The Indian Act

"Let's focus our energies and seize the initiative. Let's cut to the heart of the problem and once and for all deal with the Indian Act," Atleo told representatives of more than 600 First Nations gathered in Winnipeg.

Atleo is saying some good things, but I also gotta disagree, here. We can't just do away with the Indian Act.

It's an incredibly complex legal document that had set out the relationship between First Nations and Canada. Or rather, it had set to set it out.

Am I saying we should keep the Indian Act? No. It's also an incredibly heinous document, which allows the federal government to decide who's indian. And it also denotes how we create our governments. It needs to go.

However, despite its major flaws, it does do one thing. It protects us First Nations from the Canadian melting pot. It protects whatever little sovereignty we have from the pressures and influence of governments that do not have First Nations considerations and concerns in mind. It's a double-edged sword that also cuts its wielder, but First Nations aren't holding it by the hilt but by the blade.

What must happen is a national (and even international) effort by First Nations communities to write up a constitution that supersedes the Indian Act by allowing our own customs and traditions to guide our peoples rather than the dictates of a nation that is often hostile and contrary to our own interests, which is usually to be left alone, and maybe even prosper. We don't want top-down governing, but instead grass roots level municipal bodies that can be quickly organized into a more central force when necessary.

And if the Canadian governments want to be involved, that'd be good. But we must be careful that we're not inviting them to interfere in our deliberations.