Feds to change discriminatory Indian Act rules
Updated Tue. Jun. 2 2009 8:08 PM ETThe Canadian Press
VANCOUVER -- The federal government will change rules on Indian status that discriminate against the descendants of native women who married non-native men.
Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl said Tuesday that Ottawa will amend the Indian Act rather than challenge a judgment by the B.C. Court of Appeal.
The ruling in April stemmed from a longstanding dispute involving Sharon McIvor of Merritt, B.C., and her son Charles Grismer, who was barred from passing Indian status to his children.
McIvor, a member of the Lower Nicola Indian Band, lost her Indian status when she married a non-aboriginal man. After the Indian Act was amended in 1985, she applied for reinstatement for herself and her son, a process that took 20 years.
Strahl said Tuesday the court has firmly ruled on what parts of the Indian Act violate equality provisions of the Charter of Rights.
"We agree with their decision," he said outside the House of Commons.
Chief Lisa Shaver, the British Columbia representative for the Assembly of First Nations' Women's Council, said she's thrilled that the government won't challenge the Appeal Court ruling.
"This is pretty huge in terms of the expulsion that's caused great psychological, emotional and economic suffering amongst our families when they're discriminated (against) because they don't have the status," said Shaver, a member of the Penelakut Band in Chemainus, B.C.
She said several aboriginal groups have made recommendations on how Ottawa can amend the Indian Act.
"It's just a matter of ensuring that consultation is properly undertaken nationwide."
That's also a concern for Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the B.C. Union of Indian Chiefs, who said the Conservatives have a poor track record when it comes to input from First Nations groups.
"We're not impressed with their unwillingness to properly consult with the aboriginal people of this country on issues of great importance," he said.
Ottawa has until next April to fix the problem and Strahl said he has already contacted the First Nation involved and the Native Women's Association of Canada.
He hopes to work with them over the summer "to come up with the best plan forward in a legislative way to correct what the court sees as really a gender-based (issue) that has to be fixed."
Indian status involves a range of entitlements, including extended health benefits, money for education and exemption from some taxes. The court also found there are other non-monetary benefits, such as acceptance in the aboriginal community.
Strahl said he doesn't know how many people might be added to the ranks of those with Indian status.
Before 1985, if two generations of status Indian men married non-Indian women, the next generation lost its Indian status at age 21.
The 1985 reforms meant that generation's Indian status was reinstated for life but McIvor and her son were not covered because she was a woman.
"While the legislative schemes are complex, the complaint is essentially that Mr. Grismer's children would have Indian status if his Indian status had been transmitted to him through his father rather than his mother," Justice Harvey Groberman wrote in the B.C. Appeal Court judgment.