Prior to breaking for the summer, the federal government introduced two pieces of legislation: the First Nations Governance Act and Specific Claims Resolution Act. And while most of the focus has been on the Governance Act, the Specific Claims Resolution Act deserves some focus. The intent of the latter is to replace the existing Indian Claims Commission (ICC) and speed up the resolution of specific land claims. However upon closer examination it would appear it is merely an expansion of the existing ICC's powers and budget.

A specific land claim is a result of a native band's claim that Canada has not fulfilled treaty or other legal obligations. In 1973 the federal government established the Specific Claims Policy to investigate such claims. To date, 232 agreements worth $1.2 billion have been ratified.

The original policy was faulty in that the federal government sat as both defendant and judge. If native bands did not agree with a ruling the only alternative was the courts. In response to the violent 1990 confrontation in Oka, which occurred after a rejected specific land claim, the federal government revised the policy and established the Indian Claims Commission (ICC) in 1991.

The ICC is an independent federal commission whose mandate is to resolve claims more efficiently and fairly, and to provide an independent dispute resolution mechanism. In addition the ICC provides an out-of-court alternative for the review of rejected specific land claims. The ICC employs six commissioners who are appointed by the federal cabinet: Chief Commissioner Phil Fontaine, and Commissioners Roger Augustine, Daniel Bellegarde, Renee Dupuis, Alan Holman, and Sheila Purdy.

As a result of not having binding authority, many of the suggestions made by the ICC are ignored by government. Due to what some argue is too slow a resolution process, the government reviewed the ICC resulting in the Specific Claims Resolution Act. The draft Act establishes an independent claims body that would focus on mediating disputes, and have binding authority on decisions - in other words the ICC with bite.

If passed, the proposed Specific Claims Resolution Act would "replace" the Indian Claims Commission with the Canadian Centre for the Independent Resolution of First Nations Specific Claims (the Centre). The Centre would consist of a Chief Executive Officer responsible for two divisions: a Commission to facilitate negotiations and a Tribunal to resolve disputes. The Commission would be responsible for the receipt, registration, and work to resolve all specific claims regardless of their value using a wide range of dispute resolution mechanisms - i.e., what the Indian Claims Commission currently does. The Tribunal would determine the validity of each claim and award monetary compensation where necessary.

To "speed up" claims resolutions, this new body would have binding authority for land claims up to $7 million. Currently Ottawa budgets $75 million per year to settle land claims. At present there are approximately 430 outstanding land claims, averaging $5 million each. It will take almost 30 years and $2 billion to settle the existing claims.

Under the proposed legislation, the Centre will be accountable to both Parliament and the auditor general for its expenditures. Besides the Chief Executive Officer to oversee the Centre's activities, the Commission would have a Chief Commissioner and a Vice-Chief Commissioner. Similarly, the Tribunal would have a Chief Adjudicator assisted by a Vice-Chief Adjudicator. In addition both the Commission and Tribunal would have up to five other members - doubling the Indian Claims Commission's executive staff.

So what's wrong with that Well, there is nothing in the draft legislation to protect Canadians from patronage appointments. Nor is there anything to prevent the current Indian Claims Commission's Chief Commissioner and five Commissioners from being appointed to the new Centre. So the government will spend twice as much, possibly appoint the same people, and give the new body power to make settlements binding.

By selling the Specific Claims Resolution Act to Canadians as an entirely new process to quicken the resolution of specific land claims, the federal government will not have to explain why the size and budget of the Indian Claims Commission would almost double - good spin.