How has collective rights impacted the legislative process in Canada?

Report







The ways the CCRF has fostered recognition of
collective rights
The ways the CCRF meets the needs of
Francophones in a minority setting
The ways the CCRF meets the needs of
Francophones in Québec
How much the federal and provincial
governments support and promote the rights of
official language minorities in Canada
How the Indian Act recognizes the status and
identity of Aboriginal peoples
How legislation like Treaty 6, 7, 8 recognizes the
status and identity of Aboriginal peoples
How the governments recognize Métis cultures
and rights through legislation
http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/political-economy-of-calvin-andhobbes-5.html

Collective Rights – rights guaranteed to a
specific group in Canadian society for
historical and constitutional reasons.
› Aboriginal peoples (First Nations, Inuit, and Métis)
› Francophones and Anglophones

Collective Identity – the shared identity of a
group of people, especially because of
common language/culture

Ethnocentrism – the belief that your own
cultural group is superior to others

Every citizen has rights in Canada, not
everyone has collective rights

You only get collective rights if you
belong to one of the groups (Aboriginal,
Francophone, Anglophone)

People’s collective rights are protected
under the constitution just like CCRF

Aboriginal Peoples
› First Nations
› Inuit
› Métis
Anglophones
 Francophones


Represents the founding people of
Canada
http://beatdiaspora.blogspot.com/2008_10_01_archive.html

http://www.canadiandesignresource.ca/officialgallery/symbols/metis-nation-flags/
Do you
know
what
these
symbols
are?
A look at the legislation which established Aboriginal collective rights.
http://www.fanpop.com/spots/inuit/images/18046133/title/symbol-photo

There are 11 Treaties in total

Treaty talks began after the Royal Proclamation of
1763

Treaties affect the rights/identities of the First Nations
people

First Nations would get things like education, reserves,
annuities, hunting/fishing rights and farming
assistance in exchange for land/resources

The Numbered Treaties are sacred. They cannot be
changed without the First Nations consent
http://apihtawikosisan.wordpress.com/2011/07/05/the-more-things-change-the-more-they-stay-the-same/

Avoid war
› In the USA there was a fight for land, Canada
could do the same
› Many First Nation casualties
› Canada wanted to link BC, they would take
drastic measures

First Nations wanted to secure their future
›
›
›
›
›
Smallpox and tuberculosis
Buffalo gone
Fur trade done
European settlements
Things weren’t going well…
Working in partners, look from page 129-135 and compare the First Nation’s perspective
with the Canadian Government’s perspective on the treaties.
http://embracingbevin.blogspot.com/2010/10/we-are-twice-armed-if-we-fight-with.html

First Nations feel that land is not
something people can own/give up and
that land is part of their culture
› This is why there can be issues

First Nations recorded Treaties in their oral
histories (not written down)

Government recorded Treaties in English

The oral/written records disagree on
aspects: Why do you think this would be?
Made rules about First Nation’s lives
without consulting them
 Refers to the rights/status of First Nations
peoples
 Parliament thought the First Nations
needed guidance

› Ethnocentric View – felt that Canadian
(European) culture was better than First
Nation’s culture
http://ma-nouvelle-vie-en-france.blogspot.com/2011/02/french-are-ethnocentric.html

Confirmed collective rights of the First
Nations
› This Act made policies for the laws (Treaties)
that were created

Indian Agents were created
› They would then interpret the Treaty rights

The Act has who is considered “status
Indians”
› These are the First Nations who receive
Treaty rights
› Status Indians do not have to pay taxes, but
most First Nations do if they are not part of a
reserve

Originally tried to assimilate the First
Nations
› Told them how to run their government
› Restricted traveling, political, cultural aspects
› Had to give up Treaty rights if they wanted to
vote
› Residential schools

The Act clearly has been revised many
times. It is still in place today.

Have taken out the majority of the racist,
ethnocentric elements

It needs to be updated now but there
are issues with this
› First Nations feel they are not adequately
consulted for the revisions
› Until this happens, the Indian Act will not be
updated
What does this say about our
constitution?
No… this would NEVER be a
question on your exam…
http://www.mediaindigena.com/rickharp/issues-and-politics/poll-should-the-indian-act-be-gone-by-2015
Here are more First Nations legislation which has occurred in Canada
http://www.canadaflagmart.com/servlet/the-10/First-Nations-Canada-Flag/Detail
What does this show you about residential schools?
http://www.abbacanada.org/pastletter.html

Meant to “educate” First Nations and
assimilate them at the same time

Removed children from their families

Took away their language, culture and
identities

The government is now compensating
former students from the trauma they
suffered
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_V4d7sXoqU
http://www.danielnpaul.com/IndianResidentialSchools.html

Made to:
› Maintain Treaty rights
› Increase social/economic welfare to its
peoples
› Obtain better education/opportunities
› Cooperate with federal, provincial, local
governments for their benefit

The government wanted to get rid of
the Treaties
› Said that it was discriminatory legislation

First Nations did not support this
› Lots of protest
› Treaties are considered legal obligations
› Can’t just get rid of them
http://bcinto.blogspot.com/2009_01_01_archive.html

First Nations wanted their rights entrenched
(fixed firmly) in the constitution

Their rights were put into the constitution in
1980 before it was patriated
› Section 35, Canada’s constitution recognizes
First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples as
Aboriginal peoples, and recognizes their existing
Treaty and Aboriginal rights

The constitution was patriated in 1982
› To bring to a country something that belongs to
the country

First Nations look to be recognized as a diverse
peoples

Still have modern treaties (establish new land
claims mostly)

Make sure that the Treaties are being followed

Both the government and First Nations agree
that things need to be changed/updated, but
they must work together to get that
accomplished
A look at the legislation which gives the Métis collective rights!

Don’t have any historic treaties with
Canada’s government

Considered part of the Aboriginal
peoples of Canada

Have inherent rights because they are
First Peoples

Led to the establishment of the Manitoba Act
› Established Manitoba as a bilingual province
› Catholics and Protestants were given education
rights
› Métis were given land rights (scrip)

Gave the Métis land rights along the Red River

Showed that the government needed to
negotiate with them to get things done

The government had to take them seriously

A document that could be exchanged
for land for land

Had to choose between scrip or
becoming a Treaty Indian

Government felt that they did not have
the same rights as First Nations
http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/treaty8/020006-3050-e.html

Métis wanted to protect land rights in
Saskatchewan

Riel and the Métis led a resistance against
the government

Lots of fighting, Riel ended up being hung

Again showed that the government
needed to take the Métis seriously
http://culturepopped.blogspot.com/2009_04_01_archive.html

Established in 1938

Lobbied the government for land
› Was the first time Métis had land set aside for
them

Enabled the government to pass the Métis
Betterment Act
› Made for 12 temporary Métis settlements
› Métis did not have control of the land
› If land was found to be unsuitable for
farming/fishing, it could be given back to the
government

The Métis lobbied to get recognition in
the constitution

Just like the First Nations and Inuit, they
were put into Section 35 as one of
Canada’s Aboriginal peoples with rights

Alberta Government gave the Métis a
permanent land base and could handle
their own business

Could develop oil/gas on settled lands

Gave them autonomy (authority to
make decisions)

Supreme Court approved the Métis right to
hunt and fish since they are under the
constitution as one of Canada’s Aboriginal
peoples
› Métis have the same relationship to the land as
First Nations people

In 2007, they took these rights away and
made it so that Métis had to get licenses to
hunt/fish. Some people agree that Métis
deserve these rights while others think that
everyone deserves those rights.
› They did not consult the Métis before making this
decision
Got this off of a test somewhere….

Section 16-20 of the Charter

English and French are the official
languages

Makes New Brunswick the only official
bilingual province

Manitoba was a bilingual province

With this act, public funding was cut for
Catholic Schools
› The Catholics spoke French
› The Protestants spoke English

Act made Manitoba and English
speaking province only

A group of people who speak one of
Canada’s official languages (English,
French) but do not live in an area where
the majority of the population speaks
their language

Section 23 – Schools need to exist so that
one can practice their language if they
are in a minority language setting
› Francophone/Anglophone schools
› Must be publicly funded

Law established in Québec in 1977

Made French people a distinct people
who should be able to express their
identity

French became the language of
government, work, education and
business

Signs in Québec must be in French
› Can have English on, but the French should
be more prominent

Francophone parents cannot educate
their kids in an Anglophone school
› Immigrant parents can if their child has had
some education in English, otherwise they
must go to a French school
Maintenant un examen!

similar documents