FIRST NATIONS GOVERNANCE:
A CASE STUDY OF THE TL'ETINQOX-T'IN
by

Richard James Elliott
B.A., University of Victoria, 1997

PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

UNIVERSITY of NORTHERN
BRITISH COLUMBIA
LIBRARY
Prince George, B.C.

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA
November, 2009
©Richard James Elliott, 2009

Abstract

This project examines best practices in First Nations governance structures and compares
these to present day structures in the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government using a case study
methodology. The following question is explored "What are the barriers to developing a

more effective governance structure in the Tl'etinqox-t'in community? To answer this
research question a review of current literature and a case study format will be used. The
paper outlines the history and development of First Nations Governance as defined by the
Indian Act (1876), and how Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) policies have
imposed challenges for development of effective First Nations governance structures. A
comparison is offered between researched best practice in governance structures and
current First Nations governance structures. Four key elements of effective governance are
identified in the research: constitutions, localized governance structures, accountability and
transparency, and revenue creation. These elements are compared to the current practices
of the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government. Recommendations, based on the research findings, are
then presented to assist the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government structures to become more closely
aligned with effective practice.

ii

Table of Contents
Abstract

ll

Table of Contents

lll

List of Figures

IV

Glossary

v

Acknowledgement

Vll

Chapter One

Preface

1

Introduction

3

Background: Tl'etinqox-t'in People & Governance

3

Background: Indian Act & Governance

4

Rationale

8

Methodology

9

Research Question

10

Chapter Three

Literature Review

11

Chapter Four

Discussion & Analysis

22

Constitution

22

Localized Government Structures

23

Accountability & Transparency

25

Revenue Creation

31

Summary

32

Chapter Five

Recommendations

36

Chapter Six

Conclusion

40

Chapter Two

42

Bibliography
iii

List of Figures
Figure 1.1:

The First Nation Legal Environment

7

Figure 3.1:

Self-Administration versus Self-Governance

14

Figure 4.1:

Current Tl' etinqox -t' in Organizational Structure

28

Figure 4.2:

Continuum: Current Practices to Nation Building

34

Figure 5.1:

Governance Structure

37

iv

Glossary

Governance
The Institute on Governance (lOG), an Ottawa based, non-profit think tank founded in
1990 to promote responsive and responsible governance both in Canada and abroad defined
governance as " ... the process whereby power is exercised, decisions are made, citizens or
stakeholders are given voice, and account is rendered on important issues" (Graham 2007).
It is defined in broader terms in The First Nations Governance Handbook as " ... the process

and structure by which councilors direct and manage Council business for the purpose of
enhancing the wellbeing of community members" (Sterritt 2003).
Constitution
A constitution spells out the rules of Government and how it will govern. Included are: the
purpose of Government, its organization, issues of authority, rights of the people and how
changes can be made to the Government (Cornell, Curtis and Jorgensen 2003).
Accountability
Accountability is an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for
one's action. To be accountable means that a person is liable for sanctions, either positive
or negative, according to rules, decisions, policies or enforced by someone else (Shepherd
2006).
Transparency
Transparency describes the free flow of information between those who possess the
information and those who seek it or wish to know it.

v

Legitimacy
A political system gains legitimacy when it accurately represents the ideals and values of
the citizens it represents. Shepherd (2006) defines legitimacy as " ... having congruence
between the citizens' conceptions of fair and representative Governmental organization and
action on the one hand, and actual institutional structures and their actions on the other".

vi

Acknowledgement

The following people were instrumental in bringing this project to completion; my
supervisor Hans Donker who guided me through the process, John Curry who offered his
ideas and editing skills, Darron Campbell, who brought a fresh set of eyes and pulled me
away when I needed a break, my daughter Alexis, who called me "no-fun guy" while I was
working but always respected when I needed quiet time. However, it is to my wife Elaine
that I owe the greatest debt of gratitude. She was there at every step with ideas,
suggestions and the occasional push. This project would not have come about it if it were
not for her loving support.

vii

Preface
Thirteen years ago, as a recent graduate of the University of Victoria I followed my new wife
to Alexis Creek, a small, remote community in central British Columbia that is surrounded
by several First Nation reserves. Prior to this I had not lived in a community with fewer than
75,000 people nor had I any exposure to First Nations people or their culture. I soon learned
the world did not operate in the manner to which I was familiar in regards to matters of social
dynamics and community structures. I also learned that my expertise and abilities to keep a
group of twenty or so seven and eight year olds on task, was an asset to the local schools.
When a teacher abandoned her class because she could not handle the stress of living in a
remote community and teaching in a First Nations school, there was consensus that I would
be the logical replacement. At the end of the school year, the existing principal left and
again it was decided that I was the logical replacement. Thus began my career as Principal
of Tl' etinqox School.
The culture of the school mirrored the unstable, underachieving and chaotic nature of
the local community.

The community was impoverished, with unpredictable social

structures due to constant changes in the power hierarchy of Council and experienced
widespread violence and abuse. The school was un-cared for, insufficiently equipped with
quality resources and had a general moral reflecting frustration and defeat. With much hard
work, consistency, a well defined purpose and a high level of expectation, the school has
begun to operate with its own momentum, one characterized by respect, care and orderly
progress.

No longer do we have to rely on extrinsic "rewards" such as MP3 players,

bicycles, and other monetary items as motivation for students to behave appropriately, they

have become involved and caring partners in their education, exhibiting respect for one
another and the school. No longer is petty jealousy hampering the development of the staff
and students. There is common understanding in the community that the school is a nonpolitical entity and cannot be manipulated by partisan politics. Special interest groups, who
feel they have certain privileges due to their political affinity to the present, but ever
changing Council, no longer exert power and influence over the school.
The culture and climate of the school has changed significantly, becoming stable,
accountable, and transparent.

The school has gained legitimacy and become a notable

success, not only within the local community and the greater community of Williams Lake
but provincially as well. In thirteen years I have witnessed six elections for Council and with
each successive election came a resurgence of new hope.

This new hope was usually

followed by systemic nepotism and abuses of the political system. What are the barriers that
prevent the community from mirroring the success of the school? As I began my work in the
School of Business at the University of Northern British Columbia, I found myself
examining the impasse that characterizes the Tl'etinqox-t'in.

Why is the school able to

develop a social structure with stability and credibility while the Band cannot? This question
set the stage for the research project as I found myself drawn to understand the complex
phenomena of this community's constant state of flux, resulting in an inability to progress
forward with respect to social and economic stability.

2

Chapter One: Introduction & Background

Introduction
This project begins with a background of the Tl 'etinqox-t' in people and their current
governance structure as well as a background of the Indian Act and how it relates to
governance. The project will then examine the current literature around good governance and
the practices that both hinder and promote the development of good governance structures
within First Nation communities. From the literature four key elements are identified. These
elements are used in a case study format, to answer the research question: "What are the
barriers to developing a more effective governance structure in the Tl 'etinqox-t 'in
community? "

Background: Tl'etingox-t' in People & Governance
The home of the Tl'etinqox-t'in people is located on the Chilcotin Plateau, 98 kilometers
west of Williams Lake on Highway 20. The reserve is situated on the bottom of a river valley
that is approximately ten kilometers long and two kilometers wide. The area is pristine with
little or no development and boasts vast tracts of untouched wilderness where wildlife and
the natural beauty of nature thrive. The Chilcotin River runs through the reserve and is a
source of food and recreation for the people. There are approximately 1,450 members of the
Tl'etinqox-t'in Band with approximately 1200 people living on the reserve (Government of
British Columbia 2007, 1).
The Tl' etinqox-t'in people elect twelve Councilors and one Chief every two years.
The most recent election was February, 2009. It is the responsibility of the Chief to assign

3

portfolios to each of the Councilors. Several factors influence how involved a Councilor
becomes in the day-to-day operation of their portfolio including; the workload within the
department itself, how involved a Councilor wants to be, the relationship between the current
department head and the Councilor, whether the Councilor already works in the department
or has another role within a different department. Unlike Federal, Provincial, Municipal or
Regional politics where it is deemed a conflict of interest, members of Chief and Council
may hold office while also being employed by the Tl 'etinqox-t'in Band. As the Tl'etinqoxt'in community moves toward a governance structure with credibility and stability, it will
need to grapple with issues such as conflict of interest as well as those related to
transparency, accountability, responsiveness, and the clarity of the roles and responsibilities
of Council.
Background: Indian Act & Governance
The Constitution of 1876 (Department of Justice 1985) gave the Canadian Parliament
legislative control over First Nations in Canada. Through the Indian Act the Department of
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), used a band system of governance to oversee
and control the lives of First Nations people in Canada. The traditional leadership models,
often hereditary in nature, were replaced by a band system structured in a fashion similar to
municipal governments with elected officials. INAC legislation drastically changed the
traditional First Nation method of selecting a new leader or leaders. By providing leadership
elections for Council (Cote 2001), INAC legislation effectively made the elected Council
accountable to INAC, and not to band members. The Indian Act essentially handicapped
First Nations by removing traditional governing structures (Chief and Council structures
were not the only governance system used by First Nations) and then failing to adequately
4

provide the necessary tools First Nations governments needed to implement effective
governance.
Many First Nations have objected to the paternalism of the Indian Act. The Federal
Government has increasingly recognized the Act has many shortfalls as the framework for
relations between First Nations and the government of Canada (Hurley 2002). However, the
Federal Government has not been successful in correcting these shortcomings. Hurley (2002)
believes that the conflicting role of the Federal Government and First Nations, along with
differing viewpoints about First Nation self-government, has only hindered the reformation
of the Indian Act. With many First Nations disillusioned and frustrated with the Indian Act,
a division has emerged among First Nations politicians and people in regards to the
effectiveness and relevance of the Indian Act in today's world. Some argue the Indian Act is
repressive while others argue it protects specific rights of First Nations. The Indian Act is a
potent mechanism of the Federal Government; it gives authority to manage the affairs, lands
and funds of First Nations people across the nation. With this comes the power to deny basic
Canadian civil and personal rights to hundreds of thousands of "wards" of the federal state
(Hurley 2002).
Governance structures among First Nation communities are at varying stages of
evolution. A few recent decisions regarding aboriginal governance by the Supreme Court of
Canada have influenced the progress of negotiations for alternate governance systems for
First Nations in Canada and in British Columbia. However, "given the vastly different
circumstances of Aboriginal peoples throughout Canada, implementation of the inherent
right cannot be uniform across the country or result in a "one-size-fits-all" form of
governance. The Government proposes to negotiate self-governance arrangements that are
5

tailored to meet the unique needs of Aboriginal groups and are responsive to their particular
political, economic, legal, historical, cultural and social circumstances" (Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada 1995). The Federal Government's approach to the implementation of more
appropriate systems of governance focuses on practical, workable and flexible agreements
rather than trying to define them in abstract terms. The hope is this type of approach will
allow all the parties involved to make meaningful progress towards First Nation governance
agreements (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada 1995). While the Indian Act contains
provisions assigning limited powers to Councils, it does not provide procedural or structural
tools to guide the effective administration of band governments. The Indian Act does not
attend to rules governing conflict of interest or the roles of elected officials and First Nation
staff (Carelton University Center for Community Innovation 2005). This is problematic as
not all governments operate in a systematic and effective manner. There are communities
where governments "use the rules in creative and effective ways, solving numerous
problems, growing their economies, carrying out the functions of government smoothly, and
giving their people rich opportunities to live productive and fulfilling lives. Other societies
have governments that are confused about their responsibilities and functions, abuse the
rules, or even rewrite them so that a few people can enrich themselves at the expense of
others" (Cornell, Curtis and Jorgensen 2003, 3). In such communities governments can
become so disorganized and ineffectual they become paralyzed.
Figurel.l from The First Nations Governance Handbook compares accountability
structures for a Band operating under the Indian Act and a Band operating under a locally
developed constitution (Sterritt 2003). This figure demonstrates that under the INAC model,
a Band operating under a locally developed governance model with a locally developed
6

constitution IS not self-governing. Even with these structures in place, the First Nations
community is reliant on the Federal Government as a source of funding. The reliance on
funding makes First Nations primarily accountable to the Federal Government and not to the
members of the First Nation community.
Figure 1.1: The First Nation Legal Environment

Indian Act

First Nation Constitution

Minister of Indian Affairs

First Nation Community Members

Council

Council

Director of Operations

Director of Operations

Staff

Staff

(Sterritt 2003, 11)

7

Chapter Two- Rationale & Methodology

Rationale
Since the Indian Act legislation was introduced in 1876, it has been at the center of almost
continual debate and is laden with controversy, anger and sorrow. While many First Nations
call for the elimination of the Indian Act, confusion surrounds what would replace it. While
treaty settlements with individual First Nations have reduced some of the authority of the
Indian Act, it remains the standard governance system for most Bands. Individual First
Nations are encouraged by the Federal Government to develop a process to move away from
the Indian Act and to create their own governance structures. In such cases, Indian and
Northern Affairs' mandate is not to dictate the form of governance structures implemented,
but instead to act in a supporting manner. The stated goal of Indian and Northern Affairs is to
support First Nation communities in the implementation of strong, effective and sustainable
governments.
Research by INAC (2008) has shown that effective governance is the single greatest
contributing factor to a community's socio-economic progress and its overall well-being. In
addition, the research demonstrates that effective governance structures and institutions assist
First Nation communities to : take greater control over the decisions that affect their lives;
carry out effective relationships with other governments; take advantage of economic
development opportunities; improve programs and services and enhance their social and
economic opportunities.
For the Tl'etinqox-t'in people to obtain a strong, effective and sustainable
government, the process of developing their own governance system must be undertaken.
8

This process should involve: introspection; evaluation; discussion about culture, community,
belief systems, and values; and an evaluation of current governance practices. It is only
through good governance structures that First Nations will be able to move forward and
ensure their place within the greater society (Helin 2006).

While the Tl'etinqox-t'in Chief

and Council have contemplated a move towards a more traditional form of governance, they
have not developed a local constitution. If the community is to establish an effective and
sustainable government the development of a constitution and governance structures that are
a reflection of the people and their unique circumstances would be vital.
Methodology
A case study methodology is used to examine governance research and how this research
relates to the governing structures of the Tl'etinqox-t'in. "Case study research excels at
bringing us to an understanding of a complex issue or object and can extend experience or
add strength to what is already known through previous research. Case studies emphasize
detailed contextual analysis of a limited number of events or conditions and their
relationships" (Soy 1997). Soy (1997) also states that " ... scientists, in particular, have made
wide use of this qualitative research method to examine contemporary real-life situations and
provide the basis for the application of ideas and extension of methods".
The case study methodology allows the flexibility to compare firsthand observations
with results obtained from other research methods and establish a bridge between the two
(Suriyabhivadh 2005). Based on a review of the literature and the personal understanding of
the local context, case study methodology was chosen to explore the complex issues
surrounding the current governance structures of the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government. As an
9

employee (school principal) of thirteen years, the author's observations will be compared to
the academic and professional literature. The analysis of this comparison will form the basis
for a set of recommendations for strengthening the Tl'etinqox-t'in governance structure.
Research question: What are the barriers to developing a more effective governance
structure in the Tl'etinqox-t'in community?

10

Chapter Three- Literature Review

Twenty-nine First Nations governance projects were reviewed in the study "First Nations
Governance Pilot Projects: Challenge and Innovation" (2005). The governance projects were
presented in a case study format with the objective of highlighting achievements, best
practices and innovative approaches to governance issues. In each of the areas assessed, the
review identified impediments to effective First Nations governance, all of which pointed
towards the need for a comprehensive strategy to support First Nations. This strategy would
address the following:
1. Lack of self-sufficient First Nation economies, which result in a
preoccupation on the part of First Nation Governments with day to day social
and economic challenges.
2. Unpredictable financial resources which impair First Nation Government
capacity to prepare and implement long term plans for governance.
3. Lack of effective governance infrastructure including judicial, administrative
and financial structures.
4. First Nations fractured along residency, gender, youth and registered Indian
status lines.
5. The federal policy environment.
(Carelton University Center for Community Innovation 2005).
The report recommended that First Nations move towards greater accountability through
community consultation and open processes. The report identified the re-building of
relationships among First Nations people and pursuing common goals as an important
component of the strategy. It focused on the development of First Nation constitutions as a
crucial component of the process. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), a
global development network which advocates for change in the area of governance, notes
11

that "Good governance is, among other things, participatory, transparent and accountable. It
is also effective, equitable and promotes the rule of law. Good governance ensures that
political, social and economic priorities are based on broad consensus in society and that the
voices of the poorest and the most vulnerable are heard in decision-making over the
allocation of development resources" (United Nations Development Program 1997).
The First Nations Governance Handbook (Sterritt 2003, 11) states, the "Indian Act is
silent with respect to many of Council's governance relationships". This allows First Nations
leaders a great deal of latitude in designing or implementing a governance model or approach
that is tailored to their own culture, traditions or needs and allows leaders to develop their
charter or constitution without the legal constraint of the Indian Act (Sterritt 2003).
However, Calvin Helin (2006) suggests this very silence with respect to governance in the
Indian Act is causing the corruption and the so called "gravy train" mentality found on many
reserves today. The "gravy train" mentality is the idea that it is the right of elected officials
to line their pockets as well as those of friends and family. Helin (2006, 151) implies it is the
Chiefs themselves who do not want governance accountability or transparency legislation
brought forward, as it will end the " ... century-long thieves' banquet masquerading as
democracy under the so-called rule of law." Helin (2006) concludes that real democracy, fair
election procedures, and transparent and accountable governance are necessary before
aboriginal peoples can move forward in the creation of a sustainable economy, but those
structures and ideas are available in only the most generous interpretation of the current
Indian Act.
It must be noted that good governance is not guaranteed just because governance

systems are put in place. As noted by the Institute on Governance researchers, First Nations
12

communities do not merely need self governance according to their traditions to flourish. As
with all human societies, they also require effective governance no matter what the tradition
(Graham and Bruhn 2008). If traditional First Nation governance structures are incapable of
operating in the context of today's society, do not accurately reflect current First Nation
value systems, or lack legitimacy, they will be ineffectual. Cornell, Curtis and Jorgensen
state:
It is obvious even to the most casual observer that some Governments are

more effective than others. Some societies have Governments that use the
rules in creative and effective ways, solving numerous problems, growing
their economies, carrying out the functions of Government smoothly, and
giving their people rich opportunities to live productive and fulfilling lives.
Other societies have Governments that are confused about their
responsibilities and functions, abuse the rules, or even rewrite them so that a
few people can enrich themselves at the expense of others. Sometimes
Governments make such a mess of things that the society itself is threatened
with collapse.

Regardless of the form, processes or style of Government a group of citizens
chooses to represent them, the trust and acceptance they receive from their
own citizens and in those on the outside who deal with them, determines their
effectiveness. While no Government is perfect, effective Governments all
enjoy legitimacy with the people they serve and tend to have the respect of
outsiders (Cornell, Curtis and Jorgensen, The Concept of Governance and its
Implications for First Nations 2003, 3).
In 1987, the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University started
the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development to determine the conditions
necessary for successful development among First Nations. The central focus of the Harvard
Project was to study what was out there, what worked, where, and why. Key research
findings indicated the following four elements are critical for the successful development of
First Nations governance:
1. Sovereignty. When First Nations are responsible for their own decisions

around development and governance they constantly out-perform external
decision makers.
13

2. Institutions. For effective development to take place First Nations must
ensure stable, legitimate, transparent and accountable institutions.
3. Culture. Development must incorporate legitimate governance structures that
are culturally appropriate.
4. Leadership. Leaders have to be willing to introduce new knowledge,
challenge assumptions, and propose change.
(John F. Kennedy School of Government 2004).
First Nations who took control of their affairs and backed up that control with capable,
culturally appropriate and effective governing institutions were significantly better off
economically than those who had not. In short, self-governance matters for the well-being of
First Nation people as much as it does for others. (Cornell and Kalt 2006). Of critical
importance, is the ability to govern oneself and this requires genuine jurisdiction; selfgovernance as opposed to self-administration. The distinction is made clear in the following
table (Figure 3.1) which illustrates the difference between self-governance and selfadministration.
Figure 3.1: Self-Administration versus Self-Governance

Self-Administration

Self-Governance

Jurisdiction

Vested in First Nations but Vested in First Nations, tribes, or other
limited to narrow policy associations of First Nations and
domains and subject to covering a wide array of policy domains
federal or provincial veto

Governing
Institutions

Designed
largely
by Designed by First Nations, tribes, or
outsiders, usually the federal other associations of First Nations
Government

14

Core Functions

Establish a constitutional Foundation

Administer programs

Distribute resources such as Make and enforce laws
jobs, money, services
Make and implement decisions
Manage the internal affairs of
the nation to the extent Provide for the fair and non-political
allowed by Canadian or resolution of disputes
provincial law
Administer programs
Manage the internal and external affairs
of the nation as allowed by First
Nations' laws
Revenue

Largely
from
federal
Government; First Nations'
efforts to increase revenues
focus
largely
on
craftsmanship and lobbying
for increased federal funding

From diverse sources, including but not
limited to federal funds; First Nations'
efforts to increase revenues focus on
enterprise development and other
revenue generating options

Accountability

Typically
uni-directional,
having to do largely with
First Nations' accountability
to funders, especially the
federal Government, for how
funds are used

Multi-directional, having to do with (1)
First Nations' accountability to their
own citizens for governing well, (2)
First Nations' accountability to funders
for use of funds, and (3) federal
accountability to First Nations for
policy decisions

InterGovernmental
decision
making
processes

Consultation; the assumption
IS that other Governments
know what's best for First
Nations but should at least
talk to them

Partnership (decisions are made jointly
where substantive First Nation interests
are involved); the assumption is that
First Nations and other Governments
can work together to determine what's
best for both

(Cornell, Curtis and Jorgensen 2003, 19)
"The challenge facing indigenous nations is to solve difficult social problems, protect
indigenous cultures, build productive economies, effectively manage lands and resources,
15

effectively manage social and other programs, construct mutually beneficial relationships
with other Governments and with surrounding communities, and rebuild societies that work.
Such functions are impossible to accomplish without placing power in the hands of
indigenous peoples to make critical and far reaching decisions for themselves" (Cornell,
Curtis and Jorgensen 2003, 7) It is not only the ability of First Nations to make decisions
that are important, but also the ability to make reasonable and informed decisions that is of
equal importance.

The Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development

identified and defined specific characteristics of successful tribal governments such as a
separation between politics and day-to-day administration, a capable and principled
bureaucracy and stable institutions and policies (Cornell and Kalt 2006).
The National Centre for First Nations Governance (NCFNG) is a non-profit service
and research organization governed by First Nations with a mandate to support First Nations
as they seek to implement effective self-governance and to assist First Nations in the further
development of their day-to-day government operations.

Their premise is that each First

Nation develops its own process and governance structures, as no two First Nations are
exactly the same (National Center For First Nations Governance 2006).

However, the

NCFNG has created a model for First Nations based on five pillars which they believe are an
amalgamation of traditional values and current realities:
1. People - The people are defined as the foundation of the nations, they; share
language, stories, history, family relationships and form communities which hold the
collective memories of their nations.
2. Land - The land is seen as a fundamental element of First Nations governance
because much of First Nations authority and identity is closely tied to it.

16

3. Laws and jurisdiction - Laws and jurisdiction provide the framework with the highest
law being a constitution. Without which First Nations revert to the authority of the
Indian Act.
4. Institutions - Institutions provide the framework and delivery systems to successfully
operate communities and deliver programs and services to the people.
5. Resources -Resources (information, systems, people, tools and revenue streams) are
required components for any effective enterprise.
(National Center for First Nations Governance 2009).
Graham and Wilson (2004) also identified five principles of good governance: legitimacy
and voice, fairness, accountability, direction and performance. The research explores these
principles through an aboriginal lens in order to identify significant challenges to aboriginal
governance.

To facilitate change the authors suggest a need for more discussions between

the Federal Government and First Nation leaders around defining good governance and
setting in place guiding principles for the future.
Contemporary First Nation governance structures need to reflect the modem world
and allow First Nations to interact economically and socially in the greater society.
Therefore, contemporary governance systems may need a different structure than historical
governance systems (Jorgensen 2007).

Not all historical versions of First Nations

governance structures consist of the Chief and Council model. Some historical versions of
First Nation governance structures were created out of a specific need reflected in the current
situation of a First Nation. For example, hunters may have led during hunting season,
warriors may have led during times of conflict, and elders may have led when important
decisions were needed regarding the nation as a whole. Recognizing and reconciling the
differences between historical and contemporary governance structures is a difficult
challenge. Jorgensen (2007) argues that this subjects First Nations to two tests; effectiveness
17

and ownership. Effectiveness is in reference to First Nation institutions and procedures,
formal and informal, written and unwritten that will effectively respond to the many diverse
community demands. The second test deals with the institutions themselves which must be
seen by First Nations as having genuine relevance; there must be a sense of ownership for
their institutions: not simply a manifestation of the non-aboriginal system. "If citizens view
organizations of authority as somehow violating the values or principles of governance they
believe in, then those institutions are doomed to being overturned, ignored, or abused"
(Jorgensen 2007, 45).
Bill C7 - The First Nations Governance Act (2003), proposed that First Nations
establish codes in key areas of governance including; leadership selection, appeals, financial
management, and administration. Bill C7 also provided First Nations with the opportunity to
make changes to current Band government systems by prescribing a framework for First
Nations governance. At the center of this framework is the idea that communities create a
locally developed constitution. Constitutions are a fundamental first step because they
provide the framework for community governance, reflect the values and beliefs of the
community and describe the relationship between people and their Government. According
to Bill C7 constitutions will:
1. Lay the framework for decision-making processes.
2. Outline the powers of the governing authority and the citizen.
3. Describe the values, principles and beliefs that should act as a base for any decisions
made.
(Hurley 2002).

18

Hurley (2002) contends a constitution legitimizes and identifies the different powers
of political organizations; protects the rights and freedoms of the citizens and is the building
block to continued development.
Effective self-government requires a foundation of basic rules that spell out
how the nation will govern itself. "It typically includes what the fundamental
purposes of the nation's Government are, how that government is organized,
who has what authority and when that authority can be exercised, what the
basic rights of citizens are, and how changes in government can be made.
Along with a treaty, if the nation has one, it is a foundational agreement-in
this case among citizens themselves-establishing the institutions and the
rules through which the society intends to pursue its purposes and the means
by which additional rules can be made" (Cornell, Curtis and Jorgensen, 2003,
7).
Constitutions are a reflection of a people's identity and allow for the expression of
their ideology or belief system. A First Nation constitution should be based on its own
culture, values and traditions. Carleton University Centre for Community Innovation (2005)
states that a First Nation constitution may address subject matters such as:
First Nation Government structures (legislative, executive, administrative, advisory
and judicial).
Methods for selecting
tradition/custom).

leaders

and

officials

(by

election,

appointment,

•

Law making procedures.

•

Community decision-making, referendum or ratification procedures.

•

Financial management and administration standards and procedures.

•

Codes of conduct and conflict of interest rules.

•

Procedures for the delegation of the First Nation's authority to other Governments.

•

Core laws and procedures for First Nation land management and administration.

•

Core laws and procedures for citizenship and membership.
19

First Nation collective rights and individual rights of members and citizens.
•

Constitutional amendment procedures.
(Carelton University Center for Community Innovation 2005, 19).
Helin (2006) lists two barriers to indigenous development: systemic and inherent.

The inherent barriers are a way in which the dependency mindset has been socialized
internally into the psyche of generations of indigenous people. The inherent barrier, which
hinders forward movement of indigenous people must be recognized and acknowledged in
order to develop a better plan for the future. Helin (2006) indentifies the systemic barriers
as; lack of accountability at virtually all levels of indigenous government, lack of
transparency and accountability in the handling of monies and budgets, poor management
and allocation of existing transfer payments, and in some cases, corruption or ineptitude that
has resulted in monies and resources wasted. Helin also contends governments become selfsustaining through taxation and until First Nations governance models address taxation for
the creation of wealth and cease to rely on transfer payments, First Nations will not move
beyond simply providing programs for INAC.
While the literature on First Nations governance is varied and extensive, most of the
research is unanimous in its support of the need for effective First Nations governance.
Throughout the literature there have been several consistent elements that support effective
governance models . Four such areas have clearly surfaced as barriers to the Tl'etinqox-t'in
yet are critical elements to effective governance. The four key elements are:
1. Constitutions

2. Localized governance structures

20

3. Accountability and transparency
4. Revenue creation

21

Chapter Four - Discussion & Analyses
Constitution
A constitution lays out the purpose of government and how it is to govern: it is the corner
stone upon which government is built. However, constitutions are rare in First Nations
communities. The Indian Act is repressive and authoritarian and does not easily allow First
Nations to get out from under the Act's control and develop their own constitution. Cornell,
Curtis and Jorgensen (2003, 8) state a constitution " ... typically includes what the
fundamental purposes of the nation's government are, how that government is organized,
who has what authority and when that authority can be exercised, what the basic rights of
citizens are, and how changes in government can be made. It is a foundational agreement-in
this case among citizens themselves-establishing the institutions and the rules through
which the society intends to pursue its purposes and the means by which additional rules can
be made". If the objective of Council is to govern its people then the constitution is what
enables them to do so. A constitution puts limits on what a governing body can and cannot
do in the execution of its duties. Without a constitution there is a tendency towards abuse of
power.
Currently the Tl'etinqox-t'in people have no formal written constitution which is to a
large extent responsible for the lack of consistency regarding the duty, function, organization
and power of the Council. The Tl'etinqox-t'in people are handcuffed when choosing leaders
because they are completely at their mercy until the next election. During elections the
question becomes, "are they running for personal gain or because they want what's best for

22

the people?"

Without a constitution the electorate 1s powerless to achieve lasting and

effective change on the reserve.
Localized Government Structures
Historically, First Nations had their own traditional governance structures.

During

colonization these traditional structures were forcefully replaced by westernized versions.
The new governance structures developed by the Federal Government included a system of
elected representatives in the form of Chief and Council. First Nation Governments became
an extension of the administrative system used by western culture which effectively reduced
their power to program providers dependent upon the Federal Government for funding. This
sense of paternalism has led to a distorted sense of Government responsibility and purpose.
As noted by Cornell, Curtis and Jorgensen:
The idea of Government as law-maker, dispute-resolver, or vehicle for
pursuing collective goals has been buried beneath the need for services and
the fact that indigenous Government is the funnel that brings services to those
who need them. This in turn leads to battles over who controls the programs,
the jobs, the services. Government becomes the boxing ring in which various
community factions fight for resources. Whoever wins gets to control the
distribution of those resources, confirming the idea that this is what
Government is really all about. Under these conditions, self-government is
little more than self-administration. The major decisions are made somewhere
else while the First Nation simply gets to implement them (Cornell, Curtis
and Jorgensen 2003, 6).
The Tl'etinqox-t'in Government uses the INAC model and has elections every two
years with a Council who answers to INAC, not the people. The INAC model limits the
power of Council to human resource issues and the continual operation of INAC programs.
INAC programs require numerous resources to fulfill the many reporting and operational

23

requirements. This leaves few resources left for true government functions such as; resource
regulation and development, justice, health, trade, industry, etc ...
First Nations governance models and functions must be developed locally and reflect
the local climate and culture. Governance models should include local traditions and culture
yet be able to effectively function within the greater society. Before First Nations people
will believe in and support governance structures they must; have a legitimate voice in the
creation of the structure and it must reflect what the people believe to be critical aspects of
their cultural identity.

Cornell and Kalt (2006) state culturally appropriate organizational

and strategic structures are significant determinants of success and there exists a common
belief that assumes reserve structures should mirror the cultural rules of others. However,
having reserve structures mirror the cultural rules of others suggests there is only one correct
path to success.
As noted by Elizabeth Furniss ( 1999), for as long as the Tl 'etinqox -t' in people can
remember they had a system governed by hereditary Chiefs.

While the details of the

traditional government structure are debated amongst the people themselves, there is a
common belief that they were led by a Chief and elders. This system provided, at the very
least, a sense of continuity with a traditionally appropriate belief in the wisdom of the elders
to guide governance. This differs significantly from the INAC imposed structure of electing
a Chief and Council every two years.
The role of elders has diminished to the point of non-existence in many First Nations,
including the Tl'etinqox-t'in. There is no place in the current Tl'etinqox-t'in governance
structure for elders to provide input. As the game of politics evolves on the reserve it is
24

becoming more and more a young person's game; elders are being pushed aside and provide
little direction. Elder's may run for office, but common practice is that they seldom, if ever,
do. The Tl'etinqox-t'in people should reflect on the elder's traditional role within the
community and define how that role will carry the community into the future as they develop
a localized governance structure. All members of the community must then work with the
Tl'etinqox-t'in Government to develop a system that reflects their current situation and
acknowledges traditions specific to their people.
Accountability and Transparency
The Tl' etinqox government has been plagued by accountability and transparency issues. The
focus on accountability and transparency needs to move beyond the individual and focus on
the community or nation as a whole. While electors are responsible for putting people into
office, those same electors need to develop a sense of confidence in their ability to contribute
to the greater picture: the betterment of the community, not just individuals or specific
families. The decision-making process needs to be made transparent to ensure community
members understand why decisions are made. Council meetings need procedures governing
consistent decision making processes. These processes need to provide avenues for public
involvement and develop a sense of stability and legitimacy both within and outside the
community. "The Third Annual Aboriginal Governance Index: Rewarding Good Governance
on Canada's Reserves" is a research paper whose stated purpose is to find a" ... convenient
benchmark through which individual bands can measure their progress in achieving
responsible self-government" (Sandberg and Quesnel2009, 7). The study finds that only
twenty-one percent of First Nations responded indicating Council minutes and decisions are
"always or mostly made easily available"; over half of the respondents replied that
25

information regarding meetings and decisions is "never or rarely made easily accessible to
band residents" (Sandberg and Quesnel2009, 35). The study reports that a majority of
respondents (sixty-two percent) indicate band members "never or do not really have access
to band financial plans or financial statements" (Sandberg and Quesnel2009, 35).
Transparency means allowing public access to band documents. Transparency also
means long term planning with goals; an indication of how to get there and what measures
will be used to achieve those goals. Transparency allows the community to view decisions
using the long term goals as a framework. People may not always agree with the validity of
a decision but having long term goals allows those decisions to be measured against
something tangible and for which they had a part in creating. Making short term decisions
without real direction, sense of purpose or from behind closed doors will cause people to
question the reason and motive of those decisions.
Transparency and accountability are theoretical concepts centering on process and
procedure. However, when put into practice these theoretical concepts cannot operate in
isolation: a governance system also needs legitimacy (Shepherd 2006). A government gains
legitimacy when it accurately represents the ideals and values of the citizens it represents.
Shepherd (2006) defines legitimacy as having a common understanding between the citizens'
idea of fair and representative governmental organization and action and actual institutional
structures and their actions. It is possible to be transparent and accountable and lack
legitimacy. Without legitimacy a community is ineffectual in administering policy and is in a
continuous state of self correcting.

"Accountability without legitimacy means the

community will be continually second guessing and overturning governmental actions, and
government itself ultimately will be unable to pursue an effective coherent, long-term set of
26

policies, not because it is unaccountable, but because, as a set of institutions, it lacks the
support of its own people" (Cornell 1993, 9). Cornell argues that if institutions are
accountable to their people they will have legitimacy. Unfortunately, First Nations did not
design the structures that govern them; they were designed and imposed by the Federal
Government, therefore, these structures are reflective of western philosophy and beliefs and
not representative of traditional First Nations structures and therefore lack legitimacy.
Cornell (1993, 9) states that it " ... is important for the community to see the institution it is
governed by as fundamentally appropriate for that community.

To be legitimate, those

institutions have to fit the community's ideas about how things ought to be done - in
particular the sorts of things government's do, such as exercising power and representing
interests". Cornell (1993) goes on to state that Europeans thought First Nations had no
government structures and what little they had was uncivilized and without legitimacy.
Legitimacy is not static, it ebbs and flows with changes in societal values and beliefs
(Cornell 1993). When Government is effective, open, accountable, and transparent and is
making decisions that represent what people want, it gains legitimacy. People will change a
government when they see, or experience, events that negatively impact legitimacy.
Transparency and accountability, therefore do not guarantee legitimacy.
Like many bands, the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government needs to develop measures for
accountability and transparency.

The lack of consistent organizational structure is a major

obstacle to transparency and accountability because the structure changes every two years at
election time. The inefficient and unstable conditions of this structure are represented in
Figure 4.1 which illustrates the current Tl'etinqox-t'in organizational structure.

27

Figure 4.1: Current Tl'etinqox-t'in Organizational Structure

Chief & Council
(Portfolio Holders)

Band Manager

Department Heads

Office Manager

Staff

The Tl'etinqox-t'in organizational structure depicts no clear lines of accountability. Every
level of the organization is meshed with levels above and below it and transparency is lost
because of structural and departmental overlap.

The arrows in Figure 4.1 represent the

different roles Council members currently hold within the Tl'etinqox-t'in organization.
Because Council members also hold roles at all levels of the organization, it is impossible to
separate the different organizational levels within the organization, creating numerous
conflict issues.

For example, Councilors can be department heads, employees, band

managers, and office mangers. Some Councilors are employees or department heads within
the portfolio they are assigned to oversee. The lack of a consistent and stable organizational
structure undermines it's accountability, transparency and legitimacy.

When the lines

between Councilor, department head, office manager and staff become blurred to the point
these people are one in the same it is impossible to assure accountability and transparency.

28

As Figure 4.1 demonstrates the current governance structure clearly lacks flow.

Unlike

Regional, Municipal, Provincial or Federal government structures, employees can hold an
elected position within the organization. The structure of the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government
Office has looked very different from Figure 4.1 over the past thirteen years.

The

Tl'etinqox-t'in people have seen everything from centralized rule to rule though consensus.
Some Council's have chosen to hold all the reins of power, controlling every aspect of life on
the reserve while other Council's have reduced their role to political figure heads without any
real control or decision-making responsibilities.

There is no consistency as each new

Council sets different parameters for the powers of office. The inconsistency leads to a lack
of understanding of the role of Council and complacency within the community when leaders
abuse their position and use it for personal gain. Every election brings a new structure and a
huge turnover in staff as the new Council hires its own people. In my thirteen year tenure as
Principal I have reported directly to the Chief, to Council, to an Education Committee, to a
single portfolio holder and to an Education Director.

Calvin Helin (2006, 150) states

" .... there is no legislation concerning accountability between First Nation leaders and
members. With the phasing out of the Indian Agents in the 1960's, Aboriginals moved
abruptly from being governed to governing themselves without any accountability being
built in: administrative and financial practices evolved without baseline standards throughout
the country".
The instability of the Tl'etinqox-t'in governance structures are linked to its lack of
legitimacy. What is not clear is whether the lack of legitimacy is the cause of the instability
or that the instability is the cause of the lack of legitimacy. If lack of legitimacy is the cause
of the instability then the fault lies with the governance structures and how they are

29

perceived by the community.

Governance structures that are not developed locally or

representative of local traditions and customs create little faith in the community. With little
or no faith in INAC developed governance structures a community becomes apathetic.
Apathy leads to a lack of participation and disassociation. If instability is the cause for the
lack of legitimacy then the people have no faith in the current leaders.

Tl'etinqox-t'in

politics are rife with accusations of corruption and scandals. It has become common belief
that those in power will abuse the power for their own means: rumors regarding corruption
are common. Tl 'etinqox-t'in politics are often won and lost based on smear campaigns, not
merit or achievement. Smear campaigns and rumor mongering are a sure way to undermine
the legitimacy of any government. These political tactics combined with disillusionment in
the structures themselves represents the current situation for the Tl'etinqox-t'in people.
Mismanagement is often the cause for a lack of transparency. In the 1999 Auditor
General's Report, INAC had to intervene in 167 of 585 of the country's Indian Bands due to
severe financial mismanagement (Helin 2006). In March 2004 it was reported that 23 percent
of Indian Bands, Tribal Councils and political organizations were under management
intervention (Helin 2006). Questions need to be asked about why so many organizations are
failing to live up to their responsibility. Many communities have called for forensic audits
only to be told that their concerns are an internal matter (Helin 2006). This leads to even
more brazen mismanagement as people realize INAC is not quick to intervene in the
financial matters of Bands. If First Nation communities had proper governance structures in
place it would be easier to deal with concerns or issues when they arise. However, most
communities do not have the required capacity or structures and rely on the Federal
Government for assistance in these matters.
30

Several times over the years INAC has also been asked to come and review the
policies, practices, and to conduct forensic audits of the preceding Tl'etinqox-t'in
administration. INAC has always responded that it is an internal matter. Trying to discredit
former leaders by calling for an audit has become standard procedure for each new Council.
This tactic immediately gives the new Tl'etinqox-t'in Council the moral authority of selfrighteousness.
Revenue Creation
Every government needs access to revenue. Most First Nations have not developed sources
of revenue beyond the transfer payments from the Federal Government. Reliance on transfer
payments has crippled development of true government processes and structures in First
Nations communities.

They have become dependent upon those payments, making

themselves wards of the governments as opposed to governments in their own right. Cornell,
Curtis and Jorgensen state that:
Such dependency can be counterproductive. It can place First Nation governments in
a reactive mode, deciding what they do based on what outsiders are willing to
support. The vagaries of outside political processes also reduce the ability to plan
ahead; you don't know what you can do until you see next year's federal budget.
Finally, First Nations lose valuable energy making constant appeals for more funding
and meeting oversight requirements for the funding they receive. Reducing this
dependency could have enormous benefits for First Nations.
It is unrealistic to assume every First Nation community has the capability to forgo all
transfer payments and replace them with alternate sources of revenue. Many First
Nations see the lack of access to natural resources as a major hurdle in developing
alternate revenue sources; a story that is played out in many non-aboriginal
communities across BC as well. Without access to alternate revenue sources First
Nations communities will always be answerable to INAC regulations and reporting
requirements. In the current system First Nations cannot put the needs of their
community over the needs of INAC (Cornell, Curtis and Jorgensen 2003, 13).

31

Currently, the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government creates revenue through two additional
sources; a gas bar and a forestry operation. These additional revenue sources are small but
are a first step in moving towards greater economic independence. To develop secure longterm revenue sources the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government needs to develop a long-term economic
plan. Due to the high levels of unemployment on the reserve there is a great deal of pressure
on the Band Office to create employment. These jobs are often short term make work
projects with little ability for sustainability over the long run. Simple job creation offers little
in the way of contributing to the development of future revenue creation for the Band. With
only a two year window of opportunity between elections, leaders are hard pressed to
produce immediate results. This pressure to produce immediate employment opportunities
sacrifices long term benefits for short term gain. The Tl'etinqox-t'in Government is trying to
develop long term partnerships but the process is slow. These partnerships include a bioenergy plant to sell electricity to neighboring communities, a forest and resource
management agreement with the Provincial Government, a maintenance agreement with the
local road and highways contractor, a R V camp site, and a general store. These partnerships
will create long term benefits for the community, greater financial independence for the
Tl'etinqox-t'in people and are an essential step toward potential freedom from INAC control.
These partnerships will contribute to a healthy future for the community.
Summary
While there may be a desire for First Nation people to return to a more historical way of life,
we cannot undo what has been done. However, First Nations do have the opportunity to
ensure that they are involved in any discussions involving their future and governance. "In
the pursuit of self-government, successful First Nations will divest themselves of the Indian
32

Act.

First Nations that make the transition, by treaty or other means, will become

accountable, politically and legally, to their members" (Sterritt 2003, 10). In order to move
in this direction, communities such as Tl'etinqox-t'in must first make sound, well-informed
decisions on the subject of governance.
A critical first step for a First Nation to remove themselves from the Indian Act is to
become educated on the subject of effective self governance. They must understand what
they are about to undertake; the reasons for such an undertaking, how they will achieve these
goals, and how they will measure progress. It is important to have a clear timeline to
illustrate to the community that the process will not happen overnight. The Tl'etinqox-t'in
leaders must educate themselves concerning their role in effective governance and
understand how removing themselves from the constraints of the Indian Act will benefit their
people and allow more opportunities to determine their own future . Through this process the
Council and the community will begin to understand the role of Council is that of trustee;
that Council has a fiduciary responsibility to the people, and the people are the source of
their power. Effective governance requires that power rest with the people: people entrust
Councilors to act in the best interests of the community. Ultimate power rests with the
people, not the Council.

Unfortunately, the current belief is that power rests with Council

and once elections are over, Council reinforces this notion by their actions. People are afraid
of offending the Council in fear of reprisals . Reprisals have included being removed from
reserve housing (effectively being banned from the community) or being denied access to
money and other resources. The current structure is a closed loop system of governance;
power rests in the hands of the Council effectively disempowering the community members
and making Council accountable to INAC and not to their electorate (Helin 2006).
33

Figure 4.2 shows Cornell and Kalt's continuum of governance; from First Nations
operating under the Indian Act where power and control reside with INAC to the nation
building approach where First Nations having real decision making power.
Figure 4.2: Continuum: Current Practices to Nation Building
Current Practices

Nation Building

Institutions are unstable,
perhaps corrupt, viewed
with suspicion by the
people, and incapable of
exercising sovereignty
effectivelv

Governing
Institutions

Institutions are stable, fair,
legitimate in the eyes of the
people, and capable of
exercising sovereignty
effectively

Elected leaders are
preoccupied with quick
fixes, crises, patronage,
handing out resources, and
factional politics

Elected
Leadership

Elected leaders focus on
strategic decisions, long
term vision, and setting
good rules, and bring the
community with them

Tribal government is
dependent on federal
funding policies and
hostage to federal decisions

Relations with Other
Governments

Tribal government has the
resources and capabilities
to make its own decisions
and fund its own programs

Tribal government hinders
development through
micromanagement, politics,
and over-regulation

Business &
Economic
Development

Tribal government clears
path for development
through appropriate "rules
of the game" and evenhanded enforcement

''--------------------/
(Cornell and Kalt 2006, 22)

34

It is easy to see that the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government falls under the standard approach

of Cornell and Kalt's continuum; it lacks in areas identified in the research as good
governance. However, development of governance is a process and communities are all at
different stages in this process. While the Tl'etinqox-t'in community may not be as far along
in its development as other communities, they are no less capable of moving along that
continuum. According to Helin (2006) it is critical for success to have strong, ethical
leadership helping guide the community through the process.

And, while the current

Tl'etinqox-t'in leadership has not fulfilled Helin's prerequisite, the current Chief has a
demonstrated history of working diligently toward a better future for all First Nations people
supported by a credible constitution. One could assume this, along with other leadership
qualities, was a contributing factor in his election.

"It is important to reiterate that the

development of good governance for Aboriginal communities is a matter that should also be
in the self-interest of Canada as a nation. Modernizing tribal governance structures may,
after all, help Canada unleash the massive economic potential trapped by the current archaic
governance structure" (Helin 2006, 141).

35

Chapter Five - Recommendations
The following are recommendations to help the Tl'etinqox-t'in people in their pursuit of
good governance:
1. Promote and develop effective leaders. The Tl'etinqox-t'in people need to promote
and elect leaders who will be able to guide the community now and into the future.
Effective leaders do several critical things with repect to governance (Begay, et al.
2007):
•

Change the conversation to governance, development and the future.

•

Adopt a strategic approach to decision making.

•

Make a sober assessment of the state of the nation.

•

Lay the institutional foundations for capable governance.

•

Make themselves dispensable, and
Practice what they preach.

The Tl'etinoqox-t'in community has people who could effectively lead the
community.

These people are knowledgeable about governace and can lead the

conversation to begin to educate the community about governance. However, these
people often live elsewhere and usually do not run in elections; they need to be
encouraged to run for office and given a mandate to lead.
2. Develop a constitution. The Tl'etinqox-t'in people need to develop a constituion
that spells out the rules of Government for their community. Included should be the
purpose of Government, its organization and issues of authority, rights of the people
and how changes can be made to the Government. Constitutions are a reflection of a
36

people's identity and allow for the expression of their ideology or belief system. The
Tl'etinqox-t'in constitution should be based on its own culture, values, and traditions
and should create a cultural link between Government and the people.
3. Develop transparency, accountability and legitimacy. Research demonstrates that
these elements are essential for good governance. To ensure accountability and
transparency the decision making process needs to be consistent and made public.
Tl'etinqox-t'in community members must understand why decisions are made,
encourage community involvement, and reduce apathy.

To gain legitimacy the

Tl'etinqox-t'in Government needs to ensure it accurately reflects the belief systems
and values of the people. Developing these three elements is a crucial step in creating
effective Tl'etinqox-t'in governance structures. Figure 5.1 provides an example of an
effective governance structure.
Figure 5.1: Governance Structure

Community
. - - - - - - - - - - - - , [L . . . . -_ _ _ _ _ _ ,

MANDATE:

Delegate authority
down through each
level

[

Council

[

Band Manager

[

Staff

37

ACCOUNT ABILITY:

Ensure transparency
at each level.

4. Developing revenue sources as opposed to false economies. Simple job creation
has impeded the development of sustainable economies. The benfits of job creation
are immediate, a good political ploy used to ensure re-election, but often at the
expense of long term development. Job creation is based on securing funding grants
and other one time transfer payments from INAC.

Sustainable economic

development happens through the use of long term economic goals and plans which
take years to realize but bear sustainable results.

Job creation through transfer

payments and one time grants creates a false sense of economy. The real focus of the
Tl'etinqox-t'in Government needs to be on the creation of sustainable revenue
sources, not job creation.
The following recommendations are not supported in the literature as crucial to the
development of good governance structures. However, they are elements that I feel are
obstacles to good governance in the Tl'etinqox-t'in Government and need to be addressed:
1. Lack of education. While education is not a key element or a predetermining factor

for implementation of successful governance practices, it is an important indicator for
economic success. The number of people in the Tl'etinqox-t'in community who have
completed high school is minimal. More community emphasis must be placed on
education.

A long-term strategic educational plan with a focus on specific

community needs must be developed. Few people who go on to higher education
return to the community. Helin (2006, 194) states " ... they pay lip service to utilizing
their own educated people, but many go out of their way to avoid this .. .leaders are
uneasy about having their operations exposed to (and perhaps susequently exposed
by) educated community members who may not agree with how budgets are being
38

managed or not managed, or how resources are wasted". Education will help reduce
the levels of corruption, nepotism and mismanagement.

Education is critical to

success for the Tl'etinqox't-in in today's society.
2. Family ties (nepotism) and violence. There are deep familial divides amongst the
Tl' etinqox-t'in that contribute to the violence, unrest and deep seated distrust. These
divides have a historical foundation and are played out in the political arena as well
as in regular violent confrontations.

These confrontations include shootings,

stabbings, beatings and arson and escalate to murder on occasion.

The familal

distrust is taught to the children at a very young age and is evident as early as
Kindergarten. In the political arena these encounters take the form of; withholding or
denying financial

support, evicting people from

their homes, terminating

employment, blacklisting people from future employment or benefits, making
accusations to governrnent agencies or legal authorities, having children removed
from their home, or blocking children from returning to their original families .
Because the Tl'etinqox-t'in people are split into four basic familial groups the same
faction is not able to remain in power for extended periods of time. The constant
shifting of power leads to reprisals and shaky alliances for the purpose of winning
elections. Decades of volitility and the lack of regard for community process has led
to disorder in the administrative system. This disorder has created a further divide
between have and have-not families.

39

Chapter Six - Conclusion

Thirteen years of watching Council after Council purpetuate a system of govenance that
results in community unrest, the continuation of severe poverty, susbstance abuse and
violence has resulted in this research project.

It is clear that my observations of the

Tl'etinqox-t'in community are not unique. Many First Nations communities across Canada
are in a similar state of affairs and, while the recommendations stated here seem simple
enough, the issues are much more complex.

The generational affects of a paternalistic

mindset along with racial subjegation, severe poverty, abuse and general lack of formal
education has First Nations communities, not only struggling with the shackles imposed by
the Indian Act's governance structures, but with INACs crippling financial stranglehold.
For First Nations communities to rise above this imposing situation, leaders with
strong moral purpose, a strong and focused vision for a healthier, self-sustaining community
must come forward and be willing to tackle the daunting task of confronting their own
supporters by trading short term benefits for long term sustainable growth. They must be
strong enough to eliminate the long standing practice of individual gain and convince the
community-at-large that the future will only improve if sacrifices are made today in the

interest of developing a common vision for a brighter future.
As much as the Tl'etinqox-t'in community ts entrenched in the self-destructing
practices, hatred, violence and generational competition for the vastly limited resources
afforded the community by INAC transfer payments, I am convinced there is a general desire
for a better future for the Tl ' etinqox-t'in children. With consistent, predictable structures and
an uncompromising vision based on an agreed upon ideal, change is possible. I have

40

witnessed the school become a source of strength and pride for the community.

Amid the

chaos the Tl'etinqox-t'in community was able to work together and build a school that
transcends the individual and represents a brighter hope for the future. Perhaps the successes
experienced at the school will serve as an example of what is possible and lead the way for
further success in the community. Success at the school level will pave the way for success at
the community level.

41

Bibliography

Begay, Manley A. , Miriam Cornell, Miriam Jorgensen, and Nathan Pryor. "Rebuilding
Native Nations: Strategies for Governance and Development." In Rebuilding Native Nations:

What Do Leaders Do?, by Miriam Jorgensen, 275-295. Tuscon: University of Arizona Press,
2007.
Bruhn, Jodi. In Search of Common Ground: Reconciling the lOG Governance Principles and
First Nations Governance Traditions. Policy Brief# 33, Ottawa: Institue On Governance,
2009.
Bruhn, Jodi. In Search of Common Ground: Reconcilling Western-based Governance
Principles and First Nations Traditions. Ottawa: Institue on Governance, 2009.
Carelton University Center for Community Innovation. First Nations Goverance Pilot

Projects: Challenge and Innovation. Final Report: Volume 2, Ottawa: Fist Nations
Governance Center, 2005.
Coates, Ken. The Indian Act and the Future of Aboriginal Governance in Canada. Research
Paper, West Vancouver: National Center for First Nations Governance, 2008.
Cohen, Felix S. On Drafting ofTribal Constitutions. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press,
2006.
Cornell, Stephen. Accountability, Legitimacy, and the Foundations of Native SelfGovernance. Cambridge: Harvard University, 1993.

42

Cornell, Stephen, and Joseph P. Kalt. Two Approaches to Economic Development on
American Indian Reservations: One Works, The Other Doesn't. Cambridge: Harvard
University, 2006.
Cornell, Stephen, Catherine Curtis, and Miriam Jorgensen. The Concept of Governance and
its Implications for First Nations. University of Arizona, Tempe: Native Nations Institute,
2003.
Cornell, Stephen, Catherine Curtis, and Miriam Jorgensen. The Concept of Governance and
its Implications for First Nations. A Report to the British Columbia Regional Vice-Chief,
Assembly of First Nations, Tucson: Native Nations Institute, 2003.
Cote, Charlotte. "Historical Foundations of Indian Sovereignty in Canada and the United
States: A Brief Overview." The American Review of Canadian Studies 31, no. 112 (2001): 15.
Department of Justice. "Indian Act." 1985. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/ShowFullDoc/cs/I5//20091006/en (accessed August 15, 2009).
Furniss, Elizabeth. Burden of History: Colonialsim and the Frontier Myth m a Rural
Canadian Community. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1999.
Government

of

British

Columbia.

Aboriginal

Relations

and

Reconciliation.

http://www.gov. bc.ca/arr/firstnationltsilhqotin_national_govemment/default.html

(accessed

September 10, 2009).
Graham, John. Clarifying Roles of Aboriginal Leaders and Their Staff: A Model Governance
Policy. Policy Brief#27, Ottawa: Institute on Governance, 2007.

43

Graham, John, and Jake Wilson. Aboriginal Governance in the Decade Ahead: Towards a
New Agenda for Change . Ottawa: Institute on Governance, 2004.
Graham, John, and Jodi Bruhn. In Priase of Taxes: The Link Between Taxation and Good
Governance in a First Nations Context. Ottawa: Institute On Governance, 2008.
Helin, Calvin. Dances with Dependency. Vancouver: Orca Spirit Publishing and
Communications, 2006.
Hurley, Mary C. "BILL C-7: The First Nations Governance Act." Library of ParliamentParliamentary

Information

and

Research

Service.

October

10,

2002.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LegislativeSummaries/Bills_ls.asp?lang=E&ls=C7&sourc
e=library_prb&Parl=37&Ses=2 (accessed September 15, 2009).
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. Aboriginal Peoples & Communities I Governance. 11 3,
2008. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ap/gov/index-eng.asp (accessed September 17, 2009).
-. The Government of Canada's Approach to Implementation of the Inherent Right and the
Negotiation

of

Aboriginal

Self-Government.

1995.

http://www.ainc-

inac.gc.ca/al/ldc/ccl/pubs/sg/sg-eng.asp (accessed September 10, 2009).
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. The Government of Canada's Approach to the
Implementation of the Inherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Government.
Ottawa: DIAND, 1995.
Jorgensen, Miriam. Rebuilding Native Nations. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2007.

44

National Center for First Nations Governance. Governance Best Practices Report. West
Vancouver: National Center for First Nations Governance, 2009.
National Center For First Nations Governance. NCFFNG I Pillars of Effective Governance.
http://www.fngovernance.org (accessed September 16, 2009).
Sandberg, Don, and Joseph Quesnel. "FCPP Policy Series No. 62." Frontier Center for

Public Policy. June 2009. www.fcpp.org (accessed September 15, 2009).
Shepherd, Robert P. Moving Tenuously Toward Lasting Self-Government for First Nations:
Understanding Differences With Respect To Implementing Accountability. PhD Thesis,
Toronto: University of Toronto, 2006.
Soy,

Susan,

K.

The

Case

Study

as

a

Research

Method.

1997.

http ://www . ischool.utexas.edu/~ssoy/usesusers/1391d1 b.htm (accessed August 20, 2009).

Sterritt, Neil. The First Nations Governance Handbook. Ottawa: Indian and Northern
Affairs, 2003.
Suriyabhivadh, Vacharaporn. The Case Study As A Business Research Method. 2005.
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:V saceg2uvh4J:bai2006.atisr.org/CD/Papers/2006bai6
3 53 .doc+case+study+methodo logy+in+busniess+research&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca
(accessed September 20, 2009).
United Nations Development Program. Governance for Sustainable Human Development.
Policy Document, New York: United Nations Development Program, 1997.

45

Webber, Duffy. First Nations Governance in British Columbia. Briefing Paper, Vancouver:
Simon Fraser University, 2006.
Widdowson, Frances, and Albert Howard. Disrobing the Aboriginal Industry. Montreal:
MeGill-Queen's University Press, 2008.

46