Regional Synod of Canada - Reformed Church in America

Pioneer Christian Monthly

Date - May/92

Contributor - Dirk Vermeulen

Title - Self Government, Who Needs It?

Topic - Canada

"Self-government? Who do these people think they are? What is wrong with us? Are we not good enough?"

All of us have heard such questioning statements, or a version of these, somewhere and sometime during the past few years. Canadians, whether with words such as "sovereignty" or "self-government", are no longer content with the way in which they are being governed. The political system is under attack, or so it seems, and many Canadians feel hurt and bewildered. When the Canadian native peoples are asking for what to most of us seems next to impossible, we wonder, and often we wonder out loud. "What is this self-government they are asking for? Do they really know themselves what they are after?"

To see where the native people's idea of self-government is coming from, let's look at the landmark agreement between the Inuit of northern Quebec and the provincial and federal governments. The James Bay Northern Quebec Agreement was signed in 1975. The 5500 Inuit and a slightly larger number of Cree had lived on these lands for millennia. They challenged the Quebec government of Robert Bourassa when it unilaterally decided to alter the northern landscape for the sake of the generation of hydro-electricity.

The courts agreed with the native peoples and forced the government to negotiate. After some two years of intensive negotiations an agreement was reached. In it some four hundred thousand square kilometres of territory was made available for development. In this case that meant the flooding of large tracts of land. Its sub-surface rights were given over to the provincial government, as were the rights to the lumber in the region. In return the Inuit and Cree together received the following: 500+ million dollars and a level of self-government not enjoyed by native nations for a long time.

This agreement has stood as a model for some 15 years now, and although somewhat tattered, has helped spur other land settlement agreements. In the case of JBNQA, the Inuit negotiated for a number of elements of self-government which still provides a starting point for many of the native leaders.

Firstly, there was control over culture via an organization called Avataq. Avataq's mandate is to keep the traditional culture alive and viable where possible. Secondly, there is control over the education of their children. Thus the Kativik school board was established with unique powers to develop a school System which Inuit control, teach in, and guide forward. This means extensive Inuit teacher training. It means appropriate curriculum and program development. It means a managing board of commissioners which is Inuit. It means having the final say in matters which affect the future of their youngsters. The third arm of the agreement is the Makivik Corporation. This body received the monies and is responsible for the economic membership in it. Makivik also has some unique powers. It can restrict outside economic activity on those lands retained by the Inuit. On the other side, it can and does support local Inuit initiatives. Lastly, the Kativik Regional government was set up. This operates very much as other regional governments in Quebec. Along with municipal councils in each village, it controls and guides the development of these settlements. The federal and provincial governments agreed to fund these negotiated rights.

The Inuit and Cree have also gained the right to participate on environmental and ecological committees which advise the government and Hydro-Quebec in their developmental efforts which affect the Inuit hunting and fishing territories. As well, health committees were set up to guide the northern health system.

I believe that those who study this agreement will find its powers very acceptable, even minimal. Its rights and privileges are ones that we, in the rest of Canada, have enjoyed for generations. Yet many native nations in Canada have not even that minimal level of control over their own destiny.

The JBNQA is certainly flawed. It badly needs an overhaul. For instance, one of the main omissions is local control over the judicial system. But flawed as it is, undoubtedly it has opened the way for native leaders and elders to once again take up the reins of control for their people and their people's future. This control over, and responsibility for, one's own future is the basis of cultures' self-esteem and dynamism. As such, it is well worth striving for. Perhaps the courageous native leaders of our day will find new patterns and processes that will redefine democracy for all of us. That might be refreshing!

Please click the "Back" button of your browser to return to previous page.