A referendum is planned for April 6, 2001, at the Chapleau Cree First Nation. The referendum will accept or reject the draft as the valid highest document in our First Nation. This is too fast. We need to dream.

What you do with the thoughts is entirely up to you. The future lasts a long time. Today, only a instant. 
Sometimes, a 'collective will' must be gathered before it can be recognized as a collective. It is time to seek out a collective will. Never again, will we have this opportunity.

Other CCFN Member Comments can be reviewed by clicking here.  My personal comments are below..

Introduction.

The Chapleau Cree First Nation (CCFN) Constitution, in its draft form (January 23, 2001), was distributed to the CCFN membership during the week beginning February 2, 2001.The draft consists of six (6) parts.
 

1) A Preamble (discussed on this page)
2) Fundamental Principles (Coming)
3) Governing Body (Coming)
4) General Matters (Coming)
5) Citizenship Matters
6) Amendments (Coming)

Other than the first part, each part is broken into numbered sections and sub-sections. 

This discussion paper, of several pages, makes use of the numbered references to identify the statements and ideas under discussion.

 Part One - The Preamble: Where Are We Going?

It is THE Most Important of the sections. It sets the vision. And the vision comes after a dreamquest.

My Summary:

The preamble states our common values and says the constitution is the statement of our “collective will.” 

The preamble statements imply at least three important premises.

1. That we, as a people, jointly believe in the legitimacy of this document; that it makes sense to us, and that there is no doubt that would stop us from accepting the entire document as both truthful,  fundamentally right and correct.

.
2. That we collectively see that there is direct collective and individual value derived from such a document; that there is value in each idea it contains and the protections it guarantees, and

.
3. That, through its assertion as ‘the foundation of our laws and government’, we accept the powers and limitations the constituion establishes, allows and grants, including the enforcement that is normally associated with law. 

Form of Government
The constitution, in its various parts, defines a basic structure for governance; that of Citizens, and a Council, led by a Chief. 

The structure may be adequate for today, but it may not be an appropriate model for the years to come. 

The CCFN members are the only people who, with will, put this document into effect. Some individual thinking must bring us to a decision about the appropriateness of the governance structure described in this constitution.

There are many ways under which we may choose to govern ourselves. 

Traditionally, before contact with Europeans, the Cree of the Hudson’s Bay lowlands did not have a system of government that was rigid, structured, nor was it Cree practice to restrict leadership status by defining a ‘term of office’. 

We have an opportunity to restructure and redefine a government for and of ourselves, that most likely, we will never have again. 

We have an opportunity to rethink the process of government and the concepts of leadership. 

We have an opportunity to play out a demonstration of fair, equitable, and different mechanisms based upon the learning of both our own past and the pasts of other peoples. We have history, experience and a connection, still reasonably close, through which a new Traditional and appropriate model for self-government might  be designed.

We have that opportunity today. 

We have that opportunity. . . if we truly want to work at designing such a mechanism. 

It would be an exciting process, which I am sure we could seek, and find the help of world experts to move us from a vision to a new reality.

We are at a fork in the trail. One way leads us to our home, and the other leads us to where we already are.

The preamble states our prime values, describes our spirituality, our respect for elders and that we have the right to self-government. Who are we now? What do we want that to be? 

The second concern I have with this constitution is the suggestion of law. As of yet, these laws, and the mechanisms that enforce the law, are not described.  If this constitution allows for law, then we may want to think of how the document grants us law, and the restrictions or latitudes it offers. Again, each of us must think about what is presently written, and what might be interpreted from its words and structure.

Again, we have a once-in-a-people opportunity. Maybe we should think for a while about that. Maybe April 6, 2001 is not enough time. Maybe we have been on the path to 'where we already are' for too long a time.
 

End of Part One.