<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.mapleleafweb.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>Federal Legislation</title>
 <link>http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/federal-legislation</link>
 <description>The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>The Indian Act: Historical Overview</title>
 <link>http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/the-indian-act-historical-overview</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; is  federal legislation that provides the basic legal status and entitlements of Canada’s  Aboriginal peoples. The Act deals with such things as the legal definition of  who may claim Indian status in Canada,  the rights and duties which accompany that status, the structure of Canada’s  reserve system and the nature of Aboriginal self-government. This article  provides an overview of the history of the &lt;em&gt;Indian  Act&lt;/em&gt;, including its early legislative foundations, the passage of the first &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; in 1876 and subsequent key  amendments and revisions of the Act.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div id=&quot;table-contents&quot;&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#early&quot;&gt;Early Foundations of  the Indian Act&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;The Royal Proclamation  and early Aboriginal legislation&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#civilizations&quot;&gt;Civilization and  Assimilation: The First Indian Act&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;Overview of the first  Indian Act, passed in 1876&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#assimilation&quot;&gt;Assimilation Reinforced:  The Indian Act from 1876 to 1951&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;Early amendments and  revisions of the Indian Act&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#aboriginal&quot;&gt;Aboriginal Policy in  Transition: The Indian Act from 1952  to 2002&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;Contemporary  amendments and revisions of the Indian Act&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#sources&quot;&gt;Sources and Links to  More Information&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;List of article  sources and links to more on this topic&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;hr /&gt;

&lt;h3 id=&quot;early&quot;&gt;Early Foundations of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The Royal Proclamation  and early Aboriginal legislation&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; did  not simply appear out of thin air, but was heavily influenced by the  legislative foundation established prior to its passage. Central here is the &lt;em&gt;Royal Proclamation, 1763&lt;/em&gt;, which  recognized Aboriginals as a distinct political unit within the colonial system,  as well as legislation passed by Canadian authorities in the mid-1800s.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Royal Proclamation, 1763&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;During the process of colonization, Europeans undertook  several strategies in dealing with these populations. In some cases, this  involved forced-relocation and even genocide. In other cases, Europeans  implemented strategies of cohabitation, which were meant to achieve peaceful  relations between settlers and indigenous populations.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;One of the most important of these cohabitation approaches  can be found in the &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&amp;Params=A1ARTA0006990&quot;&gt;Royal  Proclamation of 1763&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, which was issued by King George III of Britain.  The Proclamation established a system of government for former French colonies  in North America, which Britain  had won following the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&amp;Params=A1ARTA0007300&quot;&gt;Seven  Years War&lt;/a&gt;. Also included was a basic framework for relations with North  American Aboriginals. As such, it is often referred to as an “Indian Magna  Carta” or an “Indian Bill of Rights.”&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Central to the &lt;em&gt;Royal  Proclamation&lt;/em&gt; was the separation of Aboriginal lands from those forming  parts of the North American colonies, with the former being reserved for the  exclusive use and possession of Aboriginal peoples. Moreover, the &lt;em&gt;Royal Proclamation&lt;/em&gt; implemented a process  by which Aboriginal lands could be purchased for British settlement and  development. An Aboriginal group could only transfer lands to the British  Crown, not to European settlers or other colonial officials. This surrender  process was to occur on a formal nation-to-nation basis, from the Indian nation  to the Crown, and was to be done in a public process with the consent of the  Aboriginal group involved.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;By instituting an Aboriginal right to land and a formal  nation-to-nation land transfer process, the &lt;em&gt;Royal  Proclamation&lt;/em&gt; recognized Aboriginal groups in North   America as autonomous and self-governing actors (Report of the  Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996). Aboriginals were not simply  private individuals, akin to other British subjects. Rather, they were distinct  peoples and political units within the British imperial system, with the right  to negotiate with the Crown as autonomous nations.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This is not to suggest a relationship of complete autonomy  and equality between Aboriginals and the Crown. The &lt;em&gt;Royal Proclamation&lt;/em&gt; recognized Aboriginals as groups living under  Crown protection on lands within British dominions and territories.  Nevertheless, the Crown could not simply appropriate Aboriginal lands whenever  and however it saw fit. Instead, it was required to engage in a formal process  of negotiation and to purchase the lands from Aboriginal nations.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Also central to the &lt;em&gt;Royal  Proclamation&lt;/em&gt; was the concern that Aboriginals were being exploited in their  dealings with European settlers and colonial officials. In this context, the &lt;em&gt;Royal Proclamation&lt;/em&gt; recognized a duty on  the part of the Crown to act as a protector of Aboriginal peoples in their  relations with colonial society. Over time, this has been formally recognized  in terms of a &lt;strong&gt;fiduciary relationship&lt;/strong&gt;,  in which the Crown is recognized as a “trustee” for Aboriginal peoples, with  the duty to act in their interests.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For more information on the Crown-Aboriginal fiduciary  relationship:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/prb0009-e.htm&quot;&gt;Parliament  of Canada: The Crown’s Fiduciary Relationship with Aboriginal Peoples&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;Aboriginal  Legislation Prior to the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act, 1867&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;At the time of the &lt;em&gt;Royal  Proclamation, 1763&lt;/em&gt;, responsibility for Aboriginal affairs in Canada  lay with British imperial authorities. By the mid-1800s, however, Britain began  to transfer this responsibility to the Canadian colonies themselves. Between  1850 and 1876 (when the first &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; was passed), Canadian authorities enacted several key pieces of legislation,  which strongly influenced the nature of the &lt;em&gt;Indian  Act&lt;/em&gt; itself.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The first of these was &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;An Act for the Better Protection of the  Lands and Property of Indians in Lower Canada&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;An Act for the protection of  Indians in Upper Canada from imposition, and the property occupied or enjoyed  by them from trespass and injury&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, which were passed by the Province of  Canada (then a British colony) in 1850. These statutes are important in that  they represented the first attempt to define “Indian” and who would receive the  rights and duties of &lt;strong&gt;Indian status&lt;/strong&gt;.  Under the acts, the term “Indian” was defined broadly to include the following:  1) any person deemed to be Aboriginal by birth or blood; 2) any person reputed  to belong to a particular band or body of Aboriginals; and 3) any person who  married an Aboriginal or was adopted by Aboriginals (Indian and Northern  Affairs Canada, 1991). While the definition was broadly construed, it is  important to note that it assumed for the government the responsibility for  deciding who was an Aboriginal. In other words, Aboriginal groups themselves  were not given the power to define their own communities. This power, instead,  lay in the hands of non-Aboriginal authorities.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Another important statute was &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;An Act to Encourage the Gradual  Civilization of Indian Tribes in this Province, and to Amend the Laws Relating  to Indians&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, passed by the Province   of Canada in 1857.  Commonly referred to as the &lt;em&gt;Gradual  Civilization Act&lt;/em&gt;, this statute was the first to introduce the concept of &lt;strong&gt;enfranchisement&lt;/strong&gt; or the process by which  Aboriginals lost their Indian status and became full British subjects. In  introducing the Act, the colonial government viewed enfranchisement as a  privilege for Aboriginals, by which they could gain their freedom from the  protected Indian status and gain the rights of full colonial citizenship, such  as the right to vote. It is at this point that the strategies of &lt;strong&gt;civilization&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;assimilation &lt;/strong&gt;begin their legislative existence, with colonial  authorities encouraging Aboriginals to forgo their Indian status and be drawn  into the larger colonial society as regular citizens (and, hence, become  “civilized”).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Under the Act, only Aboriginal men could seek  enfranchisement. In order to do so, they had to be over the age of 21, able to  read and write in either English or French, be reasonably well educated, free  of debt, and of good moral character as determined by a commission of  non-Aboriginal examiners (Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples,  1996). Once enfranchised, the person was entitled to receive up to 50 acres of  land from the reserve on which they lived and a per capita share of treaty  annuities and other band monies. Enfranchisement was to be fully voluntary by  the man seeking it. However, an enfranchised man’s wife and children  automatically lost their Indian status, regardless of whether or not they so  desired.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In 1860, the Province   of Canada passed the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Indian  Lands Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;. An important element of this Act was the centralization of  control over Aboriginal affairs for the colony. The Act created the office of  the Chief Superintendent of Indian Affairs, and transferred all authority for  Aboriginals and their lands in the Province   of Canada to this single  official. Moreover, the Chief Superintendent was given very broad discretionary  powers over reserve Aboriginals. This centralization continued in 1867, when  the Province of Canada  was united with Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to create  the new nation of the Dominion of Canada. Section 91(24) of the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Constitution  Act, 1867&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, gave legislative authority over Aboriginals and their lands  to the federal Parliament, removing it from the provincial legislatures.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In 1869, the Government of Canada passed &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/lib/phi/histlws/hln/a69c6_e.html&quot;&gt;An Act  for the gradual enfranchisement of Indians, the better management of Indian  affairs, and to extend the provisions of the Act 31st Victoria&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.  This Act is significant in that it was the first to introduce the notion of&lt;strong&gt; self-government&lt;/strong&gt; for&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;Aboriginals on reserves. Under the  Act, Aboriginal tribes or bands were permitted to elect chiefs and band  councils for the purpose of general administration on reserves. These elected  officials were granted limited bylaw powers, and were elected to terms of three  years. It is important to note many Aboriginal groups did not engage in  democratic practices at the time. Consequently, the Act granted the government  the power to impose democratic institutions on them, regardless of what  Aboriginal groups desired. Furthermore, Aboriginal women were excluded from  voting for band chiefs and councils (women in general were excluded from voting  at this time, as &lt;a href=&quot;http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/QuebecHistory/encyclopedia/Canada-WomensVote-WomenSuffrage.htm&quot;&gt;women’s  suffrage&lt;/a&gt; was not achieved in Canada until the early 1900s).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In addition to a mechanism for Aboriginal self-government,  the 1869 Act included other key provisions. It prohibited the sale of alcohol  to Aboriginals, on the paternalistic grounds of protecting Aboriginals from  themselves. Furthermore, the Act instituted a &lt;strong&gt;compulsory enfranchisement&lt;/strong&gt; provision. Under the &lt;em&gt;Gradual Civilization Act&lt;/em&gt; (see above),  enfranchisement was a completely voluntary process, by which Indian status  could only be lost at an individual’s choosing. Under the 1869 Act, however,  Aboriginal women who married non-Aboriginal men automatically lost their Indian  status, regardless of whether or not they so desired it. Moreover, any children  resulting from the marriage would also be denied Indian status. This provision  continued with the strategy of assimilation, as many Aboriginal women, and  their children, forcefully lost their Indian status and gained Canadian  citizenship.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;hr /&gt;

&lt;h3 id=&quot;civilization&quot;&gt;Civilization and Assimilation: The First &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Overview of the first  Indian Act, passed in 1876&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Government of Canada, now an independent nation,  introduced the first &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; in 1876,  with the purpose of consolidating all prior federal legislation regarding  Aboriginals into one single piece of legislation. The following provides an  overview of the underlying philosophy and key provisions of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act, 1876&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;Philosophy of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act, 1876&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The first &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; adopted an explicit vision of assimilation, in which Aboriginals would be  encouraged to leave behind their Indian status and traditional cultures and  become full members of the broader Canadian society. In this context,  Aboriginals were viewed as children or wards of the state, to which the  government had a paternalistic duty to protect and civilize. This underlying  philosophy was clearly expressed by the Canadian Department of the Interior in  its 1876 annual report:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;“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. &amp;#8230;the true interests  of the aborigines and of the State alike require that every effort should be  made to aid the Red man in lifting himself out of his condition of tutelage and  dependence, and that is clearly our wisdom and our duty, through education and  every other means, to prepare him for a higher civilization by encouraging him  to assume the privileges and responsibilities of full citizenship.” (Report of  the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996)&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It is important to note the change in Aboriginal policy from  the &lt;em&gt;Royal Proclamation, 1763&lt;/em&gt; to the  first &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;. The first &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; maintained the Crown’s role  as trustee of Aboriginal interests, but had a very different view of that relationship.  No longer were Aboriginal groups viewed as autonomous quasi-nations within the  broader Canadian political system, to which the Crown had an obligation to  protect from abuse and encroachment from European colonial society. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;Key Provisions of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act, 1876&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Indian Act, 1876&lt;/em&gt; adopted much of the basic framework established in previous Aboriginal  legislation, with some minor alterations.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;First, the Act maintained the centralized administration of  Aboriginal affairs, with a Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, which was  a cabinet position, who had broad discretionary powers in dealing with  Aboriginals and their lands.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Act also continued the practice of imposing a definition  of &lt;strong&gt;Indian status&lt;/strong&gt; on Aboriginal  groups, thus ensuring that it was the Canadian government, and not Aboriginal  groups themselves, that had the power to decide who was, and who was not,  Aboriginal. However, the Act did place a stronger emphasis on male lineage in  its definition of Indian status. Under the Act, the term “Indian” now referred  to 1) any male of Indian blood reputed to belong to a particular band; 2) any  child of such person; and 3) any woman who is or who was married to such a  person. Moreover, the Act explicitly denied Indian status to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.metisnation.ca/who/index.html&quot;&gt;Métis&lt;/a&gt; of Manitoba, which were persons of mixed  Aboriginal and European decent.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Act also maintained and broadened the system of &lt;strong&gt;enfranchisement&lt;/strong&gt;, by which Aboriginals  could lose their Indian status and gain full citizenship. Previously,  Aboriginals could voluntarily apply for enfranchisement if they met certain  criteria. Moreover, compulsory enfranchisement occurred for Aboriginal women  when they married non-Aboriginal men. In addition to maintaining these provisions,  the Act allowed for the compulsory enfranchisement of any Aboriginal who  received a university degree or who became a doctor, lawyer or clergyman,  regardless of whether they desired to lose their Indian status and gain full  citizenship.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Regarding &lt;strong&gt;self-government&lt;/strong&gt;,  the Act continued the system of elected chiefs and band councils, who served  for three years, and had limited bylaw powers. As before, the Act granted the  Superintendent General the power to impose democratic systems on Aboriginal  groups, regardless of whether they were desired.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Moreover, the Act allowed the Superintendent General to  order a reserve to be surveyed and divided into lots, and then require band  members to obtain tickets for individual plots of land. The allowed the government  to promote &lt;strong&gt;individualism&lt;/strong&gt; amongst  Aboriginals, by breaking up communal use of reserve lands, and encouraging  practices of individual ownership of property. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Finally, the Act also included many protective features. No  one other than an “Indian of the Band” could live on or use reserve lands  without licence from the Superintendent General. Moreover, no federal or  provincial taxation on real estate or personal property was permitted on a  reserve; no liens under provincial law could be placed on Aboriginal property;  and no Aboriginal property could be seized for debt.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;hr /&gt;

&lt;h3 id=&quot;assimilation&quot;&gt;Assimilation Reinforced: The &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; from 1876 to 1951&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Early amendments and  revisions of the Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Since its introduction in 1876, the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; has undergone several amendments and reforms. The  following provides a summary of key changes to the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; during the period 1876 to 1951.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;Amendments to the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; 1876-1950&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Between 1876 and 1950, the purpose of the amendments to the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; was to strengthen the  philosophy of civilization and assimilation underlying the first Act. Moreover,  many of the changes to the Act granted the government greater powers to move  Aboriginals and expropriate their lands for the purpose of non-Aboriginal use.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Key amendments to the &lt;em&gt;Indian  Act&lt;/em&gt; during this period include:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;1885: Prohibition of several traditional  Aboriginal ceremonies, such as potlaches.&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;1894: Removal of band control over  non-Aboriginals living on reserves. This power was transferred to the  Superintendent General of Indian Affairs.&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;1905: Power to remove Aboriginal peoples from  reserves near towns with more than 8,000 people.&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;1911: Power to expropriate portions of reserves  for roads, railways and other public works, as well as to move an entire  reserve away from a municipality if it was deemed expedient.&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;1914: Requirement that western Aboriginals seek  official permission before appearing in Aboriginal “costume” in any public  dance, show, exhibition, stampede or pageant.&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;1918: Power to lease out uncultivated reserve  lands to non-Aboriginals if the new leaseholder would use it for farming or  pasture.&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;1927: Prohibition of anyone (Aboriginal or  otherwise) from soliciting funds for Aboriginal legal claims without special  licence from the Superintendent General. This amendment granted the government  control over the ability of Aboriginals to pursue land claims.&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;1930: Prohibition of pool hall owners from  allowing entrance of an Aboriginal who “by inordinate frequenting of a pool  room either on or off an Indian reserve misspends or wastes his time or means  to the detriment of himself, his family or household.”&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;1951 Revision of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In the late 1940s, the federal government established a &lt;strong&gt;Joint Committee of the Senate and House of  Commons&lt;/strong&gt; to examine Aboriginal policy. While recommending broad changes to  the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;, the Joint Committee  nevertheless continued with the previous philosophy of transitioning  Aboriginals from wardship to citizenship.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In response to the Joint Committee’s report, the federal  government instituted some changes to the &lt;em&gt;Indian  Act&lt;/em&gt; in 1951 (although, overall, the new Act continued with many of the  practices under the previous legislation).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In regard to general administration, the 1951 Act assigned  responsibility for Aboriginals to the minister of Indian Affairs, with broad  discretionary powers over the implementation of the Act as well as the daily  lives of Aboriginals on reserves. The Act also maintained the government’s  power to expropriate Aboriginal lands, albeit in a significantly reduced  manner.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Concerning the definition of &lt;strong&gt;Indian status&lt;/strong&gt;, the 1951 Act instituted some limited reforms. The  Act maintained the federal government’s power to define Indian status and band  membership, instead of transferring this power to Aboriginals themselves.  However, the new Act abandoned the criterion of “Indian blood” in favour of a  system of registration with strong biases in favour of descent through the male  line. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The 1951 Act continued with the &lt;strong&gt;band council system&lt;/strong&gt;, with some small alterations. Band council  authority was still limited. However, under the new Act, bands that reached “an  advanced stage of development” could acquire additional powers, such as  authority to tax local reserve property. The new Act also allowed the full  participation of Aboriginal women in band democracy.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The practice of &lt;strong&gt;enfranchisement&lt;/strong&gt; was kept in the 1951 &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;.  Voluntary enfranchisement was still permitted, as well as the compulsory  enfranchisement of Aboriginal women who married non-Aboriginal men was  continued and Aboriginals who received a university degree or who became a  doctor, lawyer or clergyman. Moreover, the 1951 Act introduced the  double-mother rule, which provided for the compulsory enfranchisement of  persons whose mother and grandmother had obtained Indian status only through  marriage to a man with status. However, under the new Act, the minister could  only enfranchise an individual or band upon the advice of a special committee  established for that purpose.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The new Act removed many of the prohibitions on tradition  Aboriginal practices and ceremonies, such as potlaches and wearing traditional  “costume” at public dances, exhibitions and stampedes. The Act, however,  continued many of the paternalistic elements of earlier versions. For example,  the Act made it an offence for Aboriginals to be in the possession of  intoxicants or to be intoxicated. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;One of the more important reforms concerned the application  of &lt;strong&gt;provincial law&lt;/strong&gt; to Aboriginals.  Previously, the federal government had asserted exclusive jurisdiction to  legislate in the context of Aboriginals. Changes made in 1951, however,  provided that whenever a provincial law dealt with a subject not covered under  the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;, such as child welfare  matters, Parliament would allow that provincial law to apply to Aboriginals on  reserves. This opened the door to provincial participation in Aboriginal law  making.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;hr /&gt;

&lt;h3 id=&quot;aboriginal&quot;&gt;Aboriginal Policy in Transition: The &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; from 1952 to 2002&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Contemporary  amendments and revisions of the Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Since the revisions of 1951, the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; has continued to undergo changes, both in terms of its  underlying philosophy and its specific provisions. The following provides an  overview of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; during the  period 1952 to 2002.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;Conflicting Views on Aboriginal  Policy&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;From the 1950s onward, Aboriginal policy in Canada  entered into a complex period. On the one hand, there still remained the  traditional philosophy of assimilation, which encouraged Aboriginals to leave  behind their Indian status and integrate into the broader Canadian society.  Contrasted to this, however, were new approaches to Aboriginal policy, based on  the desire of Aboriginal groups to assume control over their own communities,  as well as new ideas derived from the international indigenous movements of the  time. Central to this approach was the view of Aboriginal groups as distinct  nations, which were entitled to political, social and economic  self-determination. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This period of complexity is evident in the range of actual  and proposed amendments that occurred to the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; between 1952 and 1985. For example, in 1960, Aboriginals  received the right to vote federally without having to give up their Indian  status. Furthermore, in 1961, the compulsory enfranchisement provisions were  removed from the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;, meaning  that Aboriginals could no longer be forced to give up their Indian status. This  eliminated some of the key assimilation provisions of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;, which had been in existence since the late 1800s.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In 1969, however, the federal government introduced the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/lib/phi/histlws/cp1969_e.pdf&quot;&gt;1969 White  Paper&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; on Aboriginal affairs. This strategy paper proposed the abolition  of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; altogether, the  rejection of land claims, and the assimilation of Aboriginals into Canadian  society (with the status of an ethnic minority, as opposed to being a distinct  national-cultural group). Strong Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal criticism of the  1969 White Paper eventually led the federal government to back away from this  position.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;The 1985 Revision of  the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;One of the more significant changes to the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; came in 1985, when the  federal government introduced &lt;strong&gt;Bill C-31&lt;/strong&gt;.  This amendment was in response to changes in Canada’s constitutional framework;  in particular, the introduction of the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/canadian-charter-rights-and-freedoms-introduction-charter-rights&quot;&gt;Canadian  Charter of Rights and Freedoms&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; in 1982. Section 15 of the &lt;em&gt;Charter&lt;/em&gt; prohibited discrimination based  on certain characteristics, such as race, ethnicity, religion, sex, age, or  mental or physical disability. This right to equality had important  implications for sections of the &lt;em&gt;Indian  Act&lt;/em&gt;, particularly in regard to the historical practice of compulsory  enfranchisement for Aboriginal women who married non-Aboriginal men (while  Aboriginal men marrying non-Aboriginal women could retain their Indian status).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Indian Act, 1985&lt;/em&gt; removed this discrimination by asserting that women could no longer gain or  lose Indian status as a result of marriage. Moreover, the new Act permitted the  restoration of Indian status to several groups that had been forcefully  enfranchised in the past. This included Aboriginal women who had lost status  due to marrying non-Aboriginals; children enfranchised as a result of their  mothers’ marriage to non-Aboriginals; persons enfranchised as a result of the  double-mother provision; and illegitimate children of Aboriginal women who lost  their Indian status because of non-Aboriginal paternity.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In addition to removing elements of discrimination from the  Act, the 1985 revision also granted Aboriginal bands the right to determine  their own membership. Under the Act, bands were allowed to administer and  update their band lists, which was a record of all persons who were recognized  as formally belonging to the band. Moreover, bands were allowed to establish  their own rules of membership in administering their band lists. This reform  enabled greater Aboriginal control over who was to be considered an Aboriginal  for the purpose of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;Recent Amendments to  the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The last major revision of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; occurred in 1985. Since that time, however, there have  been further amendments to the legislation. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In 1988, the Act was changed to allow bands greater powers  to tax land interests on their reserves, as well as permitted individuals to  mortgage these leaseholds on reserves. The purpose of these reforms was to  provide bands with access to revenues and financing in order to promote  economic development on reserves.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The 1990s and early 2000s saw renewed efforts on the part of  the federal government to significantly revise the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;. In the early 1990s, the federal government announced  its intention to eventually abolish the &lt;em&gt;Indian  Act&lt;/em&gt;. As part of this policy, the government introduced the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Indian  Act Optional Modification Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; in 1996. The proposed legislation  included modifications to the Indian Act in several areas, such as the system  of the band governance, bylaw authority, and the regulation of reserve land and  resources. The Act faced strong opposition from Aboriginal groups, and was  never passed by Parliament.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In 2002, the federal government again initiated a major  overhaul of the Indian Act with the introduction of &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;The First Nations Governance Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.  Central to the new Act was the requirement that Aboriginal bands develop a  system by which to choose their leaders, as well as clear rules regarding how  band money is spent. Furthermore, under the Act, the actions of Aboriginal  bands would no longer be exempt from the &lt;em&gt;Canadian  Charter of Rights and Freedoms&lt;/em&gt;. Again, however, the new Act faced  opposition from Aboriginal groups and was never passed by Parliament.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For more information on &lt;em&gt;The  First Nations Governance Act&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?Parl=37&amp;Ses=2&amp;ls=c7&quot;&gt;Parliament  of Canada: Bill C-7: The First Nations Governance Act&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;While these large overhaul packages were never passed, the  federal government did implement more narrow revisions of the Indian Act during  this period. In 1999, it enacted &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;The First Nations Land Management Act&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; (FNLMA). Previously, reserve land management, such as environmental standards  and land use policies, was governed by provisions of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;. Under the FNLMA, however, bands can apply to the  federal government to assume control over land management on their reserves.  The purpose of the legislation is to improve band capacities and opportunities  for economic development.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For more information on &lt;em&gt;The  First Nations Land Management Act&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/pub/matr/fnl_e.html&quot;&gt;Government of Canada:  First Nations Land Management Act&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, in 2000, the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt; was amended to allow band members living off-reserve to  vote in band elections and referenda. This amendment was in response to a 1999  Supreme Court of Canada decision which concluded that the denial of voting  rights for off-reserve band members violated their right to equality under  Section 15 of the &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/canadian-charter-rights-and-freedoms-introduction-charter-rights&quot;&gt;Canadian  Charter of Rights and Freedoms&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For more information on this amendment of the &lt;em&gt;Indian Act&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/nr/prs/s-d2000/00168bkd_e.html&quot;&gt;Government of Canada:  Amendments to the &lt;em&gt;Indian Band Election  Regulations&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;em&gt;Indian Referendum  Regulations&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;hr /&gt;

&lt;h3 id=&quot;sources&quot;&gt;Sources and Links to More Information&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;List of article  sources and links to more on this topic&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;Sources Used for this  Article&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;“An Act for the gradual enfranchisement of  Indians, the better management of Indian affairs, and to extend the provisions  of the Act 31st Victoria, Chapter 42.” &lt;em&gt;Indian  and Northern Affairs Canada&lt;/em&gt;.  14 April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/lib/phi/histlws/hln/a69c6_e.html&quot;&gt;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/lib/phi/histlws/hln/a69c6_e.html&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;“Historical Legislation: 1850-1970.” &lt;em&gt;Indian and Northern Affairs Canada&lt;/em&gt;. 14  April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/qc/csi/hist1_e.pdf&quot;&gt;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/qc/csi/hist1_e.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;“Current Legislation: 1985.” &lt;em&gt;Indian and Northern Affairs Canada&lt;/em&gt;. 14  April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/qc/csi/present1_e.pdf&quot;&gt;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/qc/csi/present1_e.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;“First   Nations Land  Management Act.” &lt;em&gt;Indian and Northern  Affairs Canada&lt;/em&gt;.  23 April 2004. 14 April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/pub/matr/fnl_e.html&quot;&gt;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/pub/matr/fnl_e.html&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;“Amendments to the &lt;em&gt;Indian Band Election Regulations&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;em&gt;Indian Referendum Regulations&lt;/em&gt;.” Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. 232  April 2004. 14 April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/nr/prs/s-d2000/00168bkd_e.html&quot;&gt;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/nr/prs/s-d2000/00168bkd_e.html&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;Hurley, M. “Bill C-7: The First Nations  Governance Act.” &lt;em&gt;Library of Parliament&lt;/em&gt;.  18 December 2003. 14 April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?Parl=37&amp;Ses=2&amp;ls=c7&quot;&gt;http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?Parl=37&amp;amp;Ses=2&amp;amp;ls=c7&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;Hurley, M. “The Indian Act.” &lt;em&gt;Government of Canada&lt;/em&gt;. 04 October 1999. 14  April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/EB/prb9923-e.htm&quot;&gt;http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/EB/prb9923-e.htm&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;Hurley, M. “The Crown&amp;#8217;s Fiduciary Relationship  with Aboriginal Peoples.” &lt;em&gt;Library of the  Parliament&lt;/em&gt;.” 18 December 2002. 14 April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/prb0009-e.htm&quot;&gt;http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/prb0009-e.htm&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;“Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal  People.” &lt;em&gt;Indian and Northern Affairs Canada&lt;/em&gt;.  October 1996. 14 April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ch/rcap/sg/sgmm_e.html&quot;&gt;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ch/rcap/sg/sgmm_e.html&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;Henderson,  W. “Indian Act.” &lt;em&gt;The Canadian  Encyclopedia&lt;/em&gt;. 14 April 2008. &amp;lt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/prb0009-e.htm&quot;&gt;http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&amp;amp;Params=A1SEC876967&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;h4&gt;Links to More  Information&lt;/h4&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/I-5/&quot;&gt;Department  of Justice Canada: Indian Act ( R.S., 1985, c. I-5 )&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ch/rcap/sg/sgmm_e.html&quot;&gt;Indian and Northern  Affairs Canada: Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.canadiana.org/citm/themes/aboriginals/aboriginals8_e.html&quot;&gt;Canada  in the Making: 1876 - 1877: The Indian Act, 1876 and Numbered Treaties Six and  Seven&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/judicial-system-legal-issues">Judicial System &amp;amp; Legal Issues</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/1763">1763</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/aboriginals">Aboriginals</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/canadian-charter-rights-and-freedoms">Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/constitution-canada">Constitution of Canada</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/federal-government-0">Federal Government</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/federal-legislation">Federal Legislation</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/first-nations">First Nations</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/indian">Indian</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/indian-act">Indian Act</category>
 <category domain="http://www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/royal-proclamation">Royal Proclamation</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 13:58:44 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jay Makarenko</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">422 at http://www.mapleleafweb.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
