White Father + Native Mother = Red Tape

The fact that our country hands out racial identification cards has always creeped me out a bit. We call it “Indian Status,” to make it sound like some kind of government bonus, but when all is said and done, it’s still just a tag.  Kind of like a catch-and-release program, but instead of tracking the caribou population, we’re tracking people.
 
Indian Status cards are handed out through a series of rules under the Indian Act.  They’re only available to First Nations people whose ancestors took treaty, even though Métis, Inuit and non-treaty peoples are all protected in the constitution. Canada’s Indian status rules are racist and paternalistic, but the most accurate descriptor of them is administrative genocide.  We no longer kill Natives with muskets and smallpox, we just bury them in paper. By refusing to recognize community members and their rights, we have actually managed to bring several First Nations to the brink of on-paper extinction.

There used to be many of ways a person could lose his or her status; but before 1985, the main one was through intermarriage.  When a woman with Indian status married a non-status man, she and her children lost their status forever.  It was an effective way of making sure the Indian Register didn’t grow exponentially.  In 1985, though, the government changed those rules in response to a human rights complaint before the United Nations.  Those women who lost their status, and their children, could get their Indian Status reinstated, but their grandchildren were out of luck.  This came to be known as the “second-generation-cut-off rule.”

The second-generation-cut-off rule means there is still a distinction between individuals with aboriginal ancestry on the male line versus the female line.  Where an Aboriginal grandfather can get you status, an Aboriginal grandmother might not.  Those First Nations on the verge of extinction have bought themselves another generation – 20 to 30 years – before they have no more government-recognized members on the books.

First Nations do have the capacity, under the Indian Act, to maintain their own registers, under their own rules; so they could easily choose to ignore the second-generation-cut-off rule and admit the grandchildren of women who married out. However, much of the funding from Indian Affairs is based not on the “band registers,” as they are known, but on Indian Affairs’ own list of who has status and who does not.  Critically, status also affects an individual’s ability to own reserve land. 

Last but not least, some First Nations have been hesitant to re-admit individuals whose status was returned after 1985 onto their band registers.  Working with limited funding and a high demand for social services, their resources were already stretched to the limit.  As sexist and non-inclusive as such a decision may sound, those voices pose a legitimate question:  where will the funding come from for all these new band members?

Remember that at the end of the day this is a numbers game.  This summer, a judge in the British Columbia Supreme Court ruled that the second-generation-cut-off rule was unconstitutional because it discriminated against women, and ordered the Federal government to change the rule.  Needless to say, the feds are appealing the decision.

But would a gender-equal second-generation-cut-off rule be much better?  Given the reality of intermarriage in Canadian society, this is not likely.  Nor would it address the financial crisis faced by many reserves, provide more on-reserve housing, or strengthen self-determination. The fact is, the treaties don’t contain any provisions on “Indian Status.”  So why is it there at all?

First Nations in Canada may have a moral right to define their own citizens, the same as any other nation; but as Indigenous people, they are denied the opportunity.  Ironing out the gender discrimination in the Indian Act is currently the job of the Supreme Court.  The crucial issue here, though, is equality among nations.  It’s easy to see the debate over Indian Status as simply a race issue, but skin colour is really just the superficial issue.  What the Indian Act and status cards ultimately discriminate against is nationhood.

Comments (1)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Corey Agnew

July 29, 2010

Votes: +1

• 
• 
• 

...

My greatgrandmother is from one of the largest reserves in canada at big cove NB. now my father and his generation is the second generation and they can get there status and i cant which sucks cause the generation cut off should be 3 or 4 generations at least!! i want my status tooo..

Write comment

Email Name		Title Comment smaller | bigger
		I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage. Write the displayed characters Add Comment