Canadian taxpayers spend about $10-billion each year for federal and provincial programs aimed at natives. But there is little to show for all that spending: Many reserves continue to exhibit high levels of unemployment, substance abuse and poverty. In some cases, living conditions resemble those in the Third World -- such as at the Kashechewan Reserve on the shores of James Bay, which is now being evacuated by the Ontario government because of contaminated drinking water.

But change is possible. Even a few modest tweaks to existing policy could provide new hope for hundreds of thousands of reserve-resident aboriginals.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation's (CTF) Centre for Aboriginal Policy Change recently published Road to Prosperity - Five Steps to Change Aboriginal Policy. The study advances a set of recommendations the federal government could implement with relative ease to bolster political accountability and economic prosperity on reserves:

- According to the federal auditor general, 80% of the Department of Indian Affairs' expenditures are transferred directly to native bands. How these funds are disbursed is decided by the chiefs and their band councils.

One way to improve accountability would be to have native governments collect revenues in the way other levels of government do: through income taxes, property taxes and a multitude of other levies. The billions of dollars in government payments currently transferred to native band councils should be redirected to individuals. Some money could then be taxed back by the local native government.

Yes, money would still ultimately be travelling from Ottawa to the bands. But the existence of an individual taxpaying intermediary presents a key difference: Ordinary natives would instantly come to appreciate how much money -- how much of their money -- bands were spending. They would thus have more motivation to hold their leaders to account than under the current system, whereby money simply travels from a black box in Ottawa to a black box held by chief and council.

- As things currently stand, once money is transferred from Ottawa to native bands, the auditor general has no authority to audit how it is spent. This leads to corruption and abuse. A second reform should be to expand the auditor general's mandate to include native bands.

- The CTF regularly receives calls from natives frustrated with their local councils or with the Department of Indian Affairs. But aside from us, who can they complain to?

Since there is little separation between politics and administration on reserves, everything that is in any way related to band governance is politicized. This scenario provides chief and councils with tremendous control over community members. So it is not surprising that Access to Information documents obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation show that in 2003, the Department of Indian Affairs received 297 allegations of corruption, nepotism or mismanagement involving native band councils.

As an interim measure to ensure native Canadians receive appropriate redress, an independent ombudsman for aboriginal affairs needs to be established. The ombudsman would have authority to investigate complaints and propose changes to a band's administrative practices or the practices at Indian Affairs.

- Pride of ownership provides a powerful motivation for individuals to improve their property: It's why homeowners are willing to spend their weekends fixing their houses.

Federal law does not permit those who live on native reserves to own their homes, however. This explains why visitors are so often are shocked by the dilapidated state of the housing stock: Residents have no incentive to make repairs or improvements.

Because "fee simple" ownership of reserve land is forbidden, Certificates of Possession (COP) -- what may be called "quasi-ownership" -- have emerged as an alternative. When a band issues a COP, the landholder is deemed to have an interest in the property he inhabits. This interest may then be used to apply for mortgage financing, which is otherwise unavailable to reserve residents. In addition, land held under a COP can be subdivided, left to an heir or sold to another person having a right to reside on that reserve.

The result is that certificate holders tend to assume the mindset and habits of true property owners. Thus, Certificates of Possession should be used more widely to promote pride of ownership and prosperity in native communities.

- Studies show that native women and children living on reserves are the most disadvantaged of all Canadian citizens.

Throughout Canada, provincial family law governs the division of assets and child custody upon dissolution of marriage. But on reserves, the federal Indian Act is supposed to decide these issues -- and that statute is mute on the subject of matrimonial property rights.

This leads to one of the key factors behind the plight of native women and children: Native men typically control property rights on reserves. Because such rights also determine child custody and access rights, this means that many divorced native women not only become homeless, they also lose contact with their children.

Ottawa should delegate some of its jurisdiction in this area. New legislation could allow for the appropriate provincial family laws to apply on reserves. This would ensure that native women are treated according to the same modern, humane standards we apply to women at large in our society.

In the past, native leaders and activists have responded to similar CTF recommendations with the argument that any effort to promote accountability on reserves will water down native rights, and thus contribute to "cultural genocide."

This is nonsense. Our goal is simply to free natives from the paternalistic policy that has long been embedded in the Indian Act and the Department of Indian Affairs. When natives are enabled to succeed in the same way as other Canadians, they will be no less Cree, Mohawk or Ojibwas. But they will be more prosperous and self-sufficient.