January 25 and 26 Jurisdiction Summary updated March 6/07

Meetings Tab

Summary: Jurisdiction Meeting – January 25 and 26, 2007

I. Dialogue

I. A. Presentation by Tseshaht First Nation

Lena Ross began by thanking the Coast Salish people for holding the Jurisdiction meeting on their land. Chief Les Sam, Lena, Martin Watts, and Willard Gallic then thanked and recognized FNESC for the hard work on jurisdiction, noting that this work will have positive impacts on generations to come. Chief Sam then presented a print of the Tseshaht logo FNESC.

I. B. Presentation of the Passage of Bill -34: First Nations Jurisdiction over Education in British Columbia Act

Jan introduced Melody Morrison, who assisted FNESC with political lobbying efforts and was instrumental in the successful passage of Bill C-34. Melody was able to arrange meetings with key people in Ottawa, including MPs and Senators, and her role was critical in the fast-tracking of the legislation through the parliamentary system.

Melody honoured the contribution of the FNESC leadership, lobbying teams and staff, as well as the Summit leadership and media consultant from Ottawa. She then talked about the journey that let to passage of Bill C-34 in an unprecedented short period of time:

  • Fast passage of legislation has only occurred 12 times, when all political Parties have agreed not to send the Bill to Committees. If this hadn’t happened before Christmas, it would have been difficult to get on the Parliamentary Agenda in the spring session.
  • Because of the minority government, a strategic approach was needed involving meetings with representatives from all Parties to ensure everyone was on side. A number of meetings were held from October to December/06 with political staff as well as Parliamentarians. A great deal of communications work was completed by FNESC staff. The meetings with Gerry St. Germain and Paul Martin were both interesting and extremely important strategically.
  • The Bill received an Order Paper number on November 20. A series of meetings then took place with the House leaders, at the same time as arrangements were being made for students from Fort Nelson, Heiltsuk and Okanagan First Nations to attend the House for tabling of the legislation.
  • After a one-day delay, during which time the students demonstrated great patience, the Bill was finally introduced in the House of Commons on November 28. The speeches by all the House Leaders were incredibly positive, and the Bill was deemed to have passed First, Second and Third Readings. The students were very excited at the passage of their Bill in the House of Commons.
  • Bill C-34 went straight to the Senate and was referred to Committee, where Nathan and Christa were called as witnesses. It was out of Committee in 45 minutes, and passed the Senate on December 12.
  • Once a year, the Governor General comes to the House of Commons to give Royal Assent to legislation, and it just happened that Bill C-34 was one of the pieces of legislation to receive Royal Assent in this way on December 12, 2006.
  • Bill C-34 brought a measure of civility, cooperation and good will to Parliament. It is truly a rare moment in history when that kind of feeling is in evidence on Parliament Hill.

Jan Haugen thanked Melody on behalf of FNESC, and presented her with a gift.

1. C. DVD: House of Commons Proceedings

A DVD was played of the speeches by the House Leaders and subsequent discussion and passage of Bill C-34 in the House of Commons. Unfortunately, the speech by Minister Prentice is missing from this version. Christa highlighted the focus on funding in all the presentations and indicated that Minister Prentice made a commitment in his speech to ensure that Education Jurisdiction in BC is adequately funded. FNESC is preparing a DVD containing excerpts from all the speeches, interviews and other material, which be copied for all IFNs. The plan is to complete the DVD with the exception of the provincial legislation content by the end of March.

1. D. Update on Provincial Legislation

Christa indicated that with the passage of federal legislation, the priority is now the drafting and passage of provincial legislation. FNESC is currently in preliminary discussions with BC and it is anticipated that the legislation will be introduced into the provincial legislature in the spring session, which starts in February. BC hadproposed the option of amending the School Act to include our Jurisdiction Act, but we will be negotiating a stand alone Act. BC will work with FNESC to draft the Provincial legislation. This will involve reviewing drafts of the Bill and providing feedback; both from a legal perspective and case study perspective. It is anticipated that the provincial legislation process will be straightforward as there is significant momentum and support by the Premier and Minister of Education.

Christa was asked if the BC College of Teachers were in support of First Nations Education Jurisdiction. She replied that FNESC has been consulting all of the Education Partner groups, especially the BCCT as they will have a role to place in teacher certification and are definitely supportive of the Agreement. In response to another question, Christa noted that the BCCT already works with First Nations on language teacher certification through the DSTC and is very supportive.

1. E. Process for confirming “Interested First Nations;” BCRs

Nathan reminded the IFNs of the requirement for BCRs. To date, only 30 out of 48 have been received by FNESC. In response to a question, he noted that this BCR does not commit a First Nation to signing an agreement. It is a mechanism for a First Nation to formally confirm the intention to negotiate, and provides FNESC and INAC a clear understanding as to which First Nations are interested in negotiating a Canada/First Nations Education Jurisdiction Agreement. The wording for the BCRs is on the website and is also available at the registration desk with Paisley. Nathan also mentioned that the deadline for community jurisdiction allocations is February 15, 2007, and that so far only 26 IFNs have accessed the funding.

1. F. Update on the First Nations Education Law and other Templates

The latest draft of the FN Education Law was distributed. Nancy noted that the template has been slightly revised and there will bea more complete draft for discussion at the next meeting. After walking through the next draft in March, Nancy recommended that further work wait until more capacity building activities have taken place, which will help in completing it. Both the Education Law and Law Making Protocol templates will be rolling drafts.

Comments and questions on the Education Law Template:

  • New definition of parent to include the expanded version.
  • Page 2: Ensure that there is consistency with the CFNJA and the Funding Agreement
  • Page 3: parent entitled to review school plan (added), vision or mission statement
  • Page 5: Definition of non member: how will they have input in to how the school is operated?
  • It was suggested that a checklist be created for what needs to be in an Education Law at the bare minimum.

There were several comments made about non-members and school rights. One IFN representative commented that the language in the Education Law makes it seem like non-First Nations students are being segregated. Nathan replied that a non-First Nation member had identical rights with the exception of school governance. Nancy noted that the rights each First Nation wants to give non-members is up to each First Nation, and they do not have to be the same for all beyond the minimum requirements; use whatever works for each community. There was agreement that his issue needs to be brought back for further discussion.

There was a question about whether there would be any student under the Jurisdiction Agreement whowould be ineligible for funding. Nathan replied that students living on land with“buckshee” leases (old unrecorded leases) would not be eligible for funding. In response to a question as to whether a First Nation could refuse a student or students,Nancy replied that there is language in the Education Jurisdiction Agreement and a bottom line in the Funding Agreement aboutwho First Nations must provide an education for. It was further commented that First Nations should have the right to turn away students when it is more of a capacity issue.

1. G. Review of Action Items

A brief progress report was provided on action items from the January meeting. See section V for the latest update. Please note that as a result of the intense activity required to prepare for the negotiations of Canada-First Nation Education Jurisdiction Agreements, some action items have been deferred until later in the spring.

I. H. Timeline

The updated timeline is as follows:

  • Provincial Legislation introduced and passedMarch/07
  • Work Plans for negotiation and development completedApril/07
  • Negotiations: Canada-FN Education Jurisdiction

Agreements and Funding Agreementsfrom May/07 onwards

  • Initialling of first Canada-First Nation Agreementsas early as 2007
  • Three-year transition triggered by initialling Agreementas early as 2007
  • Canada-FN Agreements ratified and signed2009/10 or earlier if ready
  • FNEA becomes operationalafter 3 IFNs ratify and sign Agreements

II. Community Progress

II. A. Highlights: Community Reports

Tsehaht held a dinner around the Christmas concert with jurisdiction a key item on the agenda. There was also a thorough review of the legislation process.The next community meetingwill includediscussion on obtaining a mandate to negotiate. Seabird has regular updates and discussion with the Band Education Advisory Council and the school district, and had a meeting with the school trustees specifically to talk about jurisdiction and implications. AdamsLake is currently reviewing its education policies as a way of working up to jurisdiction. SetonLake is holding community meetings and informing the education advisory committee on a regular basis. Heiltsuk sent 6 students from the Comparative Civilizations class to Ottawa to witness the passage of the Act. The students had to go through an interview process and write an essay on Jurisdiction. Bella Bella is ready to start reviewing the templates and starting to see where they can begin adding their own policies, and has also created a DVD for parents and students, which was also presented at the AGM. MountCurrie made bags containing all the jurisdiction information and went door to door handing them out to community members.

Lytton First Nation has hired a contractor garner community support through information sessions and other activities. Tsouke plans to hire a communications person to alter the presentation specifically for the community and will be making a presentation to the school district. Snuneyxmuxw plans to establish monthly meetings with parents and Band school board.

The Gitskan Wetsuweten Education Society would like to do some Board training and link it to the templates being developed for Jurisdiction. Nuxalk held a half-day session with new education board, and will be training the school PAC on getting the word out about jurisdiction. Ktunaxa holds monthly meetings on jurisdiction with prizes as incentives to attend.Lower Kootenayset up a jurisdiction committee including youth and elders and is trying to record all questions from community members to bring back to IFN meetings. Saanich Indian School Board had two presentations on jurisdiction and it will be tabled at the next Board meeting for a mandate to negotiate. Several communities, including Soda Creek and Okanagan, provide updates on jurisdiction through the community newsletter.Okanagan also started an immersion school in the fall, which is a huge impetus to get an Agreement signed. The Tsilhqot'in National Government will be presenting the Jurisdiction Agreement in Tsilhqot'in language at the next AGM. Fort Nelson reported on students whoattended the House proceedings and an elder who championed raising money from the private sector to send students to Ottawa. Tl’azt’en Nation will work on building community capacity to participate. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council will be organizing a community forum to see whether jurisdiction can accommodate the establishment of the FN school board.

II. B. Community Issues

  • Tobacco Plains mentioned a new development with the possibility of the school closing as the population is shrinking and there is declining enrolment.
  • Soda Creek highlighted the need to establish better contact with parents and Band Council and have more in-depth discussions.
  • All 8 Bands in the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council are committed to establishing a FN School Board; however capacity continues to be a challenge.

III. Communications

III. A. Communications Products

Copies of Bill C-34: First Nations Jurisdiction over Education in British Columbia Actwere distributed, as well as several press releases and a draft transcript of the legislation’s introduction in the House of Commons on November 28, 2007.

IV. Capacity and Training

IV. A. Board Governance Training

Nathan outlined the progress to date on the governance training and the approach to the project:

  1. Broad areas and relationships, how things can function effectively, the role of Chief and Council as the Law-making body, etc. Nathan provided a visual chart of relationships:

Law-Making

Chief and Council-(passes, amends Law, ensures implementation, enforcement, can (Terms of reference prepared) delegate aspects of authority)

Appoint or elect

CEA- Decision model: vote or consensus

Within the manual, the broad areas can be outlined. There is also a piece on the transition elements to meet the legal requirements and keep the transition painless. The manual itself will be extremely comprehensive, the “mother of all governance manuals,” and will contain not only the background legal and historical information but also material on the practical areas of governance. (See page 7 of the June 5 and 6/06 Meeting Summary for detailed information on proposed manual content).

Nancy and Nathan responded to questions regarding the process of amending the Law, indicating that there will be an amendment process in the template. The Law-making Protocol will describe the process for approving and amending the Education Law; the amendment process can be detailed and cumbersome, or can be a simple process if the objective is flexibility. The Laws will be registered with INAC. Templates will be developed, including one regarding the general structure of the CEA (roles and responsibilities, Chair, committees, etc.

  1. The exercise of Jurisdiction,specifically areas of First Nation authority and governance. These include legal issues, as well as looking at statutes such as the School Act. Nathan then presented a “legal issues spotting” summary of issues for consideration in relation to governance of CEA Boards and mentioned that Nancy’s office is assisting in reviewing and compiling existing literature in this area. The document includes a list of related statutes and Codes that apply to First Nations schools (Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Criminal Code, Teaching Profession Act, Youth Criminal Justice Act, etc.) and a list of other relevant sources. Issues for consideration include:

a)General Administration issues: School calendar, school attendance, home-schooled children, student progress, student conduct policies, discipline and appeal process, search of students and lockers, detaining students, regulation of class sizes, school property, supervision of students before and after school hours, school field trips

b)Access to Information and Records Management Issues: Student records, storage of records, privacy, access to information, school personnel and employment issues

c)Negligence Issues: Supervision of students and activities, standard of care, adequate safety precautions

d)Health Related Issues: Health Officer, policy on administering medication, communicable disease guidelines

e)Conflict of Interest: Policy

IFN representatives suggested several other legal areas: appeal process; minimum standards for outdoor infrastructure such as gazebos and smokehouses; playground equipment standards, including proximity to the school. It was noted that there is significant overlap between the school certification process and the Board governance issues.

  1. Training: Once we have the information section, how do we create an effective training process? Nathan outlined some ideas for training methods, which could incorporate cases studies, simulations, or other training processes:

a)Short Course: 3-5 days

b)Seminar series: 1 day

c)On-line learning

d)Mentoring

e)Periodic trouble-shooting sessions

He then asked everyone to consider the best way for delivering training, in terms of regional and community sessions, timing, location, etc. Most people preferred a combination approach, with some training taking place in larger gatherings in locations such as Kamloops, Chilliwack Whistler and WilliamsLake. Timing suggestions differed, with some preferring summer and others winter or spring. Ideas that were discussed include:

  1. Jurisdiction Boot Camp: an initial provincial 3-5 day course in a residential setting (such as UBC)to build common understanding of the governance issues, manual content, etc. Readings should be provided weeks in advance, with opportunities for online review and study.
  2. Online: When people return to their communities from boot camp, there can be a series of online sessions, as well as computer-assisted meetings. Software exists (Illuminate) for this approach.
  3. Internet Regional Conferencing would also promote online dialogue and learning.
  4. Mentoring and Troubleshooting: This should be contracted out to FNESC.
  5. Regional Training Sessions for 2-3 days in various areas of the province will allow communities from the same area to take further training together, tailored to the time of year that best suits their needs.
  6. Speaker Series on certain governance areas could be arranged.
  7. Training the Trainers: Each First Nation will need trainers; there are different levels of governance knowledge within each community, and training will need to take place on several levels. It was suggested that some training should expand beyond the Board, an include parents and other stakeholders.
  8. Data Base of Existing Training Resources and Trainers: Information needs to be compiled on existing Board Governance training documents and modules, as well as individuals who already provide this kind of training.

Nathan indicated that he will continue to work on content and report on progress at upcoming meetings.