** Use 'Back' button to return to previous page

From: Canadian Indian.Com: 

MANDATORY TAXATION 

From: Don dbain@telus.net 
Subject: MANDATORY TAXATION BRINGS ABOUT BETTER GOVERNMENT 
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 10:42:59 -0800 
CBC RADIO - EARLY EDITION Thursday, January 4, 2001
8:15 a.m. "Commentary by Tom Flannigan, Political Science Professor at the University of Calgary"
 

 CLUFF: Once again, there is talk of replacing the Indian Act. The Federal Minister of Indian Affairs, Robert Nault, wants to bring in new rules on how First Nations operate. Mr. Nault also wants to beef up funding for Indian Band administrations, but one political scientist thinks some of that funding should come from Band members themselves. On "Commentary" this morning, Tom Flannigan explains why he believes mandatory taxation will bring about better government. 

FLANNIGAN: According to media reports, Indian Affairs Minister Bob Nault plans to introduce a First Nations governance act into Parliament to replace the Indian Act. The new legislation should remove many obsolete powers from the federal government, such as the requirement for ministerial approval of wills made by status Indians, but it is not just a matter of conferring long-overdue rights upon Native people. If Aboriginal self-government is to work properly, status Indians must also assume new responsibilities. 

First and foremost, the residents of Indian reserves must start taxing themselves to pay some of the costs of their own government. The cry of the American Revolution was no taxation without representation, but it is equally true that there is no representation without taxation. When Ottawa pays all the expenses, reserve residents have little incentive to monitor the performance of their own governments. Indeed, reserve residents and Band councils have substantial incentives to treat self-government as a cash cow, to extract whatever they can from the Canadian treasury. Having to pay part of program costs will drive home the message that government is not manna from heaven, but there is an inevitable tradeoff between public expenditure and private costs. 

Most Indian reserves are small and poor and cannot possibly pay the whole expense of governing themselves, nor should they. Every city and rural municipality in Canada is subsidized by senior governments, which have much greater control over the levers of taxation. But a requirement to raise part of costs from their own residents, even if that share is small, is a precondition to making Aboriginal governments accountable to their own people, just as it is for cities and rural municipalities. Recently, the Kamloops Indian Band in British Columbia, under the farsighted leadership of Chief Manny Jules, has shown the way by instituting a sales tax on the reserve, payable by status Indians as well as by non-Indians. 

Most Aboriginal advocates claim that they are exempt from taxation because they prepaid for all time by surrendering the land and the wealth that it contains. That argument may or may not be persuasive, but it is beside the point in this context. Self-funding through taxation is necessary for responsible government, and if government is not accountable, it is the reserve residents who suffer most. Immunity from taxation favours the elites who run the reserves. It is not in the long-term interest of the ordinary people who badly need a more effective and trustworthy form of government. 

 It is equally important to lift the blanket of secrecy now covering reserve politics. Following a 1988 court decision, reserve governments operate as if they were privately-held corporations: Conducting meetings in camera, keeping financial information secret, and preventing news media from conducting investigations. In Alberta, eighteen out of forty-four First Nations governments are under some degree of financial supervision because of chronic overspending, but the Department of Indian Affairs will not tell the media which reserves these are. Would Canadians tolerate such concealment in any other branch of public affairs? 

If self-government is to become meaningful to Aboriginal people, it must live up to democratic standards. Residents must contribute to the cost of their own government and public business must be transacted in public. For Commentary, this is Tom Flannigan in Calgary. 

CLUFF: Tom Flannigan is a Professor of Political Science at the University of Calgary. 

[Note: This segment also aired on CBC's On The Island and Daybreak.]
 


Reprinted under the Fair Use: doctrine of international copyright law.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html

© Copyright 1999 Canadian Aboriginal.Com
Please send comments to editor@canadianaboriginal.com