The District of Sechelt, British Columbia and the Municipal System of Aboriginal Self-Government
Author(s) -
Nicholas Asquin
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
political science undergraduate review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2562-1289
pISSN - 2562-1270
DOI - 10.29173/psur22
Subject(s) - government (linguistics) , misnomer , public administration , criticism , political science , law , philosophy , linguistics , theology
The purpose of this paper was, in exploring the details of the Sechelt Indian Band Self-Government Act and the powers it entails, to ascertain whether or not the Municipal Model represents a viable and successful option toward Aboriginal self-government. In this paper I examined the extent to which certain key provisions of the Sechelt Act align with the traditional goals of Aboriginal self-government to gauge its usefulness to Aboriginal groups. I performed this by first exploring the concept of Right and Title, its implications and the resulting powers which self-governing bands must possess to satisfy the provisions of Right and Title. I then used these criteria to establish a basic ‘report card’ against which the Municipal Model’s efficacy can be gauged through comparison with the provisions of the Sechelt Act. I found that not only does the Sechelt Act satisfy all vital criteria for an effective selfgovernment agreement, but that the Municipal Model name is itself a misnomer for a far wider package of rights and responsibilities than those given to municipalities. I conclude that the Sechelt Indian Band Self- Government Act is a highly effective iteration of the Municipal Model, contrary to criticism, and that the model’s success merits consideration as a viable Aboriginal self-government solution for future cases.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom