Teachings from the Tree of Life, part 40: Is There Life After the Indian Act?
Binaakwe-giizis (Falling Leaves Moon) - October 28, 2026
Is there life beyond the Indian Act?
Abolishing - and replacing - Canada’s Indian Act is a complicated topic that sparks major conversations about self-determination, legal rights, and what the federal government should be responsible for.
Most First Nations chiefs think the Indian Act is outdated and limiting, but they don't really agree on what should take its place.
Let's look at the upsides and downsides of getting rid of the Indian Act:
A huge plus is that it will finally put an end to a 150-year-old act that was racist from the start. Getting rid of this Act, which has been pushing an outdated, overly controlling, and race-focused classification system, means we can remove the colonial federal control that tells First Nations how to run things, who gets status, and how communities make decisions. This change opens the door for First Nations to manage their own affairs as independent nations, following their own laws, cultures, and traditions. Plus, it sets the stage for a modern, equal relationship between the Crown and First Nations, in line with today's human rights standards.
Some people worry about losing their historic rights, but honestly, there's no real reason to be concerned.
Or is there?
Changing the Indian Act doesn't mean Treaties will disappear. However, it would mean big talks are needed to figure out how things like reserve lands, governance, status, funding, and federal responsibility would work afterward.
The Indian Act is basically just a way for the Canadian government to keep control. Getting rid of the Indian Act doesn't mean First Nations people would lose their treaty rights or healthcare. Those rights and services actually come from historical and constitutional agreements with the Crown, not from the Act.
Getting rid of a racist Act is a great idea on its own, but there are a few complications to consider.
To start with, how things will be managed with the Crown after it's abolished really hinges on new laws or self-government deals. In other words: trying to build a castle on quicksand wouldn't be the smartest move.
Some First Nations leaders and critics are concerned that taking apart the framework without a clear, jointly developed legal transition could lead to risky gaps or legal battles over enforcing treaties and land rights.
If we don't have new laws that are developed together and approved by the nation, won't getting rid of the current ones just risk repeating past assimilation attempts and passing federal financial responsibilities around?
The status card is currently your ticket to certain federal programs, non-insured health benefits (NIHB), college funding, and tax breaks under Section 87 of the Indian Act. If it got scrapped without a plan or new laws, those tax breaks and services would lose their legal backing. That's why First Nations leaders want any move away from the Indian Act to be a team effort. They think First Nations should issue their own citizenship or membership cards. This way, federal funding and tax breaks would be tied to nation-to-nation treaties or self-government deals instead of a federal list based on race.
Apart from the status card, the Act's got some important legal protections, like keeping reserve lands safe from being seized by private entities and offering tax breaks for property on reserves. Some folks are worried about losing these protections. They're concerned that getting rid of the Act without a solid backup plan could wipe out collective treaty rights and turn bands into just regular municipal groups.
When it comes to healthcare and status programs, a big worry for people in the community is that without solid new laws in place, scrapping the Card might mess up funding, status definitions, or how the federal government stays accountable.
People are genuinely worried that getting rid of the Act might wipe out Indian identity. This could mean First Nations losing their land rights and titles, turning their communities into unsustainable towns, and eventually losing their land altogether. Many are convinced this is a strategic maneuver by the government, believing they are using Manitoba's Anishinaabe premier, Wab Kinew, as a figurehead to deceive his supporters into agreeing with the abolition.
And then there are those First Nations critics who suggest that people should focus on addressing the issues with their own leadership and the internal conflicts (including the widespread lateral violence) in their communities before diving into unfamiliar territory.
So, the big question is: Is abolition a blessing or a curse?
In my opinion, it's high time to break the cycle. Abolishing the Act is damn just and necessary, but first make sure you get your own act together before you do anything rash.
Miigwech for listening.
THE LINKS:
Teachings from the Tree of Life: The Healing MirrorTeachings from the Tree of Life: A Vision of Healing
Teachings from the Tree of Life: We Learn as We Walk the Path of Life/A Reflection on Life and on Our Role as ArtistsTeachings from the Tree of Life: The Girl Who Walked the Bear Path
Comments