The Indian Act Explained

Summary

In this interview, Bob Joseph discusses his book '21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act,' which outlines the historical and ongoing impact of the Indian Act on Indigenous peoples in Canada. Joseph explains how the Act's policies, such as the status Indian system and residential schools, aimed to assimilate Indigenous people into mainstream Canadian society but instead led to cultural preservation and resistance. The conversation highlights the ongoing journey towards reconciliation and the importance of understanding this complex history.

Takeaways

• 📜 The Indian Act, established in 1876, has had a profound impact on the relationship between Canada and Indigenous peoples, shaping many aspects of their lives.
• 📚 Bob Joseph's book, '21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act', aims to educate Canadians about the Act's contents and its repercussions, fostering reconciliation.
• 🔗 The initial article that inspired the book went viral, with 55,000 views in the first month, indicating a significant interest in the subject among Canadians.
• 🚫 The Act created a Status Indian system that discriminated against Indigenous women who married non-Indigenous men, causing them to lose their status and their children's status as well.
• 🏡 Status Indians who lost their status, often due to forced assimilation policies, were required to leave the reserves, separating them from their communities.
• 🔄 Although changes were made in 1985 to allow Indigenous women to maintain their status and for its inheritance by their children, not all bands have reinstated former members.
• 🏭 The Indian Act introduced residential schools, which non-Indigenous Canadians are now starting to understand better due to efforts like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
• 🏞️ The Act created reserves as a temporary holding place for Indigenous peoples until they assimilated, but they did not actually own the land.
• 🆔 The Act also enforced a policy of renaming Indigenous individuals with European names as part of the assimilation process.
• ⛔️ The Act imposed restrictions on Indigenous peoples' freedom, such as needing permission from Indian Agents to leave the reserve and banning them from forming political organizations.
• 🗳️ It wasn't until the 20th century that First Nations were allowed to vote, with some gaining suffrage as late as 1961, reflecting a long history of disenfranchisement.

Q & A

What is the main focus of Bob Joseph's book '21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act'?

The book aims to educate Canadians about the lesser-known aspects of the Indian Act and its impact on Indigenous peoples, thereby helping to facilitate reconciliation.

How did Bob Joseph's original article lead to the creation of his book?

The article went viral with 55,000 views in the first month, indicating a significant interest in the subject, which prompted Bob Joseph to expand on the bullet points and write a book.

What was the Indian Act's primary intention regarding Indigenous women and marriage?

The Indian Act was designed to assimilate Indigenous people into the economic mainstream by creating a Status Indian system where Indigenous women who married non-Indigenous men would lose their status, as would their children.

When was the gender discrimination in the Indian Act regarding marriage rights addressed?

The gender discrimination was addressed in 1985 with an amendment called Bill C-31, which allowed Indigenous women and their children to maintain status upon marrying non-Indigenous men.

How did the Indian Act impact residential schools and what is Bob Joseph's perspective on non-Indigenous Canadians' understanding of this impact?

The Indian Act introduced residential schools, and Bob Joseph believes that non-Indigenous Canadians are starting to understand the repercussions of this decision more as time goes on and more information comes to light.

What was the purpose behind creating reserves according to the Indian Act?

The purpose behind creating reserves was to have a place to put Indigenous peoples until they assimilated, acting as a temporary holding area.

Why did the Indian Act rename individuals with European names?

The Indian Act was part of the assimilation process, and renaming individuals was a way to track and facilitate assimilation by legally racially defining them.

How did the Indian Act restrict First Nations' political activities?

The Indian Act banned First Nations from forming political organizations and restricted them from leaving the reserve without permission from the Indian Agent.

What was the cultural impact of the Indian Act's prohibition on traditional practices and regalia?

The Indian Act's prohibitions were tantamount to cultural genocide, as they attempted to suppress Indigenous identity and culture by forbidding the use of traditional language, legal systems, regalia, and practices like potlatches.

How did the Indian Act influence the political rights of First Nations peoples?

The Indian Act denied First Nations the right to vote and to form political organizations, significantly limiting their political participation and influence.

What is Bob Joseph's view on the effectiveness of the Indian Act in achieving its intended purpose of assimilation?

Bob Joseph suggests that the Indian Act was not effective in assimilating Indigenous peoples, as it kept them separate by enforcing distinct laws and lands, which goes against the principle of assimilation.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to Bob Joseph's Book on the Indian Act

Bob Joseph, author of '21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act: Helping Canadians Make Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples a Reality', is introduced. The book aims to educate Canadians about the Indian Act of 1876 and its impact on Indigenous peoples. Joseph is the founder of Indigenous Corporate Training, specializing in cultural relations. His book originated from a viral article that garnered significant attention, indicating a public interest in the subject. The interview with Steve delves into the contents of the book, discussing its origins and the importance of reconciliation.

57:25

🏡 The Indian Act's Impact on Indigenous Land Rights

The Indian Act established the reserve system, which reserved land for Indigenous peoples' use but did not grant them ownership. This system was designed to assimilate Indigenous peoples into the Canadian mainstream by confining them to specific areas until they could be integrated. The Act also led to the creation of the status Indian system, which had discriminatory effects, particularly on Indigenous women who lost their status and the rights associated with it upon marrying non-Indigenous men. Although amendments in 1985 addressed some of these issues, challenges in reinstating status and associated benefits persist.

02:28

👥 The Indian Act's Restrictions on Personal Freedoms

The Indian Act imposed significant restrictions on the personal freedoms of Indigenous peoples. It enforced a permit system to restrict travel off reserves, renamed individuals with European names as part of an assimilation strategy, and banned the formation of political organizations. The Act also prohibited the sale of alcohol and ammunition to Indigenous peoples and restricted their participation in the economy. These measures were part of a broader policy aimed at assimilating Indigenous peoples into Canadian society by controlling their movements, identities, and cultural expressions.

07:32

🚫 The Indian Act's Cultural Suppression

The Indian Act sought to suppress Indigenous culture by banning practices such as speaking Indigenous languages, participating in traditional legal systems, and wearing traditional regalia. It also made potlatches illegal, an important cultural practice for many Indigenous communities. These measures were part of a broader effort to assimilate Indigenous peoples by eradicating their cultural identity, which the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has characterized as 'cultural genocide'.

12:35

🗳️ The Indian Act and Political Rights

The Indian Act denied Indigenous peoples the right to vote until 1961, long after most Canadians had gained suffrage. This denial was rooted in the Act's definition of 'Indian' as less than a person, thereby excluding them from political participation. However, recent elections have seen increased Indigenous political engagement, with Indigenous communities recognizing their potential to influence election outcomes and advocating for their interests.

17:37

📜 The Legacy and Repercussions of the Indian Act

The Indian Act's legacy is complex and far-reaching. It created a system of separate laws and lands for Indigenous peoples, which has hindered their assimilation into Canadian society. Despite the Act's intent to subjugate Indigenous peoples, it paradoxically preserved their distinct cultural identities. Bob Joseph suggests that Canada is more of a 'cultural fruitcake' than a melting pot, with diverse cultures, including Indigenous cultures, maintaining their uniqueness within the nation.

22:37

🤝 Conclusion and Thanks

The conversation concludes with thanks to Bob Joseph for his informative discussion on the Indian Act and its effects on Indigenous peoples. His insights contribute to a broader understanding of the need for reconciliation and the importance of educating Canadians about this critical aspect of the country's history.

Keywords

💡Indian Act

The Indian Act is a set of laws in Canada that has governed the lives of Indigenous peoples since 1876. It was designed to assimilate Indigenous people into the mainstream economy and society by enforcing a separate legal system and social structure. The Act has had profound repercussions on Indigenous communities, including the loss of land rights, cultural practices, and personal identities. In the script, Bob Joseph discusses how the Act denied women status, imposed a system of reserves, and enforced enfranchisement, among other things.

💡Assimilation

Assimilation refers to the process of integrating a minority group into a dominant culture, often by suppressing or eliminating the minority's original culture and identity. In the context of the Indian Act, assimilation was a key policy goal, aiming to make Indigenous peoples conform to the dominant European-Canadian way of life. The Act did this by, for example, banning traditional practices, forcing the adoption of European names, and setting up reserves as temporary places until complete assimilation was achieved.

💡Status Indians

Status Indians are Indigenous people in Canada who are registered as members of a First Nation and are entitled to certain rights and benefits under the Indian Act. The Act created a system that defined who could be considered a 'Status Indian,' often depriving Indigenous women and their children of status if they married non-Indigenous men. The script mentions the 1985 amendment to the Indian Act (Bill C-31) that aimed to rectify some of these discriminatory practices.

💡Reserves

Reserves are designated lands for the use of Status Indians in Canada, established under the Indian Act. They were created as a means to segregate Indigenous peoples while they were being assimilated into Canadian society. The script explains that the land within reserves is not owned by the Indigenous peoples living on it but is held in trust by the Canadian government, highlighting the lack of land ownership rights for Indigenous communities.

💡Residential Schools

Residential schools were institutions established by the Canadian government and churches to forcibly assimilate Indigenous children into Euro-Canadian culture. These schools are notorious for their harsh conditions and the widespread abuse of the children placed in them. The script discusses the legacy of residential schools and the efforts of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to address their impact.

💡Enfranchisement

Enfranchisement, in the context of the Indian Act, refers to the policy of removing Indigenous peoples' legal status as Indians, thereby denying them certain rights and protections under the Act. This could occur, for example, if an Indigenous person obtained a university degree or if they left the reserve for an extended period without permission. The script mentions enfranchisement as a tool to assimilate Indigenous peoples by stripping them of their legal status.

💡Potlatch

A Potlatch is a traditional gift-giving festival practiced by Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest coast, including the Kwakwaka'wakw, with deep cultural and spiritual significance. The Indian Act made Potlatches illegal, as part of the broader effort to suppress Indigenous cultures. The script recounts how Indigenous peoples continued to hold Potlatches in secret, demonstrating resistance to the Act's cultural assimilation policies.

💡Cultural Genocide

Cultural genocide refers to the systematic destruction of a group's cultural heritage, often as part of a broader campaign of subjugation. The script uses this term to describe the impact of the Indian Act's prohibitions on Indigenous languages, traditional practices, and ceremonies. The intent was to 'kill the Indian within the child,' reflecting an attempt to eradicate Indigenous identity.

💡Self-Government

Self-government in the context of Indigenous peoples in Canada refers to their right to govern themselves according to their customs and traditions. The Indian Act undermined this by imposing a band council system that was accountable to the Canadian government rather than to the Indigenous community. The script discusses the ongoing struggle for self-government as a means of reclaiming Indigenous autonomy and identity.

💡Reconciliation

Reconciliation is the process of修复 broken relationships and fostering understanding between parties that have been in conflict. In the script, reconciliation is discussed as a necessary step for Canada to take in response to the historical injustices and ongoing impacts of the Indian Act on Indigenous peoples. This includes acknowledging past wrongs, such as those committed through the residential school system, and working towards a more equitable relationship.

💡Indigenous Corporate Training

Indigenous Corporate Training is the firm founded by Bob Joseph, as mentioned in the script. It specializes in cultural relations instruction, aiming to educate Canadians about Indigenous history, culture, and current issues. The company's work is part of the broader effort at reconciliation and raising awareness about the realities of Indigenous peoples in Canada, as discussed throughout the script.

Highlights

The Indian Act, established in 1876, has significantly structured the relationship between Canada and Indigenous peoples.

Bob Joseph's book, '21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act', aims to educate Canadians on reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

The original article that inspired the book went viral, indicating a significant public interest in the subject.

The Indian Act was designed to assimilate Indigenous peoples into the economic mainstream by creating a Status Indian system.

Status Indian women who married non-Indian men would lose their status, as would their children, affecting their right to live on reserves.

Bill C-31 in 1985 addressed gender discrimination by allowing Indigenous women to maintain their status upon marrying non-Indian men.

Some bands have been slow to reinstate Indigenous women who lost their status, due to financial constraints or other reasons.

The Indian Act introduced residential schools, which non-Indigenous Canadians are now starting to understand better.

The Indian Act created reserves as a temporary holding place for Indigenous peoples until they assimilated.

Indigenous peoples do not own the land they live on; it's property of Indigenous Affairs, highlighting the lack of property rights.

The Indian Act enforced a policy of renaming individuals with European names as part of the assimilation process.

Bob Joseph's traditional name, K'ack-sum Nakwala, reflects his heritage and future role as a hereditary chief.

The Indian Act restricted First Nations from leaving the reserve without permission from the Indian Agent.

World War II Indigenous veterans faced loss of status upon return due to prolonged absence, despite fighting for their country.

The Indian Act enforced enfranchisement, causing the loss of status for any First Nation admitted to university.

The Act allowed the expropriation of reserve portions for roads, railways, and public works, and even relocated entire reserves.

The Indian Act prohibited First Nations from forming political organizations, severely limiting their rights to self-governance.

The Indian Act imposed a band council system, disrupting traditional governance structures with a system of elected chiefs and councils.

The Indian Act forbade First Nations from speaking their language, practicing their traditional law, and wearing traditional regalia.

The Act made potlatches illegal, an attempt to eradicate cultural practices and further assimilate Indigenous peoples.

The Indian Act denied First Nations the right to vote, a right that many did not gain until 1961.

Despite an apology for the residential school system, there are concerns about the sincerity of the Canadian government's commitment to reconciliation.

The Indian Act created a permit system for First Nations to sell products from their farms, controlling their economic activities.

The Indian Act is viewed by some as a legislative tool of subjugation, failing to assimilate Indigenous peoples as intended.

Transcripts

>> Steve: SINCE 1876, THE INDIAN ACT HAS STRUCTURED THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CANADA AND

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, WITH PROFOUND REPERCUSSIONS.

AND THOUGH YOU'VE NO DOUBT HEARD OF THAT ACT, YOU MAY NOT KNOW MUCH ABOUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN

IT.

THAT'S WHERE BOB JOSEPH'S NEW BOOK COMES IN.

IT'S CALLED "21 THINGS YOU MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT THE INDIAN ACT: HELPING CANADIANS MAKE

RECONCILIATION WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES A REALITY."

HE IS FOUNDER OF INDIGENOUS CORPORATE TRAINING, A FIRM SPECIALIZING IN CULTURAL

RELATIONS INSTRUCTION, AND HE JOINS US NOW FOR MORE.

BOB, GREAT TO MEET YOU.

THANKS FOR COMING IN TONIGHT.

>> Bob Joseph: THANK YOU.

>> Steve: THIS BOOK IS A RESULT, I GATHER, OF AN ARTICLE YOU ORIGINALLY WROTE AND

EXPANDED ON AND THAT ARTICLE PRETTY MUCH WENT VIRAL, RIGHT?

HOW MANY PEOPLE LOOKED AT THAT?

>> 55,000 IN THE FIRST MONTH, YOU KNOW?

IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE THOUGHT ARE WE READING THE NUMBERS RIGHT?

PEOPLE WERE JUST, YOU KNOW, SHARING AND IT WAS JUST GOING CRAZY.

>> Steve: WHAT DID THAT TELL YOU?

>> I THOUGHT THIS HIT A NERVE, RIGHT?

THEY'RE INTERESTED IN THE SUBJECT.

I SHOULD REALLY EXPAND ON THE BULLET POINTS IS WHAT I SHOULD DO BECAUSE IT WAS JUST SORT

OF -- KEEP IT AT A HIGH LEVEL AND SORT OF A QUICK DESCRIPTION AND, YEAH.

SO THAT WAS SORT OF THE GENESIS, IF YOU WILL.

>> Steve: LET'S GO THROUGH, BECAUSE WE LIKE TO GO INDEPTH HERE, LET'S GO THROUGH THE 21

THINGS.

WE WANT TO GO THROUGH THEM ALL.

SOME WE'LL SPEND MORE TIME ON OTHERS.

THE FIRST ONE DENIED WOMEN STATUS.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

>> THE INDIAN ACT WAS DESIGNED TO ASSIMILATE PEOPLE INTO THE ECONOMIC MAINSTREAM OF THE

COUNTRY.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE THOUGHT WE WOULD DO IT WAS BY CREATING A STATUS INDIAN SYSTEM.

AND THE STATUS INDIAN SYSTEM BASICALLY SAID THAT INDIAN WOMEN WHO MARRIED NON-INDIAN MEN WOULD

LOSE THEIR STATUS AND SO WOULD THEIR CHILDREN.

IF YOU LOST YOUR STATUS, THAT MEANT YOU HAD TO LEAVE THE RESERVE.

YOU COULDN'T LIVE THERE.

YOU COULDN'T BE THERE WITH YOUR WHOLE EXTENDED FAMILY.

WHEREAS IN

>> Steve: CLEARLY A DOUBLE STANDARD THERE.

DOES THAT STILL EXIST TO THIS DAY?

>> IT'S STILL THERE.

YOU KNOW WHAT?

YOU KNOW, WE FIXED IT IN ABOUT 1985, THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT CALLED BILL C-31.

AND BILL C-31 REALLY WAS A HUMAN RIGHTS COMPLAINT BY INDIAN WOMEN WHO SAID THIS REALLY

DISCRIMINATES AGAINST US AND NOT THE MEN, AND SO IT SAID THAT THEY COULD -- THEY WOULDN'T LOSE

THEIR STATUS ANYMORE UPON MARRYING NON-INDIAN MEN.

THEIR CHILDREN WOULD GAIN IT.

AND IT WOULD WORK THE SAME FOR THE MEN.

IT ALLOWED FOR A REINSTATEMENT OF INDIAN WOMEN IF THEY HAD LOST WITHIN A GENERATION OF THE BILL,

THEY COULD GO BACK AND BE REINSTATED.

>> Steve: IS THAT HAPPENING?

>> SOME BANDS ARE PRETTY GOOD ABOUT IT.

YOU'RE ONE OF OUR PEOPLE.

WE'LL PUT YOU BACK ON THE LIST.

OTHER BANDS SAID WE'RE NOT GETTING ANY NEW MONEY FROM INDIGENOUS AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS

TO LOOK AFTER MORE PEOPLE.

WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.

SOME BANDS HAVE FOUGHT BITTER LEGAL BANDS TO NOT REINSTATE.

MANY THEY'RE GETTING OIL AND GAS REVENUES.

IF YOU BECOME A MEMBER, YOU ARE ACTUALLY ENTITLED TO A BAND ANNUITY FOR OIL AND GAS REVENUE.

THERE'S A WHOLE RANGE.

>> Steve: THE INDIAN ACT OF COURSE INTRODUCED RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS.

DO YOU THINK FINALLY NON-INDIGENOUS CANADIANS ARE STARTING TO GET A BETTER

UNDERSTANDING OF THE REPERCUSSIONS OF THAT DECISION?

>> YEAH.

YOU KNOW -- SO I'VE BEEN DOING THE TRAINING NOW FOR 20-PLUS YEARS, AND IN THE EARLY DAYS, I

CAN REMEMBER ONE OF THE FIRST WORKSHOPS I EVER DID, A LADY CAME UP TO ME ON THE BREAK, SHE

WAS CRYING.

IT WAS A BREAK.

I GO, WHAT'S WRONG?

HOW CAN I HELP YOU?

SHE SAID, I CAN'T BELIEVE WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME, YOU KNOW?

I DON'T BELIEVE MY CHURCH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THAT.

IT JUST SOUNDED SO SURREAL TO HER THAT IT REALLY UPSET HER.

SHE WAS ACTUALLY CRYING.

AND I SAID TO HER, I KNOW IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE BUT I'M TELLING YOU THE TRUTH HERE.

I'M NOT MAKING THIS STUFF UP.

YOU CAN'T.

AND AS TIME GOES ON, YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO START TO SEE IT MORE AND MORE AS THINGS WILL

START TO COME OUT, THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION AND SURVIVORS AND CERTAINLY SINCE

THE '94 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION, I SEE ACADEMIA, K

THROUGH 12, UNIVERSITIES, GOVERNMENTS, BUSINESSES, THEY'VE COMMITTED TO RECONCILIATION AND

IT TELLS YOU HOW TO DO THAT, GET MORE INFORMATION ON THE HISTORY AND CULTURE.

>> Steve: THE INDIAN ACT CREATED RESERVES.

WHY?

>> WE NEEDED TO PUT THEM SOMEWHERE UNTIL THEY ASSIMILATED.

SO A RESERVE IS LIKE IT SOUNDS.

IT'S RESERVED FOR THEIR USE AND BENEFIT.

THEY DON'T ACTUALLY OWN THE LAND THEY'VE BEEN USING AND OCCUPYING.

IT WAS JUST A PLACE WE WERE GOING TO PUT UNTIL THEY WERE ASSIMILATED.

SOMETIMES PEOPLE CONFUSE IT WITH RESERVATIONS.

WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY EXCEPT HOTELS, AIRLINES, RESTAURANTS.

>> Steve: RESERVATION IS AN AMERICAN TERM.

>> IF WE WERE IN THE UNITED STATES IT'S TRIBES AND RESERVATIONS BUT IN CANADA IT'S

BANDS AND RESERVES.

SO IN THE CONTEXT OF ASSIMILATION, IT'S A HOLDING PEN.

IT'S A PLACE THEY WERE GOING TO GO UNTIL THEY ASSIMILATED.

THEY STILL DON'T OWN THE LANDS THEY LIVE ON OR THE HOUSE -- IF YOU ASK IS THAT YOUR HOUSE?

OH, YEAH.

I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE FOREVER.

IT'S REALLY PROPERTY OF INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS.

>> Steve: THE INDIAN ACT RENAMED INDIVIDUALS WITH EUROPEAN NAMES.

>> YEAH.

>> Steve: IS YOUR NAME BOB JOSEPH?

>> MY ACTUAL NAME IS K'ACK-SUM NAKWALA.

>> Steve: WHAT LANGUAGE IS THAT.

>> IT'S QWAKWALA.

IN OUR TRADITIONAL LANGUAGE, K'ACK-SUM NAKWALA MEANS A POINT IN TIME WHERE A KILLER WHALE

BREACHES THE SURFACE.

IN OUR LANGUAGE IT MEANS RETURNING CHIEF SO MY DAD STOOD ME UP ON A POTLATCH WAY BACK IN

1982 AND MY DAD IS A HEREDITARY CHIEF, WHICH MEANS HE INHERITED HIS CHIEFTAINSHIP, WE BELIEVE

THAT TO BE THE CREATOR.

I'LL EVENTUALLY INHERIT IT.

HE GAVE ME THIS TRADITIONAL NAME THAT WOULD LET PEOPLE KNOW THIS IS A RETURNING CHIEF COMING

BACK.

WHEN WE SEE A KILLER WHALE IN FRONT OF THE VILLAGE, WE BELIEVE IT'S A RETURNING CHIEF.

>> Steve: WHY ARE YOU NAMED BOB JOSEPH?

>> THE INDIAN AGENTS -- SO THE WHOLE ASSIMILATION PROCESS, HOW DO YOU KNOW WHEN THAT EXACTLY

HAPPENED?

WE SET UP THIS SORT OF KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR, IF I CAN CALL IT THAT.

THE IDEA WAS WE NEED TO SOMEHOW TRACK WHEN ASSIMILATION HAS OCCURRED.

SO TO START OFF WITH, WE DECIDE, WE'LL LEGALLY RACIALLY DEFINE THEM AND WE'LL LOOK FOR WAYS TO

UNLEGALLY RACIALLY DEFINE THEM.

SO THAT WAS THE KICKOFF.

AND SO AN INDIAN AGENT WOULD COME AROUND TO YOUR COMMUNITY AND THEY'D SAY NAME AND YOU'D

SAY K'ACK-SUM NAKWALA AND THEY'D SAY, OKAY, BOB JOSEPH IT IS.

>> Steve: THAT'S HOW IT HAPPENED?

>> I GET ASKED ALL THE TIME ARE YOU THE JOSEPH IN SQUAMISH OR THE JOSEPH OVER HERE?

I HAVE TO TELL PEOPLE I'M PRETTY SURE WE HAD THE SAME INDIAN AGENT OR A LITTLE BIT OF INDIAN

AFFAIRS HUMOUR FOR YOU.

>> Steve: I WAS GOING TO SAY, IT'S OKAY FOR ME TO LAUGH AT THIS?

>> I WANT THIS TO BE A SAFE SPACE.

THAT'S HOW I DO OPERATE.

>> Steve: YOU TALK ABOUT THE POWER OF THE INDIAN AGENTS.

THE INDIAN ACT RESTRICTED FIRST NATIONS FROM LEAVING THE RESERVE WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE

INDIAN AGENT.

WHAT'S THAT ABOUT?

>> TOTALLY.

SO CANADA -- AGAIN, PART OF THIS ASSIMILATION POLICY, WE'RE GOING TO PUT THEM THERE AND WE'RE

GOING TO TRY TO KEEP THEM THERE AS LONG AS WE CAN AND THEY WOULD SEE THIS LAND OF OPPORTUNITY OUT

THERE AND WANT TO BECOME PART OF IT.

THE IDEA WAS WE WOULD MAKE THEM GET PERMISSION SLIPS SO WE COULD SHOW YOU COPIES OF PASSES THAT

WERE SUBMITTED.

IF YOU LEFT FOR MORE THAN 30 DAYS AT A TIME, YOU COULD BE AUTOMATICALLY ENFRANCHISED.

>> Steve: THAT'S ONE OF THEM THERE.

>> YES.

YOU LOST YOUR STATUS, BECAME NON-STATUS, YOU HAD TO LEAVE THE RESERVE BECAUSE THOSE ARE SET

ASIDE FOR THE USE OF STATUS INDIANS, NOT NON-STATUS INDIANS.

WE THINK ABOUT WORLD WAR II VETERANS.

THEY WENT TO FIGHT FOR GOD AND COUNTRY, AS IT WERE.

THEY CAME BACK, THE INDIAN AGENT SAID YOU LEFT FOR TOO LONG, YOU'RE NO LONGER A STATUS

INDIAN, THEY WOULD GO TO THE WAR VETERANS BENEFITS PROCESS AND THEY WOULD SAY YOU'RE AN INDIAN,

YOU'RE DEALT WITH DIFFERENTLY AND THEY WOULD END UP IN THE JORDAN'S PRINCIPLE VACUUM.

>> Steve: DOUBLE HUMILIATION.

>> THEY HAD WE HAD THIS TREATY WITH THE COUNTRY.

WE ARE PRETTY SURE THEY WILL LIVE UP TO IT.

WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO DO THAT EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS PROBABLY A CONSEQUENCE.

>> Steve: AND YOU'RE 150 YEARS LATER STILL WAITING FOR THE COUNTRY TO LIVE UP TO ITS TREATY

OBLIGATIONS.

>> YEAH.

IT'S STARTING TO HAPPEN.

A LOT OF THE MODERN TREATIES ARE VERY POSITIVE.

THINK ABOUT THE NISGA'A TREATY.

TO ME IT'S WORKING.

THEY'RE DOING A GOOD JOB.

>> Steve: THE INDIAN ACT ALSO ENFORCED ENFRANCHISEMENT, THE LOSS OF STATUS OF ANY FIRST

NATION ADMITTED TO UNIVERSITY.

WHY WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN THE CASE?

>> AGAIN THEY'RE THINKING THEY'RE PROBABLY FITTING IN A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAN THE OTHER

ONES.

IF THEY GET A UNIVERSITY DEGREE, THAT SHOULD BE GROUNDS FOR TAKING THEM OFF OF THE LIST.

>> Steve: THE INDIAN ACT COULD 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.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT ONE?

>> PRETTY CRAZY.

THEY DID DO A LOT OF RELOCATIONS.

PEOPLE WERE MOVED SOMETIMES HUNDREDS OF KILOMETRES AWAY FROM WHERE THEY ORIGINALLY WERE FROM.

YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AT A LOT OF RESERVES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, A LOT OF THEM ARE TAKEN UP BY

UTILITIES AND RIGHT-OF-WAY CORRIDORS AND ROADS AND SO I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, SORT OF

WHERE THINGS HAVE SHAKEN OUT.

THERE WERE STUFF IN THE INDIAN ACT -- I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY FROM SOME OF THE ONES COMING

UP -- WE DIDN'T WANT THEM TO FARM.

THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO SELL STUFF OFF OF THE RESERVE SO WE STOPPED THEM FROM -- YOU KNOW,

PROHIBITED THEM FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE ECONOMY AND THEN SAID, "BY THE WAY, YOU'RE

NOT USING THE LANDS TO THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE.

WE'RE GOING TO LEASE THOSE TO OTHER ENTERPRISING ENTREPRENEURS."

>> Steve: I THINK I SAW A QUOTE FROM FORMER PRIME MINISTER ARTHUR MEEHAN, THEY'RE NOT

CULTIVATING THE LAND THE WAY WE WANT TO SO WE'LL TAKE IT FROM THEM.

>> IT WAS QUITE A SYSTEM DESIGNED TO ASSIMILATE -- INITIALLY IT STARTS OFF NICELY.

A DYING RACE OF PEOPLE.

THEY'RE NOT FITTING IN MILITARILY AND ECONOMICALLY.

BUT AS THEY ARE NOT ASSIMILATING, WE GET MORE AND MORE AGGRESSIVE JUST IN TERMS OF

INDIAN ACT LEGISLATION.

>> Steve: YOU ANSWERED THIS NEXT QUESTION BUT I'LL PUT IT ON THE RECORD.

THE ACT COULD LEASE OUT ...

YOU JUST SPOKE TO THAT.

HERE'S THE NEXT ONE.

THE INDIAN ACT BANNED FIRST NATIONS FROM FORMING POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS.

HOW DO YOU GET AWAY WITH THAT?

>> YOU CANNOT MEET IN GROUPS OF THREE.

THE INDIAN AGENT, IT WAS THEIR JOB, IF THEY KNEW OF GATHERINGS OF THREE OR MORE WOULD BE IN

ATTENDANCE AND WOULD DEFINITELY LET YOU KNOW THE RULES OF THE GAME.

THERE'S A TRIBAL POLITICAL ORGANIZATION IN BRITISH COLUMBIA TODAY WHO STILL SAYS ONWARD

CHRISTIAN SOLDIER AT THE START OF THE MEETING BECAUSE THEY COULD MEET FOR RELIGIOUS

PURPOSES, APPROVED RELIGIOUS PURPOSES.

>> Steve: SOME OF THESE WE SHOULD SAY HAVE OBVIOUSLY BEEN CHANGED OVER TIME.

>> YEAH.

>> Steve: SOME OF THEM, I THINK 1951 IS A DATE WHEN MANY OF THEM WERE NOT GIVEN THE FORCE

OF LAW ANYMORE.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD WHEN FIRST NATIONS WERE ALLOWED TO CONVENE FOR

POLITICAL PURPOSES?

>> I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN RIGHT IN THE ERA.

>> Steve: '51.

>> IT'S ON THE HEELS OF WORLD WAR II.

THEY WERE FIGHTING ALONGSIDE.

THERE WAS A SOFTENING OF ATTITUDES FROM PEOPLE WHO WERE REALLY FIGHTING ALONGSIDE.

>> Steve: LET'S GO THROUGH A FEW OF THEM.

SOME ARE SELF EXPLANATORY.

THE INDIAN ACT PROHIBITED ANYONE, FIRST NATION OR NON-FIRST NATION, FROM

SOLICITING FUNDS FOR FIRST NATION LEGAL CLAIMS WITHOUT A SPECIAL LICENCE FROM THE

SUPERINTENDENT GENERAL, OBVIOUSLY A PROHIBITION AGAINST FIRST NATION PURSUING THEIR

RIGHTS.

IT PROHIBITED THE SALE OF ALCOHOL TO FIRST NATIONS.

PROHIBITED THE SALE OF AMMUNITION TO FIRST NATIONS.

HERE'S ONE: IT PROHIBITED POOL HALL OWNERS FROM ALLOWING FIRST NATIONS ENTRANCE.

>> YEAH.

>> Steve: WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT BEHIND THAT?

>> YOU KNOW, HONESTLY, SOME OF IT I STRUGGLE WITH JUST IN TERMS OF WHY -- I MEAN, A LOT OF

PEOPLE THAT COME TO OUR WORKSHOPS DO TOO.

WHY THE HECK DO THIS AND DO SOME OF THAT STUFF?

THE SHORT ANSWER IS: IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE UNLESS WE JUST LOOK AT IT, WE'RE TRYING TO

ASSIMILATE THEM.

I THINK POOL HALLS HAD A BAD REP AT ONE TIME.

THEY WERE JUST PLACES WHERE NOT GOOD PEOPLE WENT.

>> Steve: YOU'D BE UP TO NO GOOD IF YOU WENT TO A POOL HALL.

>> PRETTY MUCH.

>> Steve: GOTCHA.

HERE'S ONE THAT HAS HAD PROFOUND REPERCUSSIONS FOR DECADES AND DECADES.

THE INDIAN ACT IMPOSED THE BAND COUNCIL SYSTEM.

>> YEAH.

>> Steve: TELL US ABOUT THAT.

>> SO WHEN WE THINK ABOUT INDIGENOUS CULTURES AT THE TIME OF CONTACT, AND CONTACT HAPPENS

AT DIFFERENT TIMES IN DIFFERENT PLACES, ON THE EAST COAST THERE'S 500 YEARS OF CONTACT.

ON THE WEST COAST, MAYBE 130 YEARS OF CONTACT.

SO IT JUST HAPPENS AT DIFFERENT TIMES.

BUT AT THE TIME OF CONTACT THERE WERE ALREADY GOVERNING INSTITUTIONS.

YOU THINK ABOUT ONTARIO HERE, YOU'VE GOT THE SIX NATIONS AS THEY'RE COMMONLY CALLED, QUITE A

SOPHISTICATED POLITICAL INSTITUTION IN ITS OWN RIGHT.

>> Steve: JUST AN HOUR AND A HALF WEST OF HERE.

>> AND IT'S MADE POSSIBLE BY AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES.

THEY GREW CROPS THAT SUPPORTED HUGE POPULATIONS OF PEOPLE, REALLY SMALL AREA.

WHENEVER YOU HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN A SMALL AREA, YOU NEED MECHANISMS TO WORK OUT DISPUTES.

BUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAID WE CAN'T LET THEM KEEP GOVERNING THEMSELVES THE WAY THEY'RE

GOVERNING THEMSELVES.

THEY HAVE TO ELECT A CHIEF AND COUNCIL.

NOT ONLY THAT, BECAUSE IT'S PART OF AN ASSIMILATION PROCESS, THEY SAY, OH, AND WE'RE ONLY GOING TO

GIVE YOU TWO YEARS.

A CHIEF AND COUNCIL FOR EVERY 100 MEMBERS, YOU HAVE 321 MEMBERS, ONE CHIEF AND TWO

COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU TWO-YEAR ELECTION CYCLES BECAUSE WE WANT YOU TO

BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE ASSIMILATION PROCESSES.

THEY ELECT THEIR OWN PEOPLE BUT ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO INDIAN AFFAIRS.

THAT DRIVES THEM CRAZY.

WE NEED TO MOVE INTO THE INDIAN ACT AND SELF GOVERNMENT AND THAT CAN MEAN GOING BACK TO THE

TRADITIONAL WAYS OR ADOPTING AN ELECTORAL FORMAT THAT'S MORE IN LINE OF HOW THEY'RE DOING THINGS

AT THAT PARTICULAR COMMUNITY LEVEL.

I'VE SEEN BLENDS OF BOTH.

WE HAVE THE GOVERNMENT OF THE NISGA'A NATION AND THEY ELECT A PRESIDENT SO WE SEE DIFFERENT

WAYS THAT COMMUNITY ARE TACKLING THAT PIECE.

>> Steve: I'M GOING TO READ THE NEXT FOUR TOGETHER BECAUSE THEY ALL DEAL WITH CULTURE IN A

HUGE WAY.

THE INDIAN ACT FORBADE FIRST NATIONS FROM SPEAKING THEIR LANGUAGE.

FROM PRACTISING THEIR TRADITIONAL LEGAL.

IT FORBADE WESTERN FIRST NATIONS FROM APPEARING IN A DANCE, SHOW, EXHIBITION OR PAGEANT WEARING

TRADITIONAL REGALIA AND MADE POTLATCHES ILLEGAL.

WHAT IS THAT TANTAMOUNT TO?

>> THEY'RE GETTING AGGRESSIVE NOW.

THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE AWAY THE CULTURE.

THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION I THINK CAME UP WITH THE BEST WORDS, THAT GOVERNMENT

COMMISSION SAID, JUST LOOK AT THE EXPERIENCE OF RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS.

IT'S REALLY A CULTURAL GENOCIDE.

WE'RE TRYING TO KILL THE INDIAN WITHIN THE CHILD WAS SORT OF THE THOUGHT PROCESS.

SO IT REALLY WAS AN ATTEMPT TO TAKE AWAY THE CULTURE.

I DON'T KNOW -- YOU KNOW, I'M NOT AN EXPERT, BUT AS SOON AS YOU TELL PEOPLE THEY CAN'T BE

WHO THEY ARE, THAT'S A PRETTY TOUGH ROAD TO PLOW EVEN WITH GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION.

>> Steve: THE OTHER THING IS, OFTEN WHEN YOU TELL PEOPLE YOU CAN'T BE THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO

REDOUBLE THEIR EFFORTS TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE THIS.

>> DOUBLE DOWN.

DOUBLE DOWN.

AND SO THE INDIAN ACT WAS I THINK -- YOU LOOK AT IT OVER ITS HISTORY, WAS STARTING TO DOUBLE

DOWN MORE AND MORE AND THEY WERE RESPONDING IN KIND.

WE WOULD HAVE OUR POTLATCHES IN THE MIDDLE OF WINTER.

WE HAD A POTLATCH IN 2014.

MY DAD'S BASICALLY COACHING, MENTORING AND TEACHING ME HOW TO TAKE OVER HIS RESPONSIBILITIES

AND WE'RE SITTING WITH A BUNCH OF CHIEFS AT A HOUSE IN ALERT BAY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

OVERLOOKING THE OCEAN.

AND ONE OF THE CHIEFS SAID TO MY DAD, A BEAUTIFUL DAY FOR A POT LASH, BOBBY JOE.

LOOK AT HOW WINDY IT IS.

THE INDIAN AGENT CAN'T GET HERE.

WE ALL HAD A GOOD CHUCKLE ABOUT SOME OF THE BANNING OF POTLATCHES AND CULTURES AND

REGALIA AND SPEAKING THE LANGUAGE.

WE'RE DEFINITELY GETTING AGGRESSIVE AT THAT POINT AS A COUNTRY IN THE 1920s.

AND YOU CAN GO INTO VERY PROMINENT MUSEUMS AND SEE STUFF THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GO INTO

THE NORTHWEST COAST DISPLAY SECTION, COLLECTED IN 1921, AND IT WASN'T COLLECTED, IT WAS

CONFISCATED AND THERE'S PROBABLY SOMEONE OUT THERE WHO BELIEVES THEY OWN IT AND WANTS TO

REPATRIATE.

THERE IS A BIG PROCESS.

MUSEUMS HAVE BEEN COOPERATING WITH COMMUNITIES TO RETURN THINGS.

>> Steve: HERE'S ANOTHER ON POLITICAL RIGHTS: THE INDIAN ACT DENIED FIRST NATIONS THE RIGHT

TO VOTE.

>> YES.

>> Steve: WE KNOW MOST CANADIANS COULD VOTE AS OF 1867.

MALES.

WOMEN AS OF A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, NON-INDIGENOUS.

THERE ARE FIRST NATIONS IN THIS COUNTRY THAT GOT THE RIGHT TO VOTE IN 1961.

>> YES.

>> Steve: THAT'S IN THE LIFETIME OF, I SUSPECT, MOST OF THE PEOPLE WATCHING US RIGHT

NOW.

IS THAT WHY THERE IS SO MUCH MISTRUST AMONG FIRST NATIONS FOR SETTLER ELECTIONS?

>> I THINK THERE'S MISTRUST AND MAYBE SOME APATHY.

YOU KNOW, THE REASON THEY COULDN'T VOTE -- I THINK THAT'S THE INTERESTING PART.

IT'S LIKE WOMEN AND SUFFRAGE.

AN INDIAN WAS ANYBODY OTHER THAN A PERSON.

THAT'S WHAT THE INDIAN ACT WOULD HAVE SAID.

SOMEBODY LOOKED AT IT, NO, THEY'RE PERSONS.

THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO VOTE.

YOU THINK ABOUT THE AMALGAMATES MISSISSAUGAS.

IT'S HARD TO GET POLITICAL POWER AT THE POLLS WHEN YOU'RE A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE.

SOME OF THAT MIGHT BE SORT OF APATHY.

SOME OF IT IS DEFINITELY INSTRUMENT OF THE MAN.

WE DON'T WANT TO DO WHAT THE MAN IS TELLING US TO DO.

BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS LAST FEDERAL ELECTION, JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, CHIEF OF THE ASSEMBLY

OF FIRST NATIONS, PERRY BELLEGARDE, PUBLISHED A PAPER AND HE IDENTIFIED 42 RIDINGS

WHERE FIRST NATIONS BANDS COULD SWING THE ELECTION FROM ONE POLITICAL PARTY TO ANOTHER,

ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE CLOSE.

SO WE DID SEE REAL UPTAKE FROM INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE LAST FEDERAL ELECTION, THERE ARE NINE

INDIGENOUS MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT.

IT WAS PROBABLY THE MOST ENGAGED THAT THEY'VE EVER BEEN.

A LOT OF IT HAD TO DO WITH GOVERNMENT CUTBACKS.

THEY WERE TRYING TO FIND SOME WAY TO NOT BE CUT BACK SO HEAVILY AND A BUNCH OF POLITICAL

OBJECTIVES THERE.

I SHOULD SAY THE INUIT, WHO ARE 68,000 OF THE 1.4 MILLION SELF-IDENTIFIED ABORIGINAL

PEOPLES ARE THE MOST EFFECTIVE IN ELECTIONS.

IF WE LOOK AT THE PREVIOUS -- THE HARPER GOVERNMENT, THEY HAD AN INUK GAL WHO WAS THE

ENVIRONMENT MINISTER.

THEY RUN PEOPLE FROM ALL PARTIES AND THEY CAN PUT PEOPLE ON THE FRONT BENCH, SORT OF A POLITICAL

POWER LEVER.

THEY'RE THE MOST ORGANIZED BUT THE SMALLEST GROUP OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE COUNTRY.

THE MOST RECENT FEDERAL FISHERIES MINISTER TOO.

AND THE METIS WERE ALWAYS CONSIDERED CITIZENS AND THEY WERE ABLE TO VOTE IN FEDERAL,

PROVINCIAL, AND LOCAL ELECTIONS.

>> Steve: SINCE YOU MENTION IT.

BEFORE I GET TO THE LAST TWO.

BEFORE I GO ON WITH THAT.

STEPHEN HARPER GAVE AN HISTORIC APOLOGY FOR THE RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL SYSTEM FOISTED UPON

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE GOING BACK MANY, MANY YEARS, AND THE APOLOGY IS IN THE BOOK AND I

READ IT AND THEY SOUND LIKE VERY SINCERE, HEARTFELT, MEANINGFUL, IMPORTANT HISTORIC WORDS.

>> YEAH.

>> Steve: DO YOU TAKE THEM THAT WAY?

>> TOTALLY, TOTALLY.

I SHOULD CONFESS, MY DAD IS VERY INVOLVED IN RECONCILIATION AND BRINGING THE RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL

STORY TO LIGHT.

HE ACTUALLY WAS ONE OF MAYBE FOUR PEOPLE THAT HAD A HAND IN HELPING WRITE THE SPEECH THAT

WENT INTO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS SORT OF THE NEXT DAY AND HE'S TOLD ME PERSONALLY QUITE A FEW

OF THE WORDS THAT I PUT IN THERE MANAGED TO GET THROUGH TO THE PRIME MINISTER AND ACTUALLY BE

READ OUT, WHICH HE THOUGHT WAS GREAT.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S A REAL COMMITMENT THERE BY PRIME MINISTER HARPER.

IT WAS KIND OF A SURPRISE.

WE ALWAYS THOUGHT MAYBE IT WOULD HAPPEN WITH A DIFFERENT POLITICAL STRIPE.

>> Steve: YOU FOUND THAT IMPRESSIVE.

>> YEAH.

>> Steve: YET A FEW PAGES LATER IN THE BOOK YOU GO ON TO SAY, WELL, HE DID SAY THIS OTHER

THING ONCE AND I WONDER WHETHER THE APOLOGY THEREFORE IS AS SINCERE AS WE THOUGHT.

WHAT WAS THE OTHER THING HE SAID?

>> I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT HE SAID.

YOU'LL HAVE TO REMIND ME.

>> Steve: IT WAS ABOUT THE G-20 WHEN HE SAID CANADA IS IDEALLY POSITIONED TO DEAL WITH

A LOT OF THE ISSUES FORCING THE WORLD TODAY BECAUSE WE HAVE NO HISTORY OF COLONIALISM HERE.

>> OH, YES.

WE HAVE A LOT OF HISTORY.

THAT'S THE INTERESTING THING.

I DO THESE WORKSHOPS ALL THE TIME, ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT AND SOMETIMES EVEN POLITICIANS.

AND ONE OF THE EXERCISES I GIVE TO PEOPLE IS I SAY, COME UP WITH A DATE IN HISTORY AND A SENTENCE

TO DESCRIBE IT THAT'S SPECIFIC TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES.

AND OUT OF A CLASS OF 30 PEOPLE, THEY'LL COME UP WITH 20, 30 DATES.

AND I'LL START A FLIP CHART.

AND WHAT YOU'LL FIND IS, THERE ARE A LOT OF DATES EARLY, LOUIS RIEL AND, YOU KNOW, DATES LIKE

THAT.

THERE'S A LOT OF RECENT DATES, THE PATRIATED EXECUTION AND OKA AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

EVERY TIME, IN A TIME LINE EXERCISE, THERE'S A BIG GAP IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S FROM THE

LATE 1800s TO THE LATE 1960s, AND IT'S UNCANNY.

I CAN EVEN SHOW YOU PICTURES.

BUT IT'S JUST UNCANNY THAT THIS GAP ALWAYS COMES UP.

WHEN I'M DEBRIEFING I'LL SAY TO THE PARTICIPANTS, WHAT DO YOU NOTICE?

A BIG GAP.

I THINK FOR A LOT OF CANADIANS THEY JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF HISTORY, THE

INDIAN ACT.

>> Steve: THEY'RE LEARNING NOW.

BOB, WE PROMISED PEOPLE 21 THINGS AND WE'RE GOING TO GET ALL 21 IN.

HERE COMES 20.

THE INDIAN ACT CAME UP WITH A PERMIT SYSTEM TO SELL PRODUCT FROM FARMS.

SELF EXPLANATORY.

THE LAST ONE THE INDIAN ACT IS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION CREATED UNDER THE BRITISH RULE FOR THE

PURPOSE OF SUBJUGATING ONE RACE: ABORIGINAL PEOPLE. I'D LIKE TO KNOW ALL THESE YEARS, AFTER

THE PASSAGE OF THE INDIAN ACT, HOW WELL, ULTIMATELY, DO YOU THINK ITS DONE AT DOING THAT?

>> IT DIDN'T.

IN FACT -- PEOPLE WILL DEBATE THIS A LOT.

YOU KNOW, IF WE WANT PEOPLE TO ASSIMILATE, YOU DON'T PUT THEM ON SEPARATE LANDS AND EVERYTHING

ELSE.

IF YOU WANT THEM TO ASSIMILATE, YOU DON'T PUT THEM UNTO SEPARATE LAWS LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.

THAT IS THE BIGGEST MISTAKE.

WE TRIED TO DO THAT PIECE.

THE FACT THAT THEY'RE LIVING UNDER SEPARATE LAWS AND UNDER SEPARATE LANDS WILL ALWAYS KEEP

THEM SEPARATE.

IT'S A LEGISLATIVE THING THAT'S HARD TO OVERCOME.

IF YOU WANT THEM TO ASSIMILATE YOU PUT THEM TOGETHER AND SHARE FOOD AND RELIGIOUS AND SPIRITUAL

IDEAS AND HUMOUR AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

>> Steve: THEY DID IT THE WRONG WAY?

>> HINDSIGHT IS 20/20.

IF YOU LEFT PEOPLE BE, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER PLACE -- YOU KNOW, WHEN WE LOOK

AT IT IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HISTORY OF THE COUNTRY, IT'S SORT OF -- I THINK OF THIS

CONVERSATION, DISMANTLING THE INDIAN ACT AS A BATTLE OF SORT OF THE SOUL OF THE NATION.

WHEN WE STARTED THE SOUL OF THE NATION REALLY WAS ABOUT EQUALITY AND EQUITY AND WE BRING ALL OF

THESE DIFFERENT CULTURES IN FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD AND WE PUT THEM IN A BIG POT AND WE TURN

THE HEAT ON AND WE'D STIR IT AND IT WOULD BE THIS GREAT GOOPY MASS OF PEOPLE.

SO THAT WAS SORT OF THE MELTING POT IDEOLOGY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN PLACE IN THE UNITED

STATES AND CANADA AND MAYBE OTHER SORT OF COUNTRIES LIKE THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT WE ARE.

IF I LOOK AT ALL THE DIFFERENT CULTURES IN CANADA, NOT JUST INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, WE'RE MORE

OF A CULTURAL FRUITCAKE THAN WE ARE A MELTING POT SOCIETY AND SO ...

>> Steve: I CAN'T SAY YOUR INDIGENOUS NAME, BUT I WILL THANK BOB JOSEPH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> Steve: FOR COMING ON AGENDA TONIGHT AND SHARING WITH US "21 THINGS YOU MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT

THE INDIAN ACT" THAT WILL HELP CANADIANS MAKE RECONCILIATION WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES A

REALITY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, BOB.

>> MY PLEASURE.