occurring in Canada. Only a minority of documents in Canadian history have bred as much dismay, anger and debate compared to the Indian Act—but the legislation continues as a central element in the management of Aboriginal affairs in Canada. Aboriginal hatred against current and historic terms of the Indian Act is powerful, but Indigenous governments and politicians stand on different sides of the fence pertaining to value and/or purpose of the legislation. This is not shocking, considering the political cultures and structures of Aboriginal communities have been distorted and created by the imposition of the Indian Act.
The Indian Residential schools and the assimilating of First Nations people are more than a dark spot in Canada’s history. It was a time of racist leaders, bigoted white men who saw no point in working towards a lasting relationship with ingenious people. Recognition of these past mistakes, denunciation, and prevention steps must be taking intensively. They must be held to the same standard that we hold our current government to today. Without that standard, there is no moving forward. There is no bright future for Canada if we allow these injustices to be swept aside, leaving room for similar mistakes to be made again. We must apply our standards whatever century it was, is, or will be to rebuild trust between peoples, to never allow the abuse to be repeated, and to become the great nation we dream ourselves to be,
“In about half of the Dominion, the aboriginal rights of Indians have arguably been extinguished by treaty” (Sanders, 13). The traditions and culture of Aboriginals are vanishing at a quick pace, and along it is their wealth. If the Canadian Government restore Native rights over resource development once again, Aboriginals would be able to gain back wealth and help with the poverty in their societies. “An influential lobby group with close ties to the federal Conservatives is recommending that Ottawa ditch the Indian Act and give First Nations more control over their land in order to end aboriginal poverty once and for all” (End First). This recommendation would increase the income within Native communities, helping them jump out of
For Status Indians various activities have expanded nearby control under the Indian Act and permitted the arrangement of new administrative structures to supplant that act. On the other hand, numerous First Nations keep up that any type of assigned power is conflicting with an intrinsic right of self-government. Inuit have sought after self-government through open government courses of action in the north in conjunction with area claims, while the Métis have progressed different cases for area and self-government. Native people groups have additionally drawn on the privilege of self-determination and worldwide law to bolster their cases. The creating assemblage of global law on human rights has concentrated much consideration, as of late, on the privilege to self-determination as it applies to Aboriginal people groups. Native associations have contended that the characteristic right of self-government is a part of the privilege of self-determination perceived in the United Nations Charter and in the Draft Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous
The over-representation of Aboriginal children in the Canadian Child Welfare system is a growing and multifaceted issue rooted in a pervasive history of racism and colonization in Canada. Residential schools were established with the intent to force assimilation of Aboriginal people in Canada into European-Canadian society (Reimer, 2010, p. 22). Many Aboriginal children’s lives have been changed adversely by the development of residential schools, even for those who did not attend them. It is estimated that Aboriginal children “are 6-8 times more likely to be placed in foster care than non-Aboriginal children (Saskatchewan Child Welfare Review Panel, 2010, p. 2).” Reports have also indicated that First Nations registered Indian children make up the largest proportion of Aboriginal children entering child welfare care across Canada (Saskatchewan Child Welfare Review Panel, p. 2). Consequently, this has negatively impacted Aboriginal communities experience of and relationship with child welfare services across the country. It is visible that the over-representation of Aboriginal children in the child welfare system in Canada lies in the impact of the Canadian policy for Indian residential schools, which will be described throughout this paper.
As Canada's first Prime Minister J. A. MacDonald denoted, it was the nation's duty to "annihilate the tribal system and assimilate the Indian peoples in all respects to the inhabitants of the dominion" (Milloy 3). The Indian Act pertained only to First Nation peoples, not to the Métis or Inuit. The Act’s main aim was assimilating Indians into the general society by encouraging enfranchisement and through it, the Government of Canada endorsed its extensive authority over Aboriginal people and communities. The Indian Act nullified orthodox forms of government and replaced them with an elective system supervised by the Indian agent. Hence, Chiefs and Councillors were to serve at the pleasure of the Crown (Milloy 6). Additionally, the Indian Department was to control the various elements of the reserve land such as resources and finance, and it was granted the authority to institute various systems of development such as "individualized land holding, education and resource and financial management" (Milloy 6). Hence, the act was meant to restrict and control the Indians at the very least and in the end, remake them into new members of the society that were fit to be called
The Indian Act was an attempt by the Canadian government to assimilate the aboriginals into the Canadian society through means such as Enfranchisement, the creation of elective band councils, the banning of aboriginals seeking legal help, and through the process of providing the Superintendent General of the Indian Affairs extreme control over the aboriginals, such as allowing the Superintendent to decide who receives certain benefits, during the earlier stages of the Canadian-Indigenous' political interaction. The failure of the Indian Act though only led to more confusion regarding the interaction of Canada and the aboriginals, giving birth to the failed White Paper and the unconstitutional Bill C-31, and the conflict still is left unresolved until this day.