During a broad Aboriginal-focused policy discussion, two words – urban reserve – were spoken publicly in Winnipeg near the end of August, and a whole lot of white folks hit the roof. For most of September, right-wing radio and newspapers were having a field day. All the usual white-protectionist epithets were thrown around, things like “we’ve given them enough already” and “no more unfair tax advantages”. Aside from the emotional, racist response from non-Aboriginal people of various class backgrounds, including not only individual community members but groups like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and the Chamber of Commerce, many levels of the state and the main local newspaper are either squarely behind or quietly supportive of an urban reserve. This article is a brief exploration of where urban reserves fit on the road to truly democratic and self-determined aboriginal self-government.

There are more than 50 urban reserves in Western Canada, the vast majority in British Columbia and Saskatchewan. Not surprisingly, the legal-political context for urban-based reserve development is unsettled treaty agreements. In Manitoba, 20 First Nations signed the “Treaty Land Entitlement” (TLE) agreement in May of 1997 in an attempt to fulfill the 1871 and 1910 Treaties 1 through 6 and 10. All these communities are made up of “bands” of “status Indians”, as defined under the federal Indian Act. As such, no non-status Indian or Métis person or community has legal access to this kind of land negotiation.

The agreement calls for the transfer of 445,754 hectares of land to these bands, 399,008 of which are currently federally-owned. The outstanding 46,000 or so hectares will be purchased from municipalities with $76 million the federal government agreed to set aside. The agreement also makes it clear that there will be no expropriation of lands to fulfill the TLE. To date, while bands have initiated settlements in smaller, more northern areas, no formal proposal has been made for by far the largest urban-based and populated centre of the province. With a provincial population of about 1.1 million people, a reserve in Winnipeg, whose population is about 685,000 people (of which upwards of 10 percent identify as Aboriginal), would be significant.

In terms of governance of the new territory, the bands will have limited flexibility under the Indian Act to decide how that will be handled. Models employed to date in Saskatchewan would not seem to lead to greater grassroots control of the expanded land base: either the existing band council governs, a band council special committee is responsible, or a management board is set-up to oversee what are generally commercial ventures. In these existing urban reserves, housing and social-cultural life seems to remain largely in the rural reserve and/or in urban, off-reserve areas. The urban land base is a site for business development, controlled by the band, but often in joint-venture with non-Aboriginal business people that generally have a bigger share of the capital and connections than Aboriginal people do.

So, what about this business model for urban reserve development? In the climate of global capitalism there is little room for collective and co-operative ventures. Deregulation, privatization and the associated cut-throat competition for profit maximization is the all-encompassing framework within which “community” can easily be sliced out of “community economic development”. In this environment, the powerful business lobby comes out of the woodwork prior to reserve formation to make sure property taxation is “fair”, based on the narrow idea that “my tax should not cut into my profit any more than yours does”, a view completely severed from an historic appreciation of how the non-Aboriginal ruling and middle classes have got their land and capital for their ventures in the first place. Aboriginal leaders and managers are often heard giving careful defensive explanations in the media: don’t worry, it’ll just be an industrial park and we’ll pay for our services. As a result, while the TLE framework can be an important tool for the just honouring of treaties, the space for its implementation becomes narrower and narrower as demands for racial and economic justice are more and more silenced by the grind of the neo-liberal machine.

QUESTIONING URBAN RESERVES

It is interesting that the Winnipeg mayor and a number of city councilors are firmly behind the implementation of the TLE. Obviously, they now have a legal responsibility but there are also other interests too: something has to be done to support the increasing urban Aboriginal population whose social and economical marginalization continues to deepen. Perhaps the conclusion they have drawn is that a less threatening kind of pseudo self-government is the best way for the state to handle it. This model could pass the buck to Aboriginal leaders while providing little of the much-needed supports and infrastructure. And, while the Chamber of Commerce and friends flip out about “fair taxation”, no one is overly concerned about an historical staple of capitalist expansion, the actual land. This is not surprising given that abandoned railway land is one likely source of territory.

Another question centers on the potential benefits of urban reserves. The Indian Act provides that First Nations do not pay tax on income earned on reserve as long as the profits are going to benefit the band members collectively. Neither do status employees of band businesses pay personal income tax. These tax policies could have potentially broad Aboriginal self-government implications for urban reserves. One could assume that some form of taxation would be necessary under full self-government so it would be interesting to see under what conditions community members would go for that. As well, if status First Nations want to expand the urban reserve benefits to Métis and non-status Indians, the required band-specific collective benefit to avoid tax on urban reserve income would have to be addressed.

And what about the workers? If Aboriginal entrepreneurship succeeds and money is funneled back to the rural home reserve for desperately needed housing and other basic services, would it be predominantly low-waged work that would be supporting this? At a recent city executive policy committee meeting, community member Gerry Grey Eyes indirectly spoke to this issue. She pointed out to the committee that Aboriginal women are not only left out of most negotiations and planning for such initiatives; these same women are also overwhelmingly under-employed. Even when they are well-educated, Grey Eyes said, they are over-represented in contract jobs and other precarious forms of work. Are there plans to change the male-dominated proposal-drafting and negotiations processes? Are perspectives like Grey Eyes’ going to be taken into account when cost-benefit analyses are done for any new reserves? Will a wide range of Aboriginal community people have a seat at the table? It remains to be seen.

MOVING TOWARDS SELF-GOVERNMENT

Even with all these issues, it is undeniable that the taking back of urban territory is an important and powerful move given the historical displacement from and ongoing encroachment of Indigenous lands. With 21st century life being so centred in the urban world, Aboriginal people must become more able to make real choices about where to live and be, to get beyond barely subsisting in either setting. A territory that spans both the rural and urban realities, one that allows them to mutually support each other, seems a promising step on the road to real First Nations self-government.

Just like anywhere else, the level of organized struggle and solidarity will largely determine how far the urban reserve model can be pushed to be as inclusive and progressive as possible. While they have a prouder history of resistance than many of those of us whose ancestors came as settlers to this land, Aboriginal people have no greater burden than non-Aboriginal people to come up with radical solutions to oppression and exploitation. In fact, given the racist roots and branches of their historical repression, Aboriginal people have arguably less social space in which to wage this fight than many others of us do. In a time when the balance of forces are not in our collective favour, we have to factor that into our assessment of initiatives such as urban reserves. Moreover, we non-Indigenous folks must commit to serious solidarity with the various struggles of all Aboriginal peoples for the recognition of their inherent rights. H