First Nations don’t need saving—they need government to get out of the way

Indigenous economic leadership in British Columbia has grown significantly over the past decade. Major projects are moving ahead, Indigenous equity ownership is increasing, and business partnerships are more robust than they have been in centuries. But we should be honest about why. In a recent op-ed by B.C. Jobs Minister Ravi Kahlon, “The path forward in B.C. is together, or not at all,” he suggested that legislation like B.C’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) is the driving force behind the significant economic advancements among First Nations and that repealing it would negatively disrupt the economy and any advancements that have been made. Kahlon confused cause and correlation. Indigenous economic success has been underway in recent decades in large part because many First Nations made a strategic shift away from rights-based litigation towards governance modernization and revitalization of their local economies. There have been a few DRIPA-related agreements announced since its 2019 introduction; however, we have yet to see state-shifting results from the exercise of DRIPA. If these advancements are credited to a legal framework, it should be the Constitution, 1982, which served to affirm existing Aboriginal and treaty rights that predate DRIPA by decades. While the mainstream media spotlights First Nations that align with the provincial and federal governments’ woke agendas, we ought to look to find the Nations that have worked to move themselves to a better place; nations that never relied on DRIPA at all. Look at the Haisla Nation, the Nisga’a Nation, the Tsawwassen. They’ve moved mountains in the past few decades—on governance and their local economies—in British Columbia, within what is described as “unceded territory,” without DRIPA agreements and long before its introduction. For the Nisga’a and Tsawwassen, moving beyond the Indian Act and into a modern treaty enabled local self-government, unlocked investment and commercial partnerships, and provided the legal certainty that supports economic planning and investments. This flowed from affirmed treaty-based jurisdiction and governance capacity—none of their efforts are the product of B.C.’s DRIPA or the federal UNDRIP Act. All of these examples reflect the leadership of nations that have long been institutionally capable and economically sound. B.C.’s first “Section 7 agreement” with the Tahltan Nation is a notable example of this. It is not DRIPA that gave way to the Tahltan Nation’s economic advancement; this is the product of a 1985 decision made by Tahltan Nation leadership to prioritize business partnerships, jobs, and procurement within their territory with the establishment of the Tahltan Nation Development Corporation. Indigenous leaders are modernizing governance and rebuilding local economies while managing the chaos caused by more than 150 years of federal policy failure. Show me an elected municipal, provincial, or federal leader who delivered transformation like the Haisla, Nisga’a, Tsawwassen, and other First Nations leaders across the country—all while operating under comparable external controls over land, capital, and jurisdiction. We will all die waiting. When I read yet another argument that some new government policy framework is the solution to the “Indian problem,” and that doing away with it will lead to the breakdown of our country, I worry that we have learned nothing. Former Haisla Nation Chief Councillor Crystal Smith recently made the essential point: First Nations cannot keep treating federal budgets, programs, and policy announcements as the lever that moves them to prosperity; the future is built through Indigenous initiative, Indigenous governance, and Indigenous-led economic action. That is the reality that governments struggle to accept: First Nations will not be saved by policy. What First Nations need now is for governments to get out of the way—it should do only two things: Reduce regulatory and jurisdictional uncertainty in ways that bring real clarity for First Nations and Canadians alike. Put power back into First Nations hands to govern ourselves through self-government and practical jurisdiction that allows nations to plan, regulate, tax, invest, and build. When First Nations are allowed to govern like governments, you see it in the strength and health of the people. Much like Premier Wab Kinew stated in his first address as elected premier: “The economic horse pulls the social cart.” Most—if not all—of today’s most successful Indigenous-industry partnerships were conceived, negotiated, and executed before B.C.’s DRIPA or the federal UNDRIP Act came into force. LNG projects. Mining developments. Forestry partnerships. Indigenous-led investment vehicles. They moved forward because nations were ready and wanting to engage as business partners—and because proponents understood that early, serious engagement with rights-holders is not a moral gesture but a commercial necessity. If British Columbia wants to secure its economic future—and Indigenous Nations want to continue building ours—the focus must remain where it belongs: on constitutional stability, governance capacity, practical jurisdiction, and real economic leadership driven by Indigenous leaders. If DRIPA starts delivering that, fine; otherwise, it is a distraction from the hard-won successes of First Nations leaders.