CHALLENGING THE STATE:
{WHY}ABORIGINAL SELF-DETERMINATION
{{{THIS IS A STORY OF COLONIALIZATION, CULTURAL GENOCIDE AND RESURRECTION THROUGH
ORGANIZED RESISTANCE}}}
INDIGENOUS PEOPLE PROJECT
FOR THE PAST 500 YEARS THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE PROJECT HAS HAD ONE MAJOR
PRIORITY: SURVIVAL
THIS HAS ENTAILED SURVIVAL
FROM THE EFFECTS OF A SUSTAINED WAR WITH THE COLONIZERS, FROM THE DEVASTATION OF DISEASES, FROM THE DISLOCATION FROM LANDS
AND TERRITORIES, FROM THE OPPRESSIONS OF LIVING UNDER UNJUST REGIMES, {1} SURVIVAL AT A SHEER
BASIC PHYSICAL LEVEL AND {2} AS
A PEOPLES WITH THEIR OWN DISTINCTIVE LANGUAGES AND CULTURES (LEVEL).
COLONIZED =====> (DEF'N) RULED BY EXTERNAL POWER/AUTHORITY ======>
CHARACTERIZED BY: (I) OPPRESSION, AND (II) EXPLOITATION OF RESOURCES
{{{{CULTURAL ANTITHESIS ASIDE} --- LAND
AS PRIVATE PROPERTY; LAND AS DIVINITY [RESPECT FOR LAND AND ALL WHO INHABIT
IT]}: EUROPEAN LAWS INSTITUTED A REGIME OF PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT EXCLUDED THE
ORIGINAL INHABITANTS FROM ACCESS TO THE LAND AND USE OF ITS RESOURCES.}}}}
COLONIALISM === NOT ONLY PHYSICAL
OCCUPATION OF SOMEONE ELSES LAND BUT ALSO ABOUT THE APPROPRIATION OF OTHERS
POLITICAL AUTHORITY, CULTURAL SELF-DETERMINATION, ECONOMIC CAPACITY, AND
STRATEGIC LOCATION.
{{{FOLLOWING
THE SECOND WORLD WAR, AND MORE PARTICULARLY IN THE 1960S -- WHILE THE STRUGGLE
FOR SURVIVAL STILL PREOCCUPIED INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN CANADA AN AROUND THE WORLD
-- A PLATFORM OF WIDER AND MORE PROACTIVE CONCERNS
BEGAN TO TAKE SHAPE AROUND THE “DECOLONIZATION OF THE MIND”
“DECOLONIZATION OF THE MIND”
STRATEGIES HAVE ATTEMPTED TO NURTURE AND SUSTAIN THE CULTURAL SYSTEMS OF
(EVERY) INDIGENOUS COMMUNITY}}}.
GENERAL OVERVIEW OF
“INTERNAL COLONIALISM”
ABORIGINAL PEOPLE OF CANADA LIVED
IN THE TERRITORY THAT IS CANADA FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE THE ARRIVAL OF
THE FRENCH OR THE ENGLISH ====> THEIR CLAIMS THAT THE CANADIAN STATE DOES NOT REPRESENT THEM AND THAT,
BY DECEPTION AND FORCE, THEY WERE DEPRIVED OF THE USE OF THE LAND ON WHICH THEY
HAD LIVED =========>HAVE BEEN MAKE ELOQUENTLY AND OFTEN IN THE LAW COURTS, THROUGH THE MEDIA, IN POLITICAL PROTESTS, AND IN FORUMS
LIKE THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
ABORIGINAL PEOPLE HAVE MADE IT CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT
ACKNOWLEDGE THE LEGITIMACY OF THE CANADIAN STATE
====> THEY ARGUE IT WAS FORM BY CONQUEST, BROKEN PROMISES AND EXPANSION BY
FORCE AND TRICKERY =====> MOREOVER, IN ALL OF THE EUROPEAN COLONIALIST
DEALINGS THROUGHOUT HISTORY THEY HAVE UTILIZED REPRESSIVE INSTRUMENTS --- FROM THE
ROYAL
PROCLAMATION OF 1763, TO THE BNA ACT OF 1867, TO
THE INDIAN
ACT OF 1876, AND MORE --- IN ORDER TO
USURPED ABORIGINAL AUTHORITY AND GOVERNANCE, AND CREATED A DEPENDENCE AND
“LEARNED HELPLESSNESS' TOWARD THE STATE.
IN MOUNTING THEIR CHALLENGE TO THE LEGITIMACY OF THE
CANADIAN STATE, ABORIGINAL PEOPLES HAVE FACED OVERWHELMING OBSTACLES ====>
THEY SHARE A HISTORY
OF DISPOSSESSION OF LAND, DISENFRANCHISEMENT, RESETTLEMENT ON RESERVATIONS, AND PROGRAMS AND POLICIES SUCH
AS RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLING DESIGNED TO PROMOTE THEIR ASSIMILATION
AS SUBORDINATE MEMBERS OF THE MAINSTREAM CULTURE AND
THE DEVELOPING CANADIAN NATION.
{{{DURING THE
19TH CENTURY THE POLICY OF COLLECTING INDIANS ON RESERVATIONS BEGAN
IN EARNEST --- IT WAS INTENDED TO BE TEMPORARY --- THE LONGER TERM STRATEGY WAS ASSIMILATION ====>
ALSO KNOWN AS “CULTURAL GENOCIDE” AND FORCE RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS (AS THE
SINGLE MOST DEVASTATING FACTOR IN THE BREAKDOWN OF SOCIETY === THE COLONIALIST CURRICULA IGNORE, CONTRADICT AND DENY
THE STUDENTS CULTURE; THEIR LANGUAGE IS FORBIDDEN AND THEIR DAILY LIFE IS
STRUCTURED ACCORDING TO FOREIGN MORAL PRECEPTS OF THE COLONIZERS)}}}
IN 1998, THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS FORCED TO CREATE A $350 MILLION HEALING FUND WHICH THE
FOUR CHRISTIAN DEMONMINATIONS ---- ROMAN CATHOLIC, ANGLICAN, UNITED, AND
PRESBYTERIAN --- JOINED THE APOLOGY FOR WIDESPREAD PHYSICAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL AND
SEXUAL ABUSE ====> THE COURT CASES CONTINUE…..
CONTEMPORARY
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL RELATIONSHIP IN CANADA
1) INEFFECTUAL GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE AND
PATERNALISTIC HANDOUTS.
2) THROWING MONEY AT A PROBLEM ====> EXPANDING LEGIONS OF EXPERTS IN HOPE OF FOSTERING ASSIMILATION
THROUGH SELF-SUFFICIENCY.
3) RHETORIC OF
SELF-GOVERNMENT AND A “NEW SOCIAL CONTRACT” ======> IN REALITY MOST
INITITATIVES SIMPLY REFORM/ TWEEK THE OLD ONE AND REFUSE TO RELINQUISH ANY
SUBSTANTIVE POWER.
SO, WHEN WE
TALK OF THE “ABORIGINAL PROBLEM” WE NEED
TO TALK IN A WIDER DISCOURSE THAT PUTS
THE BURDENS ON INSTITUTIONS SO THAT WHAT COMES UNDER THE MICROSCOPE ARE THE
POLITICS, THE CULTURE, AND THE ECONOMICS OF DOMINATION
STUNNING ARRAY OF EVIDENCE OF THE RESULTS OF INTERNAL
COLONIALISM ====> CENSUS DATA ON LIFE SPAN, HEALTH, INCARCERATION RATES, AND INFANT AND
MATERNAL MORTALITY --- TO ETHNOGRAPHIC AND
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES THAT DETAIL HOW A WAY OF LIFE WAS DESTROYED ---
HAS BROUGHT TO BEAR ON THE CASE THAT THERE IS A “THIRD WORLD WITHIN CANADIAN BORDERS”
1.
IN 1995, 40 PERCENT OF REGISTERED
INDIANS LIVED IN FAMILIES THAT WERE AT OR BELOW STATISITICS CANADA’S LOW-INCOME
CUTOFF (LICO).
2.
FOUR TIMES MORE ABORIGINAL PERSONS IN
MAJOR WESTERNCITIES LIVEIN POVERTY THAN OTHER CANADIANS.
3.
THE POVERTY RATE IN 1995 FOR
OFF-RESERVE ABORIGINAL PEPOLES, 15 YEARS AND OVER, WAS 42.7 PERCENT FOR WOMEN
AND 35.1 PERCENT FOR MEN, OVER DOUBLE THE RATES FOR OTHER CANADIAN MEN AND
WOMEN.
4.
{THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF WELFARE
NOTES, THESE FIGURES WOULD BE HIGHER IF THEY INCLUDED RESERVE POPULATIONS.}
5.
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE FOR ABORIGINAL
PERSON IN CANADA RANGE
FROM 40 TO 60 PERCENT, WHILE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS ABOUT 10 PERCENT.
6.
[SO] THE INFANT MORTALITY OF
ABORIGINAL POPULATION IS 17 PER 1000 (CAN. 6:1000); AND THE ABORIGINAL LIFE EXPECTANCY IS 10 YEARS LESS THAN
THE REST OF POP (77 YRS., 1986).
7.
(ALSO) NATIVE URBANIZATION AND
"HYPERMOBILITY" AND THE PROBLEMS OF ADAPTION
BY TRADITIONAL PEOPLE IN COMPLEX URBAN ENVIRONMENTS.
THE CONTEMPORARY “ABORIGINALITY”
MOVEMENT
THE CONTEMPORARY POLITICS OF “ABORIGIALITY” REVOLVES AROUND THE KEY ISSUE OF SELF-DETERMINATION
======> OR MORE ACCURATELY, ABORIGINAL MODELS OF SELF-DETERMINING AUTONOMY
=======> MEANS THE “DEVOLUTION” OF
REPONSIBILITY AND FEDERAL JURISDICTION OVER ABORIGINAL LANDS AND AFFAIRS,
AND THE TRANSFERENCE OF RIGHTS AND AUTHORITIES TO ABORIGINAL PEOPLE ====> IN
SHORT, LAND, IDENTITY AND POLITICAL VOICE}}}
{{{{{EXISTENTIAL
PROBLEM: ABORIGINALITY STILL CLASHES WITH
THE FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES OF A
COLONIAL CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER =====> [EX.CLASH OVER IMMUNITY FROM, OR
CONTAINMENT BY, NORMAL APPLICATION OF THE LAW]}}}}}
ON THE OTHER HAND, THE POSITION
OF THE FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE BEEN THAT THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION COULD ONLY BE EXTENDED
AS POWERS DELEGATED TO ABORIGINAL PEOPLE BY GOVERNMENT THROUGH LEGISLATION OR
CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE.
FURTHER, THE POWERS THAT WOULD BE GRANTED BY GOVERNMENT WOULD EXTEND ONLY TO POWERS NOW HELD BY MUNICIPAL
GOVERNMENTS RATHER THAN THE MUCH BROADER POWERS SOUGHT BY ABORIGINAL
PEOPLES.
{{{{ALTHOUGH ABORIGINAL POPULATIONS ARE DIVERSE == THE INCREASINGLY UNIFIED DEMAND
TO HAVE THEIR TERRITORY RETURNED AND FOR SOVEREIGNTY OVER THAT TERRITORY WAS FORCED DRAMATICALLY ONTO THE CANADIAN POLITICAL
AGENDA IN THE SUMMER OF 1990 AT KANESATAKEi WHEN “AN ATTEMPT BY THE MOHAWK TO STOP A MUNICIPAL GOLF
COURSE FROM BEING CONSTRUCTED ON LAND THEY BELIEVED TO BE THEIRS LED TO AN
ARMED STAND-OFF AND ONE DEATH” =====>
IN THE AFTERMATH, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STRUCK THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON
ABORIGINAL PEOPLES {WIDE CONSULTATIONS WITH
ABORIGINAL PEOPLE ON A MANDATE TO STUDY “VIRTUALLY EVER FEATURE OF THE
INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL
CANADIANS.”}}}}
THE INDIAN ACT
FOLLOWING CONFEDERATION, ABORIGINAL PEOPLES CAME UNDER THE
CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT. THE MECHANISM FOR THIS CONTROL, THE INDIAN ACT, WAS PASSED
IN 1876 AND GAVE GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS
ALMOST TOTAL CONTROL OVER ABORIGINAL PEOPLE. THE ACT EVEN WENT SO FAR AS TO DEFINE A “PERSON” AS “AN
INDIVIDUAL OTHER THAN AN INDIAN.”
THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE INDIAN ACT WERE PROFOUND:
ABORIGINAL CHILDREN WERE FORCED TO ATTEND RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS (WHICH MEANT THAT GENERATIONS OF CHILDREN WERE NOT RAISED
BY THEIR FAMILIES.)
[IN LOCO PARENTIS (IN PLACE OF THE PARENTS)
WHICH MEANT THAT GENERATIONS OF CHILDREN WERE NOT RAISED BY THEIR FAMILIES ==
CHILDREN WERE FORBIDDEN TO USE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE, WEAR THEIR OWN CLOTHES, OR
MAINTAIN CULTURAL TRADITIONS OR RELIGIONS.)
TRADITIONAL RELIGIOUS PRACTICES WERE RESTRICTED.
ABORIGINAL PEOPLE DID NOT
FULLY CONTROL THEIR OWN LAND AND COULD NOT SELL AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS OFF THE
RESERVE.
THE GOVERNMENT IMPOSED A “PASS SYSTEM”
WHICH RESTRICTED THE RIGHT OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLES TO TRAVEL OFF THEIR RESERVES.
AND, THEY DID NOT GET VOTING RIGHTS IN CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTIONS UNTIL 1960.
IN THE 1960S, THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BEGAN TO REVIEW THE
POLICIES CONCERNING ABORIGINAL PEOPLES. A “WHITE PAPER”, TABLED IN 1969, PROPOSED ASSIMILATION OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLE – TREATIES
WERE DROPPED, RESERVES WERE TO BECOME LIKE NEIGHBORING NON-ABORIGINAL
COMMUNITIES, AND ABORIGINAL RIGHTS AND ABORIGINAL LANDS WERE TO BE DISCARDED.
REACTION TO THIS WHITE PAPER MARKED A WATERSHED IN ABORIGINAL POLITICS – A NATIONAL CAMPAIGN, WHICH
ULTIMATELY FORCED THE GOVERNMENT TO DROP ITS PROPOSALS, BECAME A COUNTRYWIDE MOVEMENT AND
SEVERAL PAN-INDIAN ORGANIZATIONS, INCLUDING
THE ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS, WERE FORMED.
SELF-GOVERNMENT, ABORIGINAL RIGHTS,
AND LAND CLAIMS BECAME THE RALLYING POINTS OF THE MOVEMENT.
SOME ABORIGINAL LEADERS, PARTICULARLY AMONG THE MOHAWKS, VIEW THEIR BANDS AS SEPARATE NATIONS THAT HAVE
SOVEREIGN CONTROL OVER THEIR LANDS.
HOWEVER, MOST PROPONENTS OF
ABORIGINAL SELF-GOVERNMENT TAKE THE MORE LIMITED VIEW THAT THEIR
FIRST NATIONS STATUS GIVES THEM
THE “INHERENT” RIGHT TO SELF-GOVERNMENT
WITHIN THE CANADIAN FEDERATION.
THEY FEEL THEIR STATUS AS CANADA’S FIRST PEOPLE, WHO WERE NEVER CONQUERED AND WHO
SIGNED VOLUNTARY TREATIES WITH THE
CROWN, ENTITLES THEM TO THE RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION AND THE PROTECTION OF
THEIR CULTURE AND CUSTOMS – THESE RIGHTS ARE “GRANTED” BY THE GOVERNMENT, BUT
ARE “INHERENTLY” THEIRS
ON THE OTHER HAND, THE POSITION
OF THE FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE BEEN THAT THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION COULD ONLY BE EXTENDED
AS POWERS DELEGATED TO ABORIGINAL PEOPLE BY GOVERNMENT THROUGH LEGISLATION OR
CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE.
FURTHER, THE POWERS THAT WOULD BE GRANTED BY GOVERNMENT WOULD EXTEND ONLY TO POWERS NOW HELD BY MUNICIPAL
GOVERNMENTS RATHER THAN THE MUCH BROADER POWERS SOUGHT BY ABORIGINAL
PEOPLES.
[[[ WHERE DO YOU THINK THIS
PROCESS OF ENDING THE COLONIAL RULE OF ABORIGINALS WILL LEAD?]]]]
[[[EX: ONE MAJOR CHANGE TOOK PLACE IN
1999 WHEN INUIT TOOK OVER GOVERNMENT OF THE NEWLY CREATED NUNAVUT TERRITORY,
ENCOMPASSING 350,000 SQUARE KILOMETERS OF LAND IN THE EASTERN ARTIC.]]]
[[[ CHALLENGES: WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE GROWING NUMBER OF URBAN
ABORIGINALS// HOW WILL THEY BE INCLUDED? – THE APPLICABILITY OF THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
TO ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES – AND, THE SOURCES
OF FUNDING FOR THE NEW ORDER OF GOVERNMENT]]]
{LET'S CONSOLIDATE THE SOCIOLOGICAL DYNAMICS AND PROCESSES
HERE} ==========>
RACIALIZATION OF THE INDIAN
ACT ====> THE INDIAN ACT SERVED TO DIVIDE PEOPLE INTO
ARBITRARY RACIAL CATEGORIES --- INDIAN AND NON-INDIAN --- AND THEN MANDATED
DIFFERENT TREATMENT, DIFFERENT OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, AND
DIFFERNETIAL ACCESS TO RESOURCES TO EACH
GROUP === IN SO DOING, ARBITRARY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PEOPLE WERE ENCODED IN THE LAW, WHILE ALL DIFFERENCES AMONG THOSE PLACED IN EACH
CATEGORY WERE MADE INVISIBLE.
EX: ====> SO IT WAS THAT MANY PEOPLE WHO CONSIDERED THEMSELVES MEMBERS
OF ABORIGINAL SOCIETIES AND WHOSE PARENTS, BROTHERS, SISTERS AND COUSINS MAY
HAVE BEEN CATEGORIZED AS ABORIGINAL WERE DEEMED NON-INDIAN ===> THIS RACIST CATEORIZATION WAS PROPELLED PRIMARILY
THROUGH THE PATRIARCHAL
IDEA: THAT SOCIETAL MEMBERSHIP OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN IS
DETERMINED AND LEGITIMATED BY THEIR HUSBANDS AND FATHERS.
THE GENDERIZATIONOF THE
INDIAN ACT ======> THE INDIAN ACT
INCORPORATED THE WESTERN
PATRIARCHAL LAW THAT CHILDREN ARE THE CHILDREN OF THEIR MOTHER’S HUSBAND ====> A NON-INDIAN WOMAN WHO MARRIES AN INDIAN MAN
BECAME AN INDIAN, AS DO HER CHILDREN =====> AN INDIAN WOMEN WHO “MARRIES
OUT” TO A NON-INDIAN MAN IS A NON-INDIAN AS IS HER CHILDREN =====> GIVEN
THAT THE LAW WAS MADE MORE THAT TWO HUNDRED YEARS AFTER FIRST CONTACT (INCLUDING
SEXUAL CONTACT) BETWEEN EUROPEANS AND ABORIGINALS,
THE ATTEMPT TO FIGURE OUT WHO WAS AND WHO WAS NOT INDIAN “WOULD BE THE SUBJECT
OFSATIRE IF IT HAD NOT HAD SUCH TRAGIC CONSEQUENCES ======> A NON-INDIAN COULD INCLUDE A
PERSON WITH TWO ABORIGINAL PARENTS AS WELL AS ALL THOSE WITH NO ABORIGINAL
ANCESTORS.
JUST AS THE INDIAN ACT DIVIDED AND CATEGORIZED PEOPLE, SO
HAS THE RESISTANCE
BY THOSE SEEKING TO SUSTAIN THE EXCLUSION OF WOMEN WHO MARRIED OUT. THE ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS (PRIMER AUTHORITY)
ARGUED THAT “AS
INDIAN PEOPLE, WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DEAL WITH INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS OVERRIDING
COLLECTIVE RIGHTS” [QUOTED IN CANNON 1995: 98]
====> FIRST NATIONS LEADERSHIP USES THE ARGUMENT, FOR
EXAMPLE, TO BLOCK ATTEMPTS BY ABORIGINAL WOMEN TO USE THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS
(AND THUS THE CANADIAN STATE) TO SETTLE WHAT THE AFN PERCEIVES AS
INTERNAL DISPUTES
THE PATERNALISM OF THE
INDIAN ACT THE CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION OF
EXISTING ABORIGINAL AND TREAT RIGHTS (SECTION 35 OF THE CONSTITUTION ACT OF
1982, FOR EXAMPLE) HAS BEEN INTERPRETED PATERNALITICALLY SO THAT THE
SOVEREIGHNTY OF THE CANADIAN STATE REMAINS INTACT ====> NOR HAVE ABORIGINAL
LEADERS BEEN INCLUDED AS EQUAL MEMBERS IN CONSTITUTIONAL NEGOTIATIONS =====>
BUT THE MOVEMENT TO MORE INCLUSIVE DECISION MAKING HAS, IN
FITS AND STARTS, BEEN UNDERWAY ====>
PARADOXICALLY, THE CANADIAN STATE --- AUTHOR OF THE COLONIZATION OF THE
ABORIGIAL PEOPLE --- HAS SHOWN SIGNS OF HAVING THE CAPACITY (IF NOT THE WILL)
TO RENEGOTIATE THOSE HISTORICAL RELATIONS OF INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION
(ASIDE: SOCIAL MOVEMENT FOR ABORIGINAL
SELF-DETERMINATION --- HOW IS THIS
DIFFERENT FROM OTHER SOCIAL ACTIVIST MOVEMENTS????? {MULTICULTUALISM,
ANTI-RACISM, ANTI-GLOBALIZATION})
ABORIGINAL VOTING RIGHTS
SOCIOLOGIAL ASIDE {CONFUSION
IN FLERAS' TEXT REGARDING “ABORIGINAL
VOTING RIGHTS”} =====> FOR THE RECORD ======> METIS HAVE BEEN VOTING FOR MORE THAN A CENTURY,
INUIT HAVE ONLY BEEN ALLOWED TO VOTE FEDERALLY SINCE 1950 AND STATUS INDIANS
BEGAN VOTING IN 1960. ======>
SOCIOLOGICAL CAVEAT: A RECENT
REPORT COMMISSIONED BY ELECTIONS CANADA
FOUND THAT ON AVERAGE, THE TURNOUT
AMONG ABORIGINAL VOTERS DURING FEDERAL ELECTIONS IS LOWER THAN OTHER CANADIANS.
EX: IN 2000, THE RATE ON RESERVES WAS 16 PERCENTAGE POINTS
LOWER THAN THE GENERAL POPULATION.
THE AGENCY'S REPORT STATES IT HAS TAKEN MEASURES TO
IMPROVE THOSE NUMBERS --- (1) IT HAS HIRED
MORE ABORIGINALS TO WORK AS RETURNING OFFICERS, (2) SET UP MORE POLLING STATIONS ON RESERVES AND (3)
BROUGHT IN ABORIGINAL LIAISONS TO WORK
WITH RETURNING OFFICERS.
1The Mohawk community of Kanesatake is located on the north shore
of the Lac des Deux Montagnes,
where it meets the Ottawa River, 53 km west of
Montreal. The lands set aside for the Mohawks do not
constitute a reserve, and are interwoven with lands
belonging to non-aboriginal people of the village and
parish of Oka. The surface area of Kanesatake is 1,142
hectares. The community also has access to
the Doncaster Reserve, an uninhabited territory of
7,900 hectares located 14 km north of Sainte
Agathe-des-Monts, north-west of Lac-des-Îles. The
Doncaster Reserve is shared with the Mohawks of
Kahnawake.