Developmental Workshop Summary:

First Nations Jurisdiction over Education

February 14 and 15, 2006

1. Introduction

The workshop began with a prayer by Jim Angus, followed by words of introduction from each participant (participant list attached). Chief Nathan Matthew then provided a brief overview of the purpose of the workshop, as well as a summary of the background to the session:

  • In 2003, an MOU was signed with the federal and provincial governments, and jurisdiction negotiations began.
  • In November 2005, Agreements were initialled at the negotiators level.
  • This is not a process of seeking permission; rather it is formalizing our intention to draw down on our inherent right to make these decisions.
  • The next step involves the Federal/First Nation Agreement making its way to the federal cabinet as a first step towards the passage of enabling legislation. The new Conservative government is currently developing plans and priorities, and its direction on education and other issues will become increasingly clear after the Throne Speech and Budget in April.

2. Overview

Introductions were followed by a PowerPoint presentation from the January 19, 2006 meeting, providing a brief overview of the negotiations, Agreements, process and time frame. It was noted that the original intent was to negotiate education jurisdiction covering lifelong learning. However, in order to focus the negotiations, the parties agreed to a phased approach, with the first phase dealing with K-12. Later phases would address Early Childhood and Post-Secondary education and training. Other highlights:

  • The earliest date for passage of legislation is likely 2008, with implementation in 2011, after a 36-month transition period. In the meantime, capacity building and negotiations will continue and some aspects will be implemented earlier, such as school and teacher certification, so that some elements of jurisdiction will be functional before 2011.
  • There will be a comprehensive implementation plan, as a number of phases and processes are required in order to exercise jurisdiction through the law-making authority.
  • A minimum of 12 BCRs are required before Federal legislation is introduced, and 39 First Nations have already submitted Letters of Intent.
  • Developmental funding will be available during the transition period (the three years between the passage of federal/provincial legislation and implementation). This funding will be directed towards capacity building: developing the Community Education Authority (CEA), laws, etc., prior to jurisdiction being recognized.
  • The funding set out in the Canada-First Nation Education Jurisdiction Funding Agreement will include all education dollars, as well as implementation funding.
  • There is already work being done with BC on developing an English 12 curriculum that celebrates Aboriginal literature. The target date for implementation is January 2007.
  • Participating First Nations (PFNs) with Canada/FirstNations Agreements have the option of becoming a Party to the BC-FNESC Agreement by signing a “Party to Agreement” Letter, which will ensure access to all items embedded in the BC-FNESC Agreement.

(See Appendix A for questions and answers)

3.Joint development of next steps

3a) Build Community Awareness, Understanding and Support

There was a lengthy discussion among workshop participants on how to inform community members about education jurisdiction, and facilitate community participation in the process. Ideas and suggestions included the following:

  1. Need ways of communicating that are meaningful to communities. Communications need to go beyond informing, and focus on results: how jurisdiction will benefit children in the classrooms. change/improve so that our children will be better educated as a result.
  2. Need good promotional materials, including pamphlets, brochures, FAQ, and a presentation that outlines these practical benefits, as well as a description of how the First Nation would make and enforce its own laws.
  3. Develop a more humanistic approach to communications, recognizing the students’ needs, rather than a dry presentation of process.
  4. Gear messages to what jurisdiction will look like after implementation: First Nations control over First Nation education, creating own curriculum, off-reserve students funded through reciprocal tuition, etc.
  5. Prepare practical tools such as a chart that comparing the responsibilities communities have now for education, vs. responsibilities under jurisdiction. “This is what we now control; this is what we will control.”
  6. Relate the messages to the current needs of the community.

Messages to incorporate into the communications materials include the positive reasons for wanting jurisdiction:

  • We will build on provincial standards (not just maintain them).
  • We will have a new vision for certifying our teachers, and build on the platform developed by the Colleges of Teachers to create our own.
  • We will value our people and community experience through equitable treatment of language and culture teachers.
  • We will be able to graduate our own kids.
  • We can build our own community systems for education where Council has the right to mandate an education authority (CEA).
  • The education system is community-based with community values.
  • Schools will receive funding for 100% of their students, including off -reserve.
  • This will result in the empowerment of our children.
  • It supports treaty-making, and gives the community an on-the-ground opportunity to test drive the K-12 portion on self-government in education. It is an excellent entry into the total scope of education: life-long learning.
  • It is an opportunity to customize the philosophy of education to meet the learners’ needs, individualizing education programs to individual needs.”
  • Learning outcomes stay the same, but how they are taught will change to reflect who we are.
  • The system can be designed so that students have a better transition to post-secondary education, by improving on public school standards.
  • The system will be flexible, and we can make changes to it if it is not working for our students.
  • We can establish a long term vision of education for future generations, and put the mechanisms in place to achieve the vision.
  • We can create unique aspects of cultural identity, including the introduction and promotion of our own holidays.

(See Appendix B for the presentation outline from the flip charts).

3b) Carry out effective community consultation

This brainstorming session resulted in a number of suggested approaches for a process to communicate with communities and raise awareness of jurisdiction:

Who

-Representatives from PFNs

-Other people from within the communities: identify one or two communications representatives from each community and build a network of communities working together. Establish a communications team.

-Parent and Education Committees

-Elders, staff and community champions

Community-based Information kit and processes

-Brochures on education jurisdiction

-User-friendly PowerPoint presentation

-Workbook, with Questions and Answers

-Scope: clear outline of opportunities, the “givens”, what is up for discussion, etc.

-Before and after scenarios (now and after jurisdiction)

-Speakers: people who can go into communities and explain jurisdiction.

-List of communities involved

-History and summary of the benefits: How we got here, why we want to do this

-Promote in First Nations media, through closed ListServe, workshops, video conferences, lobbying

Training and Development

-Training manual or kit, incorporating the materials outlined above, as well as legislation and legal aspects, how the negotiations were carried out.

-Training the trainers: the PFN representatives and community champions

  • How to deliver the message, keep the focus
  • Facilitation training
  • Strategies for attracting people to meetings
  • How to carry out community meetings

-Community workshops, with a parent focus; have parents act as catalysts for change, and utilize Parents Club representatives.

- Video of Nathan and Christa talking about jurisdiction to provide to communities

3c) Move forward on negotiations

Christa indicated that, as part of negotiating the resourcing package, input is required on estimating the ball park costs associated with the developmental phase, based on an understanding of the activities. It was agreed later that a subcommittee on costing would be convened as soon as possible to estimate the cost of the following activities:

  • First Nations Education Authority (FNEA)-this group
  • Community consultation with both on and off-reserve members.
  • Drafting of law-making protocol, with model templates
  • Structuring laws: some way of coming together on legal advice
  • Education co-management Agreement: establishing a format for the First Nation to agree to services from the FNEA on school and teacher certification, curriculum, etc.

3d) Skills/capacity building

The discussion focused on the knowledge and skills requiredto implement and operate the structures of education jurisdiction (especially the CEA), as well as how to take a collective approach to capacity building.

Training

  • Existing laws

-Child and Family, employment, freedom of information, collective bargaining, civil liability, information management and sharing, traditional laws

  • The difference between governing (law-making) and administration
  • How to make and enforce laws
  • Developing protocols with agencies
  • Conflict resolution and mediation
  • Strategic Planning for community boards of directors
  • Government funding and resourcing mechanisms
  • Responsibilities of the First Nation and the CEA
  • Other legislation that may impact the lawmaking authority

Collective approaches to capacity building

  • Share results of pilot programs and research
  • Develop an orientation kit for First Nations and CEAs
  • Develop training templates for training of CEAs
  • PFN Workshops and Committees

4. How do we continue moving the agenda forward?

4a) Getting to “Yes”

On the second day of the session, participants at each table brainstormed the major issues in their communities that must be addressed in order to “get to yes” and move forward.

  1. Effective communications, in order to secure a mandate to move forward
  • Based on what is important to the community, as discussed earlier
  • Community forums, use analogies
  • Capture what communities are already doing and frame in the context of jurisdiction: “We are 75% there already”; “We are already making the decisions, and want the right to make these decisions formally recognized”
  1. Capacity to be able to manage jurisdiction
  • Capacity-building strategy for technical skills
  • Document what is already being done, existing capacity
  • Get the FNEA up and running
  1. Community understanding, including answers to key questions; e.g.,
  • Benefit to students attending public school?
  • Impact on educators in First Nation schools: fear
  • Removal of the applicability of Sections 114-122 of the Indian Act as a result of jurisdiction
  • Support for community champions
  1. Informed parents
  2. Results of pilot projects should be shared
  3. Well-informed, involved Councils
  • Continuity of leadership
  • What rights are we giving up? What will we gain?
  • Will the fiduciary responsibility be maintained?
  • Are we letting government off the hook?
  • Look at having Council rep from each PFN on the FNEA
  • Invite Christa and Nathan to speak to Councils
  1. Trust: a huge leap of faith, without (yet) having a long-term funding commitment from government.
  2. Budget and Timelines for negotiation, implementation
  • More clarity on funding (new and existing)
  • Resolution of the CFNFA block funding issue
  • Reassurance that the community will gain
  • Timelines: a plan that connects the dots, lays out timeframes. A large map that shows all the initiatives and events

4b) What Next?

Discussion centered around the need for further sessions so that PFN representatives can continue to develop knowledge and the capacity to facilitate community discussions. Establishing FNEA was seen as a critical step towards keeping the process going and minimizing instability. This group of PFN representatives is the nucleus of the FNEA, and will do the majority of the thinking.There was unanimous agreement that FNESC/FNSA should continue to carry out the organization and planning to carry on the work, including the coordination of further sessions to continue building towards implementing the FNEA. It was also agreed that several subcommittees would be established, with a mix of political and technical representatives from the PFNs:

Legislation: Review of proposed federal and provincial legislation
- Kathy Dickie
- Chief Fabian Alexis
- Jim Angus
- Denise Birdstone
Costing (immediate): Ensure that everything is captured
- Kathy Dickie
- Martin Watts
- Jody Delaney
- Brenda Humchitt
- Chief Charlie Cootes
- Neskonlith rep

- Curtis Dick
Curriculum- Look at the learning outcomes in the provincial curriculum (later)

- DawnMcGuire
-VernaStager
-KarenSmith
-JoannePearson
School Certification: Look at the process, in partnership with FNSA
- Joanne Pearson
- Georgina Wilson
- Michelle Archie
Teacher Standards: Join discussion with the College of Teachers, FNSA*
- DarrylAshdown
-SharonWilson
-TheresaDennis
-KispioxSchool rep
*Next meeting April 6 and 7

Other Action Items
-Distribute Meeting minutes, Summary of pilots, Calendar of meetings: April/06
-Develop a package of materials (for community discussion),
including a user-friendly powerPoint presentation. April/06
-Post jurisdiction material and information on the FNESC website April/06
-Prepare costing on the developmental phase (no date)

Appendix A

More Questions and Answers:

First Nations Education Jurisdiction

1. What is the relationship between the First Nation, CEA and FNEA?

The First Nation will pass an education law-making protocol, defining how laws will be created and passed. Then a First Nation education law will be passed that will create the CEA as the key authority for delivery of the community’s education system, and administration of services. The FNEA is the regional or central body made up of representatives from each Participating First Nation. It will have jurisdiction over areas that have been delegated to it by the PFNs.

2. Will communities under 5-year Agreements be able to access new funding?

We have several years to work through this issue with the federal government.In negotiations with INAC regarding increased funding for First Nations schools in BC, INAC indicated that First Nations with CFNFAs would be required to “break open” their funding agreements. This technical issue needs to be resolved in a way that doesn’t penalize Bands entering into jurisdiction agreements. Other options will be discussed with INAC, to secure a clear agreement and ensure that funding arrangements are not a disincentive for communities wishing to pursue education jurisdiction.

3. What about the concern that the goal of the federal government is to offload responsibility for education?

The fiduciary relationship between the First Nation and federal government will continue to exist, but there will be recognition of the First Nation’s inherent right to jurisdiction over education. The federal government will maintain responsibility for funding education. There is protection within the Agreements against “offloading” federal responsibility.

4. Will the Agreements be affected by the change in government?

The new Conservative government’s direction on education and other issues will be clarified after the Throne Speech and Budget in April. It is worth remembering that both levels of government are recognizing our jurisdiction over education, and that the Agreements with them define how best to carry it out. Much of the work with the provincial government can and will proceed, in terms of school and teacher certification, curriculum development, tracking results, etc.

5. Will our legal entities be subject to the federal and provincial government laws?

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms will apply in terms of the powers of our legal entities.

6. Doesn’t this process favour First Nations with large populations and schools on-reserve, over small First Nations whose students attend school off-reserve?

The communities with small schools and small populations can join with other First Nations to establish a multiple community, multiple or single school model for establishing the Community Education Authority. The province was not prepared to relinquish jurisdiction over First Nations students attending public schools. There will be continuing initiatives to deal with quality of education issues through Local Education Agreements, the Education Partnership Group and Tripartite discussions.

7. Can anything be done prior to the passage of enabling legislation?

Yes. The school certification process is well underway, with 30 schools certified and another 16 in process. FNESC is also moving forward on teacher certification, through discussions with the province and education partners on teacher competencies. Each representative from the PFNs can also communicate with the community, noting that all communities will benefit from these initiatives.

8. Has any thought been given to a communications strategy to include “training for trainers” for PFN representatives.

Yes. A working group will be established to look at establishing a communications tool kit on education jurisdiction.

9. What about funding for special needs education?

FNESC recognizes this as a critical outstanding issue, and will continue to work on it as a high priority while the legislative process unfolds over the next few years. This is also referenced in the BC/FNESC Agreement as an issue.

10. Is there a component to address the inadequate school facilities that are, in some cases, causing students to migrate to the public system?

The education jurisdiction agreement does not address the area of capital funding. At the same time, it is clear that the infrastructure is underdeveloped in many areas. FNESC will continue to deal with the larger issues regarding education capital as they relate to all First Nations.

11. Decisions must remain in the hands of THE First Nation members, so what are the implications for non-members attending FN schools?

One option is to set up an advisory council of non-First Nation members, so that non-First Nation members’ interests would be respected. The First Nation could choose whether this would be an advisory function, or whether some kind of decision-making could also be incorporated.

12. Are these education laws or bylaws, and how enforceable will they be?

They will be laws. Through the Agreements, the federal and provincial government will recognize the First Nations government’s ability to pass the law, creating the CEA and defining its authorities. The laws will be enforceable, and therefore also challengeable, so they will need to stay within the parameters of the Agreement. Unlike bylaws, they will replace sections of the Indian Act, although these particular sections do not currently constitute a very large role for the Minister. There is a section in the Canada/First Nation Agreement that refers to which court can be approached to enforce laws.