D. Canada, 1945–1982 · Canada, 1945–1982The White Paper and Indigenous Activism, 1968–1982
D1.4 D3.3 D2.2 D2.1 D3.1 A1.3 A1.5 A1.6 A1.8About 75 minutes
Learning goals- I can explain what the 1969 White Paper proposed and why First Nations rejected it.
- I can describe how First Nations, Inuit and Métis organizations, court cases and protests won rights between 1968 and 1982.
- I can explain the significance of the Calder case, the James Bay Agreement and the Berger Inquiry.
- I can explain how section 35 of the Constitution recognized Aboriginal and treaty rights.
Words to know
White Paper
A government policy proposal; the 1969 White Paper proposed ending the Indian Act and Indian status.
inherent rights
Rights that come from being original, self-governing peoples, not from a government grant.
treaty rights
Rights set out in agreements between Indigenous nations and the Crown.
Aboriginal title
The inherent right of an Indigenous people to their traditional lands.
land claim
A process for settling Indigenous rights to land that was never ceded by treaty or where treaty promises were not kept.
modern treaty
A comprehensive land claim agreement signed since 1975.
self-determination
A people's right to make decisions about its own future.
"Citizens plus"
In June 1969, the federal government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau released a policy paper that it said would bring equality to First Nations people. Its author was the Minister of Indian Affairs, Jean Chrétien. The government expected support.
Instead, First Nations across Canada rejected it almost immediately and organized against it on a scale never seen before. Within two years, the government withdrew it.
Why would a policy promising "equality" be rejected? The answer is at the heart of this lesson: First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples were not asking to be treated the same as everyone else. They were asserting that they are nations with inherent rights, treaty rights and rights to their lands. Between 1968 and 1982 they built organizations, went to court and to the streets, and won recognition of those rights in the Constitution.
The 1969 White Paper
The Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy, 1969, known as the White Paper, proposed to:
- abolish the Indian Act and end Indian status;
- close the Department of Indian Affairs and transfer services such as education and health to the provinces;
- treat treaties as limited historical documents to be reviewed and eventually ended;
- turn reserve lands into land that could be owned and sold privately;
- reject most land claims as too vague to settle.
The government's argument was that separate laws had kept First Nations poor and unequal, and that ending them would bring equality. Trudeau said in a 1969 speech that Canada could not recognize Aboriginal rights based on historical "might-have-beens".
The White Paper ignored the advice of the government's own Hawthorn Report (1966–1967), which had described First Nations as "citizens plus": Canadians who also had additional rights because of their history, treaties and status as the original peoples.
The response
- Harold Cardinal, a young Cree leader and president of the Indian Association of Alberta, published The Unjust Society (1969), a powerful attack on the White Paper. The title mocked Trudeau's slogan of a "Just Society".
- In June 1970, the Indian Chiefs of Alberta presented Citizens Plus, often called the Red Paper, directly to Trudeau and his cabinet. It argued that treaties were nation-to-nation agreements that must be honoured, and that First Nations must control their own affairs.
- Other organizations, such as the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs and the Manitoba Indian Brotherhood, published their own responses.
- The National Indian Brotherhood (NIB), founded in 1968, became a strong national voice. George Manuel (Secwépemc) led it from 1970 to 1976.
In 1971, the government withdrew the White Paper. It was a major victory for First Nations organizing.
The two documents start from different ideas of equality. The White Paper meant the same laws for everyone; Citizens Plus meant equal citizenship plus the rights that come from being original nations and treaty partners.Control of education
In 1970, families from the Saddle Lake area and nearby communities in Alberta held a sit-in at the Blue Quills residential school near St. Paul to demand that the community take over the school instead of having it closed or run by others. They won. In 1971, Blue Quills became one of the first schools in Canada run by a First Nations organization.
In 1972, the NIB published Indian Control of Indian Education, which called for First Nations parents and communities to control their children's schooling and teach their own languages and cultures. The federal government accepted it as policy in 1973.
Land, title and modern treaties
- The Calder case (1973): the Nisga'a Nation in British Columbia, led by Frank Calder (who in 1949 had become the first First Nations person elected to a provincial legislature), went to court to have its title to its land recognized. In January 1973, the Supreme Court of Canada split on whether Nisga'a title still existed, but six of the seven judges agreed that Aboriginal title existed in Canadian law before colonization. Later in 1973, the federal government created a policy to negotiate land claims.
- The James Bay Project: in 1971, Quebec Premier Robert Bourassa announced a huge hydroelectric project in northern Quebec, on lands of the Cree and Inuit, without consulting them. The Cree, led by young leaders such as Billy Diamond, and the Inuit of northern Quebec went to court. In November 1973, Justice Albert Malouf ordered the work stopped; a higher court quickly overturned his order, but the case forced Quebec to negotiate. The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975) is considered the first modern treaty in Canada. It gave the Cree and Inuit compensation, land rights, and their own school boards and regional governments, but the project went ahead and flooded large areas of land.
- The Berger Inquiry (1974–1977): Justice Thomas Berger studied a proposed Mackenzie Valley pipeline in the Northwest Territories. He travelled to Dene, Inuit and Métis communities and listened to people in their own languages. His report recommended no pipeline across the northern Yukon and a ten-year delay in the Mackenzie Valley until land claims were settled.
Inuit and Métis organizing; political firsts
- Inuit Tapirisat of Canada (today Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami) was founded in 1971 to speak for Inuit nationally. In 1976 it proposed creating a new territory, Nunavut (which happened in 1999). In 1977, Inuit from Canada, Alaska and Greenland formed the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (today's Inuit Circumpolar Council).
- The Native Council of Canada (1971) represented Métis and non-status First Nations people. Its leader Harry Daniels fought hard to have the Métis named in the Constitution.
- Political firsts: James Gladstone (Kainai) became the first Status Indian senator in 1958; Len Marchand (Syilx/Okanagan) became the first status First Nations MP in 1968 and the first First Nations federal cabinet minister in 1976; Peter Ittinuar became the first Inuk MP in 1979.
- Protest: in 1974, the Ojibway Warriors' Society occupied Anicinabe Park in Kenora, and the Native People's Caravan travelled from Vancouver to Ottawa to demand action on treaty rights, housing and education.
The Constitution and section 35
When Trudeau moved to patriate the Constitution in 1980, Indigenous leaders insisted that their rights be included. George Manuel and the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs organized the Constitution Express (1980): trains carried about a thousand people to Ottawa, and delegations later went to Britain and Europe.
In November 1981, the federal-provincial agreement on the Constitution dropped the clause on Aboriginal rights. After protests, it was restored, with one word added: "existing". Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 says:
"The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed."
It defines the Aboriginal peoples of Canada as the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples. It was a historic achievement, although what "existing" rights included would be argued in courts for decades.
Fifteen years of organizing, drawn to scale: from the founding of the NIB to section 35 of the Constitution.Worked exampleModelled example: Evaluating a policy from multiple perspectives
Why did a policy that promised "equality" (the 1969 White Paper) produce such strong opposition?
- Government perspective: separate laws (the Indian Act) had kept First Nations poor and controlled; treating everyone the same would end discrimination. Many Canadians in 1969 shared this liberal idea of equality.
- First Nations perspective: First Nations are nations with treaties and inherent rights. Ending status and treaties would end those rights, take away reserve lands and complete the assimilation that residential schools had begun. Equality should mean being treated fairly as nations, not being made the same.
- Process: First Nations had taken part in consultations in 1968–69, but the White Paper did not reflect what they had said, so many felt betrayed.
- Evidence of the result: an outpouring of organizing (Cardinal, Citizens Plus, the NIB) and the withdrawal of the paper in 1971.
- Judgement: the White Paper failed because it defined equality without the people it affected.
The White Paper is a powerful example of how the same word ("equality") can mean different things from different perspectives, and of how organized opposition can change government policy.
Hands-on activityAnalyse a primary source: the White Paper debate
You need: a device, paper and a pencil, and a grown-up to help you search.
- Find the text of the 1969 White Paper (Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy, 1969) and of Citizens Plus (1970). Both are available online through university and government archives, and the Indian Association of Alberta's response is reprinted in several collections. Ask your grown-up to help you choose reliable sites.
- Read one paragraph from each. Copy one sentence from each that you think shows its main idea.
- For each document, write down: who wrote it, when, for whom, and what it wanted to happen.
- Find one word that both documents use (for example equality, rights or treaties) and explain how each document uses it differently.
- Write a citation for each document (author or organization, title, year, where you found it).
What to look for: accurate quotations, a clear explanation of each perspective, and correct citations. If you cannot find the full texts, use the quotations in this lesson and your notes from it instead.
Your turn
1What did the 1969 White Paper propose?
To abolish the Indian Act and Indian status, close Indian Affairs and transfer services to provinces, end treaties over time, make reserve land private property, and reject most land claims.
2What does "citizens plus" mean?
First Nations people are full Canadian citizens plus they have additional rights because of their history, treaties and status as original peoples.
3Who was Harold Cardinal, and what did he write?
A Cree leader and president of the Indian Association of Alberta who wrote The Unjust Society (1969), attacking the White Paper.
4What happened to the White Paper?
It was withdrawn in 1971 after widespread First Nations opposition.
5Why was the 1973 Calder decision important?
Six of seven Supreme Court judges agreed that Aboriginal title existed in Canadian law; it led the federal government to create a land claims policy.
6Why is the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975) significant?
It is considered Canada's first modern treaty, won after Cree and Inuit court action; it gave compensation, land rights and self-government institutions.
7What does section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 do?
It recognizes and affirms the existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.
More practice: warm-up
1Which minister presented the White Paper?
Jean Chrétien, Minister of Indian Affairs.
2What is the Red Paper's official title?
3In what year was the National Indian Brotherhood founded?
4Who led the Berger Inquiry?
5Who became the first Inuk MP, and when?
More practice: on your own
1Why did the government think the White Paper would be popular, and why was it wrong?
It believed ending separate laws would bring equality and end discrimination. It was wrong because First Nations saw status, treaties and reserves as protecting their rights as nations; ending them meant assimilation.
2How did the Blue Quills sit-in connect to Indian Control of Indian Education?
Blue Quills (1970) showed a community taking control of a school; two years later, the NIB's 1972 policy called for First Nations control of education everywhere, which the government accepted in 1973.
3Explain one gain and one loss for the Cree and Inuit in the James Bay Agreement.
Gain: compensation, recognized land rights, and their own school boards and regional governments. Loss: the hydroelectric project went ahead, flooding large areas of land used for hunting and trapping.
4Why was the Berger Inquiry unusual for its time?
Berger travelled to small northern communities and heard testimony in Indigenous languages, putting local people's views at the centre; and he recommended delaying a major project until land claims were settled.
5Why did Indigenous leaders protest in November 1981?
The federal-provincial deal on the Constitution had dropped the clause recognizing Aboriginal and treaty rights; after protests, it was restored as section 35 with the word "existing" added.
Challenge
1Assess the historical significance of the 1969 White Paper. Was its greatest significance what it proposed, or the response it caused?
Strong answers argue that its greatest significance was the response: it united First Nations nationally, strengthened organizations like the NIB, produced key documents (The Unjust Society, Citizens Plus), and began an era of organizing that led to Calder, modern treaties and section 35. The proposal itself was withdrawn.
2Use continuity and change to compare the 1951 Indian Act amendments (previous lesson) and section 35 (1982).
In 1951 the government still made decisions for First Nations with an assimilation goal (continuity with the past). By 1982, Indigenous organizations had forced the government to recognize their rights in the Constitution: a major change from being controlled to having rights affirmed, although many issues (land, self-government, the Indian Act itself) continued.
3Write a thesis on: "Between 1968 and 1982, First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples changed Canada more than Canada changed them."
Sample: "Through organizing, court cases and protest, First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples defeated the White Paper, won recognition of Aboriginal title and modern treaties, and placed their rights in the Constitution, changing Canada's laws and its understanding of itself; yet harmful policies such as residential schools and the Sixties Scoop continued, so change went both ways."
Check your understandingQuiz
1. What did the 1969 White Paper propose?
2. What was Citizens Plus (1970)?
3. Why was the Calder decision (1973) important?
4. Which agreement is considered Canada's first modern treaty?
5. What does section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 recognize?
6. Who organized the Constitution Express in 1980?
For parents and teachersBig idea: Students describe key political developments affecting Indigenous peoples, including the 1969 White Paper and the inclusion of Métis and Inuit in section 35 (D1.4), analyse significant events and issues such as the NIB, the Berger Inquiry, the Calder case and the James Bay Project (D3.3), describe Indigenous activism as a social movement (D2.2) and conflicts over title and patriation (D2.1), and recognize contributors such as Harold Cardinal, George Manuel and Frank Calder (D3.1).
Why no joke block: this lesson follows directly from the lesson on residential schools and the Sixties Scoop and deals with a policy of assimilation, so there is no joke block.
How to help: Ask: "Why would a policy promising equality be rejected?" Help your teen find out which treaty or traditional territory your home is on (many Nations have this information on their own websites). If possible, read part of Harold Cardinal's The Unjust Society or the Citizens Plus document online together.
Common difficulties:
- Assuming "equality" must mean "the same". This lesson shows another view.
- Forgetting that Inuit and Métis organized too (ITC, Native Council of Canada) and are named in section 35.
- Thinking section 35 created rights. It recognized and affirmed rights that already existed.