Page 1
Full credit is given to the following agencies for publishing
and making available the financial and other numbers as listed
throughout this document.
Public Domain Records, Canada Indian Affairs Archives,
Statistics Canada, Department of Justice, DIAND, IAND,
Department of Finance, Office of the Auditor General,
Department of Mines and Resources, Parliamentary Reports,
Fraser Institute, and The Six Nations Reserve website and other
websites.
THE NUMBERS
Index
Specific Cost Considerations for Treaty No 1 to Treaty No 11
The 1890s Captured Costs to Consider
From 1900 to Current, Other Costs to Consider
Changes in Federal Department Spending
Did you know? Does it matter? You decide…
Federal Programs Directed to Aboriginal People 2002-03
Indian Facts
Taxes paid in 1961 and 2002 Comparison
The land claim intrusion
Indian Affairs Department History
Caledonia Costs
Page 2
Page 6
Page 8
Page 11
Page 13
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 21
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 2
Specific Cost Considerations for Treaty No 1 through to Treaty No 11
Preamble: The following are specific cost issues that apply in the treaties No 1 through to No
11. This information is verifiable at the DIAN website (under treaties) as listed in the textual
content of these treaties. No effort has been made to ensure the completeness of these
numbers and a conservative approach has been taken to the gathering of the information.
Treaties no 1 and 2 – Chippewa and Cree Indians of Manitoba, August, 1871
 165 acres to each family of 5
 $3 for each man woman and child (max. $15 per family)
 1 school per reserve (if wanted)
Treaty no 3 – Saulteaux Tribe of Ojibbeway tribe, April, 1871
 population then estimated at about 2500
 4 additional suits for Chiefs
 1 house for ???
 $6,000 in silver for payments to the bands
 $12 per family of 5, gift
Treaty no 4 – Cree and Saulteaux Tribe at Qu’appelle and Fort Ellice, July, 1874
 $25 for each Chief, annual salary
 $15 for each headman/officer, annual salary
 $12 to every house of five, gift, one time
 $750 annually for ammunition
 7th school (meaning that 6 other schools had been constructed)
Treaty no 5 – Cree and Saulteaux at Beren’s River, September, 1875
 160 acres per family of 5
 1 church, one time
 1 school, one time
 $25 for each Chief, annual salary
 $15 for each headman/officer, annual salary (max. 5)
 1 full suit for each Chief and officer every 3 years, ongoing
 $5 for every man, woman, and child (no limit), gift
 $500 annually for ammunition
 2 hoes, 1 spade per family
 1 plough for every 10 families
 5 harrows for every 20 families
 1 scythe for every family, 1 axe, 1 cross-cut saw, 1 hand-saw, 1 pit-saw, necessary files
 1 grindstone per band
 1 auger per band
 for each Chief (for the use of his band) 1 chest of ordinary carpenter's tools
 for each band, enough seeds of wheat, barley, potatoes and oats to plant the land actually
broken up for cultivation
 for each band 1 yoke of oxen, 1 bull and 4 cows
Treaty no 6 – all tribes at Fort Carlton, Fort Pitt and Battle River, August, 1876
 $12 for every man woman and child, gift
 Schools (no limit, the band can ask for as many as they wish)
 $5 annual payment to each man woman and child
 $1,500 annually for ammunition
 $25 for each Chief, annual salary
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 3
 $15 for each headman/officer, annual salary (max. 4)
 1 new suit for Chief and each officer annually
 1 horse, harness and wagon for each Chief, one time gift
 for each indian at Fort Pitt and Carleton, $1,000 per year for 3 years, government money
set aside for further expending on the indians
 sufficient relief in case of natural calamities (over and above the $1,000)
 1 medicine chest per band
 4 hoes for every family actually cultivating
 2 spades per family
 1 plough for every three families
 1 harrow for every three families
 2 scythes per family, 1 whetstone, 2 hay forks, 2 reaping hooks, 2 axes, 1 cross-cut saw, 1
hand-saw, 1 pit-saw, the necessary files
 1 grindstone and 1 auger for each Band
 1 chest of ordinary carpenter's tools for use by the Band
 for each Band, enough seeds of wheat, barley, potatoes and oats to plant the land actually
broken up
 for each Band: 4 oxen, 1 bull, 6 cows, 1 boar, 2 sows, and 1 hand-mill
Treaty no 7 – all tribes at Blackfoot Crossing, September, 1877
 $25 for each Chief, annual salary
 $15 for each headman/officer, annual salary (max. 24)
 $12 gift for every man woman and child
 $5 annual payment to every family head
 $2,000 annually for ammunition
 New suits for Chief and Offices every 3 years
 1 Winchester Rifle for every Chief and 1 for every Officer
 Teacher’s salaries (amount unspecified)
 for every family of 5 persons and under, 2 cows
 for every family of more than 5 persons, and less than 10 persons, 3 cows
 for every family of over 10 persons, 4 cows
 Chief, Minor Chief, and every Stony Chief, for the use of their Bands: 1 bull
 1 family gets: 2 hoes, 1 spade, 1 scythe, and 2 hay forks
 every 3 families gets 1 plough and 1 harrow
 each Band: seeds for enough potatoes, barley, oats, and wheat (if such seeds be suited
for the locality of their Reserves) to plant the land actually broken up.
Treaty no 8 – all tribes covered in agreements, 1899
 $26,974.00 paid out as annuities and gratuities in 1899
 $25 for each chief, annual salary
 $15 for each headman/officer, annual salary
 $5 annual payment to every family head
 teachers wages
 160 acres for each indian
 each family shall receive 2 hoes, 1 spade, 1 scythe and 2 hay forks
 for every 3 families 1 plough and 1 harrow
 the Chief receives (for the use of his Band) 2 horses or a yoke of oxen
 enough seeds to plant potatoes, barley, oats and wheat
 to every family: 1 cow, and every Chief 1 bull, and 1 mowing-machine and 1 reaper for the
use of his Band
 for such families as prefer to raise stock instead of cultivating the soil, every family of 5
persons, 2 cows, and every Chief 2 bulls and 2 mowing-machines
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 4
 as much ammunition and twine for making nets annually as will amount in value to one
dollar per head of the families so engaged in hunting & fishing.
Treaty no 9 – James Bay Treaty, 1905-06, adhesions in 1929-30
List of reserves covered include:
o Fort Hope, NWT
o Onasburg, Ont
o Marten Falls, NWT
o English River, Ont
o Port Albany, NWT
o Moose Factory, Ont
o Abitibi, Ont
o Mattachewan, Ont
o Mattagami, Ont
o Flying Post, Ont
o Ojibeways-Chapleau, Ont
o New Brunswick House, Ont
o Long Lake, Ont.
$8.00 gift to each indian residing in those reserves
$4.00 every year thereafter
Pay teachers wages
Provide educational equipment as needed
Treaty no 9 – Agreement between Dominion of Canada and Province of Ontario
Transfer of gift liability ($8.00) and annuity ($4.00) to the Province
Treaty no 10 – Order in council setting up commission for treaty no 10, 1906
$12,000.00 set aside for dealing with treaties
Recording of actual annuity payments:
$2,448.00 for Sask and Manitoba
$4,828.00 Indian paid gratuity statement
Treaty no 11
$488.00 wages for Chiefs and Headmen
$22,980.00 annuity paid to the indians
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 5
ORDER IN COUNCIL
Chippewa Indians, Of Christian Island, Georgina Island and Rama – 1923
Condition:
$25.00 per indian of the Chippewa tribe and
$250,000.00 to the Chippewas upon successful negotiation of similar treaties with the
Mississauga tribe
Mississauga Indians, Of Rice Lake, Mud Lake, Scugog Lake and Alderville - 1923
The condition stipulated in the Chippewa agreement was satisfied.
$25.00 per indian of the Chippewa tribe and
$250,000.00 to the administered for the said tribe (Chippewa)
THE ROBINSON TREATY Made in the Year 1850 WITH THE OJIBEWA INDIANS
OF LAKE SUPERIOR
2,000 pounds
500 pounds perpetual annuity to the Chief
THE ROBINSON TREATY Made in the Year 1850 WITH THE OJIBEWA INDIANS
OF LAKE HURON
2,000 pounds
600 pounds perpetual annuity to the Chief
So far, nothing to get excited about right? Read on…..
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 6
The 1890s Captured Costs to Consider
Preamble: As with the collection of numbers listed throughout the treaties, the following numbers
include only those that are clearly visible while scanning the pages. I’ve focused on the costs that
appear to be meaningful in the historical data. Any cost amount requiring a calculation (to
determine values) is not included in this writing.
ALL of this information can be verified in the reports as scanned and archived under “The Indian
Affairs Annual Report 1864-1990”. All of these reports were signed off by a then official and
presented to the then Government of Canada.
My remark: We’ll pay the indians forever until eternity? If I have anything to say about it,
the money grabbing game is over. Read on…
1864
 $17,310.00 paid out for annuities and grants as archived
 $43,734.57 for interest (6 month period) as shown in the archive
 $63,006.36 for expenses from Indian Department for the same period as archived
 $1,562,530.19 is the ending balance in the Indian Trust Fund as archived
1890
 $1,117,769.85 for grants, annuities and other forms of financial assistance as archived
 $176,160.00 for salaries as listed. The Bands and others contributed part of this amount
(estimate: 25% not government funded, this goes on for all the salaries I’ve listed up to the
year 1900) as archived
1891
 121,585 is the population count for a census of 1891. Of those people, 17,776 are from
Ontario and 3,425 are from the Six Nations on the Grand River as archived
 $3,515,233.67 is the number calculated by the Receiver General as the year end value of
the Indian Trust Fund. This includes:
 $4,897.39 write off
 $60,119.80 from additional legislative appropriating that amount
 $167,531.36 interest added to the supplement Indian Fund, re investments by the
Dominion of Canada
 $228,546.66 is the calculated amount for wages (still in 1891) as listed
1892
 $917,227.00 for grants, annuities and other financial assistance as listed
 $249,918.24 for wages and salaries at “Headquarters” and other places as listed
1893
 $95,678.50 for teachers’ salaries in 1893, 7,699 is the number of full and part time
students in the recapitulation listed
 $233,751.28 Wages for headquarters as listed
 $1,003,838.02 grants, annuities and other financial support as listed
 $160,316.33 for interest added to the Indian Trust Fund that year as shown
1894




$1,003,061.50 for grants, annuities and financial assistance as listed
$223,617.28 is the calculated amount paid out for wages as listed
$228,702.50 is the calculated amount paid out for teaching wages as listed
41297.19 acres were sold for a total of $76,418.57 as shown
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 7
1895
 $987,661.02 for grants, annuities and financial assistance as listed
 $208,429.28 calculated for wages as listed
 $3,594,206.20 is the remaining balance in the Indian Trust Fund as shown
 $160,635.04 of interest added to the trust fund, re “investments”
 $31,806.00 additional grant by Parliament to “supplement” the fund.
1896
 $902,308.00 for grants, annuities and financial assistance as listed
 $196,848.78 calculated for base wages as listed (does not include teaching salaries)
 $ 3,650,529.38 is the remaining balance in the Indian Trust Fund
 $47,075.23 of interest added to the Six Nations Trust Fund
1897
 $100 to $115 per student for boarding schools
 $1,018,738.77 for grants, annuities and financial assistance as listed
 $177,315.46 calculated for base wage appropriation as listed
 $214,208.50 calculated for teaching salaries as listed
 $12,520.52 is the amount collected for land sales as listed
 $3,692,516.01 is the remaining balance in the Indian Trust Fund
1898
 $44,255.06 for civil government wages in Ottawa as listed
 $100,130,493.00 for Indian Affairs Department Expenditures as listed
 $119,805.00 cash for annuity payout as listed
 $182,718.25 assistance to “destitute indians” as listed
 $276,618.49 for schools (on the reserves) and agencies, as listed
 $146,032.67 for other general expenses, as listed
 $160,747.67 accrued interest added to the Indian Trust Fund Account as listed
 $3,725,746.75 is the remaining balance in the Indian Trust Fund as listed
1899
 $53,073.67 for civil government wages and contingencies as listed
 $147,565.00 for annuities as listed
 $190,773.59 assistance to “destitute indians” as listed
 $269,428.28 for schools (on the reserves) and agencies as listed
 $169,947.99 for other general expenses as listed
 $171,393.42 accrued interest added to the Indian Trust Fund Account as listed
 $130,794.01 collected during 1899 (land sales and others) as listed
 $3,785,616.35 is the remaining balance in the Indian Trust Fund as listed
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 8
From 1900 to Current, Other Costs to Consider
Preamble: Annually, the Auditor General and other responsible individuals have submitted
reports to government and other authorized agencies indicating their expenditures towards the
Indian Affairs department and associated services. For the most part, the dollar value in the
reports may represent money specifically set aside for Indian Affairs or it may include direct and
indirect expenditures that may represent civil government wages, annuities and other costs (as
listed in the attached spreadsheets.)
These amounts are detailed in the spreadsheet “master list” and can be confirmed as accurate at
the “Indian Affairs 1864-1990” website http://www.collectionscanada.ca/indianaffairs/020010101.01-e.php.
Note that costs for maintaining trust funds, land funds, and any other fund specific to the indians,
capital investments and related expenditures, loans, housing programs, earned interest and other
costs related to the Indian Affairs are not included (during those years that the government was
doing “line reporting”.) When “project reporting” was instituted, these costs may be included in
the total, depending on who was writing the report, from what I can tell. This may have produced
inflated numbers, I can’t guarantee one way or another. But the numbers are indicative of
steadily growing costs…. This writing is as I see it, no embellishment, no assumptions.
From 1970 to 1974, Jean Chretien was the minister overseeing the Indian Affairs department.
From my perspective, the reports don’t reflect the financial information I’m looking for.
Perhaps someone else can extract the numbers as I can’t make sense of any of it.
The following Indian Affairs numbers are supported in the attached spreadsheet and referenced.
YEAR
CAPTURED COSTS
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
$1,093,429.01
$1,075,849.22
$1,115,271.94
$1,141,090.08
$1,148,712.24
$1,248,305.00
$1,274,596.67
$1,001,154.91
$1,358,254.63
$1,404,290.85
$1,358,254.63
$1,404,290.85
$1,573,805.18
$1,880,513.58
$1,948,537.29
$2,311,691.55
$2,535,209.34
$2,329,460.16
$2,08,8073.44
$2,097,621.58
$2,443,158.71
$2,673,382.19
$2,773,086.93
$3,217,108.02
$3,306,232.96
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 9
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
$3,830,690.42
$3,885,193.02
$3,733,599.67
$3,339,063.41
$4,401,461.45
$4,789,503.07
$5,332,503.55
$6,068,827.51
$5,081,357.13
$4,499,144.77
$4,232,790.06
$4,380,273.69
$5,161,509.45
$5,500,000.00 est no $$$ posted.
$5,304,885.47
$5,500,000.00 est no $$$ posted
$5,677,327.00
$5,186,650.00
$5,705,302.00
$5,705,302.00 est no $$$ posted
$5,178,788.00
$6,164,240.00
$8,170,434.00
$5,949,953.00
$4,354,033.00
$10,379,427.00
$12,367,691.00
$14,564,856.00
$14,055,767.00
$15,184,013.00
$16,510,729.00
$18,024,143.00
$21,484,538.00
$23,733,899.00
$27,564,104.00
$36,390,612.00
$41,116,192.25
$46,427,383.85
$50,251,466.80
$560018702.84
$55,597,007.18
$64,763,745.28
$81,644,775.01
$81,644,775.01
$122,550,522.00
$122,550,572.00
$389,400,000.00
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 10
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
$1,141,710,000.00
$1,504,800,000.00
$1,680,605,008.00
$2,051,480,946.00
$2,251,060,310.00
$2,375,935,799.00
$2,645,523,508.00
$2,771,817,137.00
$3,086,216,590.00
$3,372,838,136.00
$7,132,000,000.00 planned spending
$7,134,000,000.00 planned spending
$5,442,000,000.00 planned spending
$5,575,000,000.00 planned spending
$5,355,000,000.00 planned spending
$9,135,000,000.00 budget
***Planned spending is “net” re data for 2003 to 2006 is available at http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/estpre/20032004/INAC-AINC/INAC-AINCr3401_e.asp#pl
***The 2006 budget number can be confirmed at http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20052006/inacainc/inac-aincr5601_e.asp or http://www.fin.gc.ca/taxdollar/text/html/pamphlet_e.html
A report I read somewhere indicates that the expenditures of the Indian Affairs programs
could be as high as $7.5 billion by the year 2010!
I’ve not been successful at finding the numbers for the years left blank. It has to be noted that
all costs associated with Caledonia are extra to the itemized budget amount. That amount
will likely topple the billion dollar mark before the year is over.
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 11
Changes in Federal Department Spending
What does all this mean? Your interpretation is as good as mine. One can’t help but notice that
the Indian Affairs is the ONLY department that did not have cutbacks, in fact, their expenditures
went up by 20% while all of the other departments had cut backs, some went down by over
50%! Who knew? http://www.fin.gc.ca/budget95/binb/BINB6E.html And the money sucking
game continues…that was in 1998.
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 12
However, like it or not, this is reality, this is undisputable history. Ignoring the fact that the Indian
Affairs bureaucracy had accepted the concept that money grows on trees, I find the above
revelation very disturbing as it raises numerous red flags.
 Where has the money disappeared to, where are the audited details?
 How many people are benefiting from these investments?
 Where are the names and tasks of all these people at the head office?
 Where’s their job description and how do they fit on the salary scale?
 Why has the government not demanded full accountability for the funds?
 Why are so many people on the reserve living at or below the poverty line?
 The law that if you “happen” to receive more than $100,000.00 in grants and rewards from the
bands, that you have to return the amount over the limit, how did that come about? Why is
there no process in place that tracks the money?
 Has anyone ever returned any funds?
 Have the indians been given an accountability so they know who’s “getting it” and who’s not?
 Based on the defined “equal opportunities” in the government, I also have to question if
discrimination is occurring (against non natives).
 I also would like clarification on the First Nations Land Management Act, where does the
Grand River Band of Indians fit into this confusing scheme of things between this latest act
and The Indian Act?
 How many indians managers/directors/ADMs, DMs are employed by the Federal and
Provincial governments… individually. This may sound racist but in view of their
contemptuous attitude towards non natives, and in view of the fact that there appears to be
absolutely no appreciation for the funding going their way, the red flag just reminded me that
overhead and the FTE count has gone totally off the chart as I see it.
Then there are visible discrepancies. The following is an example. According to a published
government report “Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and Canadian Polar Commission
Performance Report for the period ending March 31, 2003”, section 3, under the heading “How
much will it cost” the report shows under Indian and Inuit Programming - $4,359,786,117 ($4.3
Billion dollars) and under Claims - $642,283,573 ($642 Million dollars) for a total of five billion
dollars!
Indian and Inuit Claims
Total
Programming
Planned Spending
Total Authorities
2002-03 Actuals
$4,427,308,000 $549,382,000 $4,976,690,000
$4,402,630,892 $643,061,295 $5,045,692,187
$4,359,786,117 $642,283,573 $5,002,069,690
Look at the explanation for these variances:
Indian and Inuit Programming: The variance of approximately $25 million between planned
spending and total authorities primarily reflects resource transfers to other priority areas within
the department, offset by incremental funding provided to address urgent health and safety
concerns. The variance of approximately $43 million between total authorities and actual
spending is primarily attributable to the carry forward to future years of operating resources ($9
million) and resources to fund the payment of guaranteed loans issued out of the Indian
Economic Development Account ($32 million).
Claims: The variance of approximately $94 million between planned spending and total
authorities is primarily attributable to increases for the settlement of a specific claim with the
Kahkewistahaw First Nation ($30 million), debt write-off ($29 million) and out-of-court
settlements ($52 million), offset by reduced requirements for the implementation of
comprehensive land claims settlements ($13 million).
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/dpr/02-03/INAC-AINC/INAC-AINC03D01_e.asp scroll down the age
to section III
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 13
Did you know? Does it matter? You decide…
 At one time, just over 100 years ago, the per diem amount the government gave to the
various denominations that operated the hospitals was $2.50 per day per patient. As I
understand it these days (as of last year) it costs the healthcare system (your tax money)
$1,500.00 for every patient that comes through emergency (I read that somewhere).
 When the Department of Mines and Resources took over the Indian Affairs in 1937, the then
Deputy Minister of Mines and Natural Resources, T. A. Crerar, discusses in his annual report:
o new administration buildings (p.5)
o new schools (p.5)
o improved hospitals (at Qu’Appelle) (p.54)
o new roads on the reserves,
o new bridges on the reserves,
o drainage system and water supply
o irrigation,
o extended breakways,
o 115 indian agents (p.189)
o 262 day schools
Personal comment: As none of the above are free, I have to question why the cost of these are
not included as capital investments or as expenditures in the reports as available on the website
(at least none that I could find).
 In the early 60s, the Housing Program was initiated
$23,301,191.21 for total expenditures for the next five years (it was canned in 1966)
Funding sources for that amount is as follows:
57.77% from welfare appropriation (your tax money)
23.65% from band funds (your tax money)
00.42% from VLA grants (your tax money)
18.15% from personal contributions…
(let’s call a spade by it’s name and stop tossing this bull at the public!)
 As listed in the 1966 annual report (page 131) from Northern Affairs, the department picked
up two thousand eight hundred ninety three (2893) jobs upon taking over Indian Affairs.
 Jean Chretien became the Minister in charge of Indian Affairs in the early 70’s.
 Under Chretien’s guidance, that number of full time equivalents (FTE) blossomed to three
thousand three hundred and fifty four (3354) according to an annual report submitted (by Jean
Chretien) pertaining to that year and this number does not include the extra one thousand
eight hundred and eight (1808) other employees devoted to “Northern Affairs”.
 From that point onwards, the financial reports are difficult to decipher. Spending however is
spelled out in detail (three million for this, five hundred thousand for that)… and in my opinion,
it would take the patience of an historian to pull it all apart and put it back together in the
manner as presented by Chretien’s predecessor.
 By just scanning the reports, several things became obvious: spending appeared to be out
of control for this department, and much of the spending is frivolous. As an example, indians
living off the reserve generally have regular jobs, make house payments, and pay for all the
common services, as you and I do. This however did not stop Chretien from giving 217 indian
families (who lived off the reserve) the money to purchase new homes (still off the reserve).
This money was in the form of interest free loans that were forgiven after ten years.
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 14
 Note: having been exposed to some of the government forms, I can only conclude that
those people applying for the housing subsidies were smart enough to know where to find the
forms, how to complete them properly, and how to support them with any required
documentation. Is the system being milked? But that’s just an observation.
 By 1975 the IAND seems to have over five thousand employees (5534 to be exact) and had
to deal with 40 collective agreements. That’s how muddled it had become.
 A report (from 1986) from the Auditor General of Canada, states that the Department of
Indian Affairs “provides financial assistance to native groups for researching and negotiating
land claims. It has provided about $35 million in the past 13 years in the form of contributions
for research into Indian and Inuit rights, treaties and claims. Another $99 million has been
provided to native claimants in the form of recoverable loans.” Those loan amounts shown in
the spreadsheets, that’s where the money went. Not only are you paying for your legal fees to
defend any action brought against you, in an effort to defend the land you pay taxes on, the
land you purchased and have a patent registration to, but you are also paying for their
expenses to take it away from you, including their legal fees. This is a “can’t lose” situation for
the indians.
 According to a published Parliamentary Report prepared in part by Megan Furi from the
Political and Social Affairs Division “…the expenditures for B-C31 (amendments to The Indian
Act) amounted to 338 Million Dollars. In 1992-1993, the expense budget (resulting from BC31) was 206 Million Dollars.”
 The office of the Auditor General released a news item addressing housing on the reserves.
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/20030406ce.html The report indicates a
shortage of about 8500 homes on the reserves and that approx. 44% of the existing houses
need renovation.
 That same report estimates that funding totaling over 3.8 billion dollars has been provided
by the various Indian Affairs and CMHC agencies in the past 10 years (as of the writing of the
report).
 In 1996, Indian Affairs proposed that 140 million dollars be thrown at the problem (item 6.8
of the report.) The Assembly of First Nations came back stating that they needed 750 million
dollars (annually) and that an additional 2.5 billion dollars was required to solve their
“housing shortage”.
 Housing related debt is guaranteed by the Minister of Indians and Northern Affairs. The
report continues to indicate that such debt has gone from 802 million dollars in 1992 to 1.25
billion dollars by 2002, an increase of over 50%!
 The April 2002 report (Indian Affairs) states that “band built” houses are not of quality, are
not constructed to local codes. Houses built by CMHC themselves are built to code, and are
“a lot better” according to the report.
 The department also contributes about 75 million dollars annually towards shelter through
it’s “social assistance program”.
 Article 6.19 of the same report indicates that Indian Affairs gives First Nations about 66
million dollars to cover infrastructure costs (this is where the cost of Caledonia damages
should be recovered – it’s not enough but it’ll get the message across).
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 15
Federal Programs Directed to Aboriginal People 2002-03
INAC
Elementary/Secondary Education
Schools, Infrastructure and Housing
Claims
Social Assistance
Social Support Services
Indian Government Support
Post-Secondary Education
Northern Affairs**
Self-Government
Lands and Trust Services
Economic Development
Administration/Regional Operations
Sub-Total (INAC)
Other Government Departments/Agencies
Health Canada
Human Resources Development Canada
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation
Fisheries and Oceans
Solicitor General
Canadian Heritage
Indian Residential Schools Resolution Canada
Industry
Correctional Service
Natural Resources
Justice
Privy Council Office
National Defense
Sub-Total (Other Government Departments/Agencies)
Total
Figures may not add due to rounding.
($M)
% of INAC
% of Total
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,045.00
971.00
642.00
621.00
526.00
387.00
288.00
185.00
133.00
133.00
122.00
260.00
5,313.00
20%
18%
12%
12%
10%
7%
5%
4%
3%
3%
2%
5%
100%
13%
12%
8%
8%
7%
5%
4%
2%
2%
2%
2%
3%
67%
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,545.00
347.00
276.00
102.00
71.00
66.00
53.00
35.00
35.00
14.00
13.00
10.00
8.00
2,574.00
7,887.00
* Expenditures in Figure 1 are budgetary only.
The programs may have changed as of 2006, I did not check into it.
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
20%
4%
3%
1%
1%
1%
1%
------33%
100%
Page 16
Indian Facts
The following numbers have been extracted from official Government of Canada websites
including Indian Affairs as we know it today and Indian Affairs as it was then.
 They claim (the DIAND) that in 2006, there were an estimated 445,436 status indians living
“on reserve” (1.4% of the Canadian population) and 285,139 status indians lived “off reserve”
(0.9% of the population).
 7:1 is the ratio of violent crimes committed on the reserves as compared to those committed
off the reserves, as published by Statistics Canada in a special report, dated June 6, 2006.
A list of numbers (verifiable from various sources) shows that in 2006:
 Canada’s population was estimated (by Statistics Canada) at 31,669,200
 Ontario’s population was calculated at 12,259,600 or 38.7%
 Manitoba’s population was calculated at 1,162,776 or 3.7%
DIAND reports are very specific with the following claims:
 17.7% of registered indians live in Ontario, and
 16.1% live in Manitoba
 614 First Nations Communities are listed by the DIAND
 61% of the First Nations Communities have a population less than 500
 52 cultural groups are represented in these communities, and
 50 Indian languages spoken within these communities
 57.9% First Nations population growth predicted by the year 2021
 12.0% growth predicted for the other Canadians
Based on the “population growth predictions”:
 based on this prediction, the status indians “on reserve” will be 703,340 (1.98%) by 2021
 the status indian population living “off reserve” will be 450,234 (1.3%) by 2021
 the Canadian and First Nations population ratio in 2003 is 43:1
 at this prediction, this ratio will have been reduced to 31:1 by 2021
 according to Statistics Canada, in the past 50 years the overall Canadian population has
grown by 61% whereas the “aboriginals” grew by 29% (2001 data)
 the Fraser institute published a report saying that the aboriginal population grew by over
22% since 1996
http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ps/lts/p14_index_e.html reports $1.7 million paid out annually in treaty
annuity payments.
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 17
Taxes paid in 1961 and 2002 Comparison
According to Statistics Canada, Public Institutions Division, cats 68-211, 68-204, 68-207 and 68208, as calculated by their authors, the following numbers can be verified in The Canadian Tax
System 7, table 1.1
1961
$ millions
Personal income tax
General sales taxes
Health and social insc. Taxes
Property and related taxes
Corporate income taxes
Liquor/tobacco/amusement taxes
Motive fuel taxes
Miscellaneous taxes
Natural resources taxes
Priviledges/licences/permits
Custom duties
Other consumption taxes
Non-resident taxes
Total
2,099
1,351
663
1,435
1,109
837
525
55
266
190
438
173
0
9,231
Percent
22.7
14.6
7.2
15.5
13.0
9.1
5.7
0.6
2.9
2.1
4.7
1.9
0.0
2002
$ millions
140,534
60,884
41,221
43,291
34,387
18,505
12,411
3,879
12,304
2,919
3,203
1,842
4,360
379,740
Percent
37.0
16.0
10.9
11.4
9.1
4.9
3.3
1.0
3.2
0.8
0.8
0.5
1.1
Personal viewpoint: In view of the fact that more and more people are taking advantage of
delaying payment of taxes through special programs such as RRSP and others, the expectation
is that revenue from personal income tax would have come down… not so! And who is the
biggest contributor to this money grab? We are!
Since the native population is skyrocketing, they (indians) should be aware that in the near future,
they will need an extensive infrastructure. Who will pay for this? They better get used to the fact
that unless they participate and contribute, they will get zero funding. Similar to Clear Lake (north
of Winnipeg), they will be pleading for assistance. It won’t happen.
If they think, even briefly, that “whites” will step up to the plate to help a hostile group that’s been
peeing on them, I have two words: think again!
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 18
The land claim intrusion

In 1974, the natives had supposedly filed all their land claims. In total, the number was
forty nine (49).

According to an official report from IAND, that number has changed slightly: as of March
31, 2006, across all of Canada, there are 622 land claims under review, 120 land claims under
negotiations, and 107 other land claims. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ps/clm/nms_e.pdf

When will this end? It appears that every time a crushed skull is found or a scattering of
bones, they say it’s a holy indian burial ground. Since when did they smash the skulls of the
dead and leave the bodies to rot without a proper burial procedure?

According to a report authored by Paulette Trembley, dated 10/14/2003, there’s an
estimate of 600 claims “in the backlog”.

The report continues that there are 25 pending claims at Six Nations

And the settlement of each claim has a cap of seven million dollars.
The Treasury Board website (for 2005 – 2006) shows the following breakdown of expenses as
they relate DIRECTLY, SPECIFICALLY and EXCLUSIVELY to Indians:
 $6,087 million dollars (that’s over six billion dollars) of your tax dollar directed at programs
exclusive to aboriginal people (this amount does not include the following)
 $1,812 million dollars (that's almost two billion) for Health Canada
 $370 million dollars for Human Resources and Skills Development
 $299 million dollars for Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (to repair existing
homes)
 $8 million dollars for “indian specific claims” commission
 $121 million dollars for Indian Residential Schools Resolution Canada
 The following amounts are also listed as having programs directed at aboriginal people:
 $112 million dollars for Fisheries and Oceans Canada
 $92 million dollars for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
 $78 million dollars for Canadian Heritage
 $53 million dollars for Industry Canada
 $35 million dollars for Public Health Agency
 $28 million dollars for Correctional Services of Canada
 $16 million dollars for Natural Resources Canada
 $13 million dollars for Justice Canada
 $8 million dollars for National Defense
 $4 million dollars for Privy Council Office
 $9,136 million bucks (that’s nine billion) is the grand total you’ll get if you dare add it up!
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 19
Indian Affairs Department History & Inconsistencies
These remarks are not grievance or complaint issues, they’re just glaring discrepancies that few
are aware of. Is everything honky dory? No, it’s not. The bulk of the following address
government reporting:
 I just want to point out that government reporting is very specific and despite that factor, the
information reported is often confusing, leaving the viewer to make an interpretation that may
or may not be correct. For government purposes, the band’s financial position must be
audited according to standards. One thing is certain though: the government has clear
accounting records of the funds being distributed to the bands. From there on, it’s a mystery.
 However there are peculiarities in government: when a departmental budgeted amount has
not been spent, the balance cannot be carried over to the next year. In fact when a
departmental budget has not been spent in its entirety, the following year’s budget is usually
reduced. The department is not allowed to take the money and stash it in some account for
use in the future. I found it very disturbing that the financial reports of the bands indicate they
are doing just that: the bands are taking the budget surplus money and spending it at their
convenience in another time period. Another double set of standards!
 The official website (The Six Nations) states that in Dec 2003, their (registered?) population
was 21,875 and that “exactly half” reside on the reserve, just over 10,900. Very interesting
that the Six Nations of the Grand River reserve overall administration includes the following
departments: (1)senior administration, (2)economic development, (3)environment office,
(4)finance, (5)fire department, (6)health services, (7)housing, (8)human resources, (9)Iroquois
lodge, (10)lands and resources, (11)lands/membership, (12)parks and recreation, (13)public
works, (14)social services, (15)technical services and (16)welfare. A huge bureaucracy!
Wages make up a good portion of the expenses for some departments. It’s very surprising that
the “salaries and wages” portion of their budget spending (the Six Nations) is not shown!!!
Where’s the money going and who’s getting it?
 In Ontario, there are about 139 First Nations reserves (according to the website). Each one
must incorporate a very similar expensive hierarchy within their “administrative layout” to
qualify for funding. The budgets for these reserves vary and some are considerably smaller;
for example The Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nations had a budget of just over 6
million dollars the previous year. Giving credit where it’s due, not every reserve can be
pointed out as being wasteful. I’m sure many “mind their dollars”.
 I looked at the Six Nations “job postings” and even though the indians pay zero taxes, the
salary scale is comparable to the wages of regular tax payers! In essence, this means that
(for those jobs posted) they are being paid a minimum of 17% more than you or I. Their
household income is not depleted with GST, realty taxes, tuition fees, etc. From a financial
standpoint, I could only wish that I had similar opportunities. I’m not complaining, just pointing
at the discrepancy.
 Further, in the competitive job market, the indians are given preferential treatment over non
indians; this means that even though I may communicate more effectively, have a better
education, be more qualified for that job and I may be seeking less money, if an “aboriginal”
applies for the same job (in the federal and provincial sectors) there’s a very good chance that
they will be selected. I will not get the position. It’s called “equal opportunity” or something
like that. From my standpoint, this is equality redefined, or is it another double standard?
Again, I have to ask how many people realize the meaning of “equal opportunity”.
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 20

After examining countless archived financial documents related to the Indian Affairs
budgets and expenditures (for a period of over 100 years) my observation is that there’s no
consistency in which numbers to report and the method of presentation.

Also some numbers appear more reliable than others. All along, the Auditor General has
been available to sign off on the reports. I have to question why in some years, this has not
happened. This is a fair question and unless evidence can be produced indicating otherwise,
I can only conclude that there was a disagreement of sorts.

Periodically, I’ve found situations where a number is spelled out, making it difficult for the
casual reader to see. This is not illegal but it’s indicative of an effort to “slip it by” so to speak.

I’ve also taken the liberty of adding the itemized numbers; they don’t always add up. This
has frustrated the effort of collecting numbers and rather than reporting something that is
highly questionable, I’ve decided to leave those years out.

At some point in the early 1970s, reporting went from “line item reporting” to “project
reporting”. This confuses the issues and it now became impossible to do comparative
reports. Charts were now “the way to go” and the information could no longer be pinned down
to the dollar. Many details were lost in this process (of chart reporting).
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.
Page 21
Costs to Caledonia …this is immeasurable, it continues to grow on a daily basis. So far, the
debt remains unsettled, promises for more money unfulfilled. All of the costs associated with
Caledonia have as yet to be added to the above listing. Then there are individuals that have
incurred costs. That has to be tabulated also. At this point in time, unofficial calculations
indicate well over one hundred million dollars and the bill is endless…
THE INFORMATION AS PRESENTED HAS NOT BEEN MODIFIED OR MANIPULATED.
Return to the top
This document prepared by Mike Parent.
The links are for your convenience should you wish to read up on the issue at hand.
No effort has been made to audit or confirm their validity.