We Hear about First Nations ‘Capacity Gaps.’ What about the Crown’s?

In government report after government report, funding agreements, policy initiatives and discussions at the negotiating table between Crown governments and First Nations, the term "capacity building" is routinely used.

The narrative around First Nations being not ready to govern themselves, trapped in perpetual capacity building, is a paternal tactic used to delay, avoid recognition and blur the reality that the Crown maintains a tight grip on power and control. It defers the important work of implementing the inherent rights of self-determination and governance.

Multi-generational colonial disruption has created deep institutional capacity gaps in First Nations. However, this one-sided world view masks another urgent need: the Crown itself, including Crown corporations, local governing systems and the public service generally, suffers from a serious capacity deficit.

First Nations have fought for recognition while governments debated the basic legal recognition of Aboriginal rights. Meanwhile, First Nations leaders have made decisions that serve their community, grounded in their laws, teachings and responsibilities, only to be ignored and dismissed.

Nearly six years after British Columbia passed the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, 2019, also termed the Declaration Act, the framing of the narrative must shift. The fundamental work of understanding why reconciliation is necessary has been done. Now, governments must demonstrate the capacity to implement.

We need to improve institutional readiness to implement the change that the law intended and that First Nations envision. If reconciliation is to move beyond land acknowledgments and rhetoric, Crown governments and their entities must invest in building their capacity — to listen, to learn, to adapt and to collaborate.

A challenge decades in the making

The Crown's capacity deficit didn't emerge overnight. It has evolved out of a colonial system that was never designed to engage with First Nations governments on a nation-to-nation basis. From the earliest treaties on Vancouver Island, where under duress James Douglas urgently gathered signatures on blank sheets of paper, to the federal bureaucracy established to manage Indian Affairs, Crown systems have assumed their supremacy.

At the same time First Nations have been on a steep learning curve. While working to make the best out of the situation caused by the limitations assigned to them by the Indian Act, First Nations have been advancing inherent Aboriginal rights — through the Constitution, landmark court decisions and international declarations. We are improving our position, and we are educating ourselves.

In British Columbia, the adoption of the Declaration Act was a pivotal moment in shifting Indigenous-Crown relations. But as time passes the lack of political and bureaucratic alignment has become increasingly apparent. We are experiencing policy backslide, administrative overwhelm, internal confusion and fragmentation.

This is not only a First Nations capacity issue. This is a Crown implementation and capacity problem. They have created few viable ways out of the Indian Act to self-reliance and self-determination, making capacity building more difficult. There is a disincentive to invest in the work of developing effective and efficient governance, instead spending money to fight the Crown's in court.

Reconciliation reduced to a slogan

Crown governments usually talk about the capacity deficits of First Nations. However, it is time for some internal soul searching, and honesty.

Capacity building within the Crown governments doesn’t just need to tackle the urgent technical, staffing and inter-ministerial co-ordination issues; it needs to address whether they are willing to implement their reconciliation obligations in good faith.

Even when the Crown has tools such as legal mandates, policy frameworks and funding mechanisms, they cannot escape by their own limited institutional capacity to see First Nations as capable of governing themselves. This leads to decisions being deferred, risks being miscalculated, inadequate consultation records and consent being ignored. Truth is, First Nations are building capacity, each at their own pace, but much of it is invisible to governments that have effectively reduced reconciliation to a slogan rather than producing effective governance systems.

Putting the spotlight on the institutional readiness and the political resolve needed to make reconciliation meaningful is the next phase of the maturation of our country. When governments build the capability and the will to act, the benefits ripple outward. In this version of reality, legal exposure is reduced, public trust increases and conflicts can be addressed through diplomacy, rather than deteriorating into conflict.

A balanced view of capacity building recognizes there is a lot of work to do on both sides of the relationship. There is an exciting space for First Nations innovation in governance. Across British Columbia, First Nations leaders are proposing governance models, stewardship regimes and legal frameworks that exceed the capacity and courage of the Crown systems to engage with.

The obstacle is not First Nations readiness. It is a government system that lacks the discipline and political direction — the capacity — to let go of the colonial Indian Act and systems of control.

‘Not for wimps’: Real structures for reconciliation

Union of BC Indian Chiefs President Grand Chief Stewart Phillip famously said, "Reconciliation is not for wimps." Reconciliation requires courage, and it requires capacity. For decades, governments have focused the capacity building on First Nations, asking our leaders to learn the language of colonial policy, navigate bureaucratic systems foreign to us and wait patiently while decisions are made elsewhere. We did just that. For years. Now First Nations leaders are stepping up, adapting and taking the lead.

Five years after the passage of the Declaration Act, the time for learning why reconciliation matters is over. It is now time for governments to establish effective structures in their institutions that create functional fiscal frameworks, align laws and implement treaty rights, not only in court, but in every decision-making situation.

Reconciliation is not consultation checklists and political gestures. Reconciliation requires government institutions that are capable of sharing power and decision-making and are willing to be changed by it.

The capacity deficit is not just in First Nations communities. Until governments seriously address their own capacity deficits, reconciliation will remain an aspiration, not a reality.