Bob Joseph - Working Effectively with Indigenous Peoples®

IN THIS FOURTH edition, we make the significant change from Aboriginal to Indigenous, which is reflected in its title: Working Effectively with Indigenous Peoples. This is a momentous change that reflects that the relationship between Indigenous Peoples in Canada and non-Indigenous Canadians, and all levels of government, are on the doorstep of a significant change. The federal government, in 2016, made the move to replace Aboriginal with Indigenous in government communications, thereby turning the handle to open the door to return relations to the nation-to-nation relationship which dates back to 1763 when the Royal Proclamation was signed by King George III . At the time of this publication, governments are in a state of flux on the usage of Indigenous or Aboriginal.

Throughout the book, we will generally use the term Aboriginal Peoples to indicate the collective group of people who hold various rights and obligations under provisions of the Indian Act and section 35 of the Canadian Constitution Act, 1982. Additionally, we use it in reference to the census, in quotes and the names of reports.

We use the term Indigenous Peoples as the collective term for First Nation, Inuit, and Mtis peoples who live in Canada.

In situations where we refer to those individuals of a specific ancestry, i.e. First Nation, Inuit, or Mtis, we will refer to them by that name; otherwise they are included within the term Indigenous Peoples.

While there are legal reasons for the continued use of the term Indiansuch as in the Indian Act, and the term is used by the Government of Canada when making references to this particular group of Indigenous Peoplesusage of the term is considered by many to be derogatory and has been largely replaced by Indigenous Peoples. So, we use Indian when its appropriate for the era we are writing about.

It is for this reason that we only refer to individual First Nation people (one of many preferred terms) when there are legal reasons to do so.

Here are some clarifying definitions and tips on usage that will come in handy with your communications with and about Indigenous Peoples:

The collective noun is used in the Constitution Act, 1982 and includes the Indian (or First Nations), Inuit, and Mtis Peoples, so legally it will always have a place at the terminology table.

CAN:

• Use interchangeably with First Peoples
• Use interchangeably with First Nations
• Use interchangeably with Indigenous Peoples

CAUTION:

• If using interchangeably with First Nations, note that some First Nations prefer not to be called Aboriginal Peoples
• If using this, it should always be Aboriginal Peoples together as opposed to Aboriginal or Aboriginals

First Nation is a term used to identify Indigenous peoples of Canada who are neither Mtis nor Inuit. This term came into common usage in the 1970s to replace the term Indian and Indian band, which many found offensive. First Nations people includes both status and non-status Indians, so theres a need to be careful with its usage, especially if in reference to programs that are specifically for status-Indians.

There is no legal definition for First Nation and it is acceptable as both a noun and a modifier.

CAN:

• Use to refer to a single band or the plural First Nations for many bands
• Use First Nation community as a respectful alternative phrase
• Use instead of Indian when referring to an individual

CAUTION:

• If using interchangeably with Aboriginal Peoples as some First Nations people dont like the term Aboriginal Peoples
• If using interchangeably with First Nations as some may have more preference for Indigenous Peoples. For example, First Nation communities in Ontario have expressed publicly and politically that they prefer Indigenous Peoples

Indian is the legal identity of an Indigenous person who is registered under the Indian Act.

One story about the origin of the term Indian dates back to Christopher Columbus who mistakenly thought he had reached the East Indies, so referred to the people in the lands he visited as indios which is Spanish for Indian.

CAN:

• Use in direct quotations
• Use when citing titles of books, works of art, etc.
• Use in discussions of history where necessary for clarity and accuracy
• Use in discussions of some legal/constitutional matters requiring precision in terminology
• Use in discussions of rights and benefits provided on the basis of Indian status
• Use in statistical information collected using these categories (e.g., the Census)

CAUTION:

• If using in front of individuals as some may deem it is derogatory and outdated and take issue with it.

A collective noun for First Nations, Inuit, and Mtis, and is growing in popularity in Canada.

CAN:

• Use interchangeably with First Peoples
• Use interchangeably with First Nations
• Use interchangeably with Aboriginal Peoples

CAUTION:

• If using interchangeably with First Nations as some may have more preference for Indigenous Peoples. For example, First Nation communities in Ontario have expressed publicly and politically that they prefer Indigenous Peoples
• For definitions of Inuit and Mtis, please see Glossary.
• When we refer to the Indian Act, unless otherwise noted, it is the current 1985 version, RSC , c 1-5.

There has been much discussion in the scientific community about how and when Indigenous Peoples populated the Americas. One prevailing theory is that Indigenous Peoples arrived by crossing a land bridge sometime around the end of the last ice age, 10,000 to 12,000 years ago. This theory holds that people from Asia migrated into the area that is now the Bering Strait to populate North and South America. More recent scientific research suggests that North and South America were populated by continuous waves of migration over a period of time that extends well beyond the last ice age. This more recent research also indicates that, due to glacial ice, the land bridge may have been impassable up until 12,000 years ago, which doesnt explain how North America became inhabited prior to this time. Exactly how the Americas were populated prior to European contact has not been definitively determined.

Most cultures, including Indigenous cultures, hold creationism as an explanation of how people came to populate the world. If an Indigenous person were asked his or her idea of how their ancestors came to live in the Americas, the answer would probably include a creation story and not the story of migration across a land bridge.

Take the Gwawaenuk (gwa wa nook) creationism story for example. The first ancestor of the Gwawaenuk Tribe of the west coast of British Columbia is a Thunderbird. The Thunderbird is a supernatural creature who can fly through the heavens. One day, at the beginning of time, the Thunderbird landed on top of Mt. Stevens in the Broughton Archipelago at the northern tip of Vancouver Island. Upon landing on Mt. Stevens, the Thunderbird transformed into human form, becoming the first ancestor of the Gwawaenuk people. This act signals the creation of the Gwawaenuk people as well as defining the territory which the Gwawaenuk people would use and protect.

Now, the idea of a Thunderbird landing on a mountain and transforming into a human being may sound unusual and a little silly, but to a Gwawaenuk person it doesnt sound any more unusual or silly than a virgin birth, or a person walking on water, coming back from the dead, or parting the Red Sea. It is what they believeand if we want to be effective, we cannot undermine their core religious and spiritual beliefs.