What does the inherent right to self-government mean What powers would this type of government have, and how should it sustain itself

According to native leaders and the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP), the inherent right to self-government means the right of native peoples to govern themselves by laws passed by their own institutions to the exclusion of laws passed by other governments in Canada (i.e., a quasi-sovereign status.) This assertion of exclusive authority to make laws affecting native peoples includes the right to be exclusively governed by their own laws.

Sovereignty, in our Constitution, is divided between the Parliament of Canada and the legislatures of the provinces. The division of legislative powers and proprietary rights contained in section 91 and 92 of the Constitution determines which of the two levels of the government has sovereign power. Under this constitutional arrangement there is no room for a third level of government. Both the Appeal Courts of Ontario and British Columbia have explicitly rejected the concept as being inconsistent with our constitution.

That said, the British Columbia and federal governments established a de facto third order style of government within the Nisga'a Treaty. It is worth mentioning, a group of Nisga'a people opposing this style of governance are challenging its constitutionality in court.

According to the RCAP the core jurisdiction of native self-governments should include "all matters that are of vital concern to the life and welfare of a particular Aboriginal people, do not have a major impact on adjacent jurisdictions, and are not otherwise the object of transcendent federal or provincial concerns." In other words, the RCAP envisions a native government wielding a tremendous amount of power and influence over the people they govern, for example: child and family services; adoption; marriage, divorce, property rights - including succession and estates, health, language, and pre-school to Grade 12 education.

Powers exhibited by current native governments already reach almost as high. Rather it is the lack of accountability -according to recent auditor general reports - that shows the extent to which government fails to account properly for existing responsibilities and funding. Additional authority without better accountability first, may lead to further corruption and abuse.

Currently, aboriginal governments rely heavily on fiscal transfer payments from government. There is little evidence that this trend would cease if a third order government were to be established since only a few band governments have the economic resources to be self-sufficient. The RCAP suggests that the federal and provincial governments provide unconditional grants to native governments rather than having bands raise their own revenues through taxes. In other words, let the Canadian taxpayer continue to foot the bill.

Municipal style governments used successfully in Canada for the governance of small communities are far more appropriate than a third order style of government. Local government is delegated from senior levels of government, and is capable of being changed in the light of actual experience with how things work. Local government also has limitations on the powers it holds and has established checks and balances, thus providing a greater degree of certainty and accountability.

There is no place within the Canadian Constitution for a third order of government. A growing economic base and political accountability will be more important ingredients, to the viability and success of a native self-government, than recognition of sovereignty could ever be.