11.07.2015 Views

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Part 4. Euro-Canadian History 1758-1871 23[150] Vipond summarized their perspective on February 23, 2010 at p. 63 as follows:The provinces are equally capable <strong>of</strong> self-government, fully clothed, independent legislative andgovernmental bodies; that federalism requires non-interference in areas not within a government'sjurisdiction.[151] Vipond gave evidence that the provincial autonomist's conception <strong>of</strong> relations betweenthe federal government and the provincial government was that they were to be treated as if theywere two foreign entities engaged in diplomacy. The fact that there was one Crown did notchange the fact that they were two governments with different powers, different assets, etc.[152] While the differences in vision between the centralists and provincial autonomists existedand became the source <strong>of</strong> major conflict in the 1880s and 1890s, both camps recognized thateach level <strong>of</strong> government had a legitimate role to play. Even strong provincialists such asMowat, Blake and Mills recognized that provincial jurisdiction in respect <strong>of</strong> matters such aseducation and lands was not so open ended that the federal powers could not limit the provinces'range <strong>of</strong> action. (Vipond, February 26, 2010 at p. 63.)2011 ONSC 4801 (CanLII)[153] As <strong>of</strong> 1867, three levels <strong>of</strong> government having various roles within any particularprovince were to serve the same Crown: the provincial governments, the federal government andin the background, the Imperial Government. The political players knew it was important tospecify which government had jurisdiction to deal with which issues. If the Government <strong>of</strong>Canada made a contract with a private individual, the treasury <strong>of</strong> the Government <strong>of</strong> Canadawould be called upon to "make good" on that contract. Government <strong>of</strong>ficials entering intocontracts needed to clearly identify the government being committed to fulfill their terms(Saywell, April 6, 2009 at pp 61, 64-5, 67.)Confederation - 1867[154] Canada came into being upon Royal Assent to the British North America Act <strong>of</strong> 1867 onJuly 1, 1867.Other Events After Confederation Relevant to the Parties' Understanding <strong>of</strong> Canada'sPowers and Obligations to Indians in 1873Establishment <strong>of</strong> a Canadian Department <strong>of</strong> Indian Affairs[155] After Confederation, many <strong>of</strong> the same ex-employees <strong>of</strong> the Imperial Indian Departmentwho had transferred to the Indian Department <strong>of</strong> the United Canadas in 1860 moved to the IndianDepartment <strong>of</strong> the Dominion <strong>of</strong> Canada. Under the 1868 Department <strong>of</strong> Secretary <strong>of</strong> State Act,the Secretary <strong>of</strong> State became Superintendent General <strong>of</strong> Indian Affairs with responsibility fordirecting the management <strong>of</strong> Indian lands and Indians.[156] From its inception, Canada/the Canadian Indian Department retained Indian Agents towork with the Indians at the local level and involve themselves in every aspect <strong>of</strong> Indian life,including distributing presents and annuities, assisting in establishing reserves, ensuring thatagricultural implements and provisions were provided, schools were built and teachers were

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!