First Nations child welfare ruling a precedent for other on-reserve issues, lawyers say

Aboriginal lawyers are cautiously optimisticTuesday's human rights ruling thatCanada fails to provide equal services for children on reserveswill legallyoblige the government to fix other inequities facing First Nations,including education, housing, access to clean water and health care.

• Canada discriminates against children on reserves, tribunal rules
• ANALYSIS:A chequebook alone won't solve First Nations problems
• Saskatchewan chiefs vindicated following child-welfare tribunal ruling

"It paves the way," Katherine Hensel, founder of a Toronto-based law firm serving aboriginal clients, told CBC News."Discrimination infuses the entire relationship between the federal government and First Nations across the board in terms of government services."

In fact, there are a number of First Nations complaints already in line for consideration by the CanadianHuman Rights Commission that will likely be affected, said Naiomi Metallic, a Halifax lawyer specializing in aboriginal law and constitutional rights.

"You could make a complaint in this regard to every essential service on-reserve," Metallic said, noting federal auditor-general reports have repeatedly flagged disparities infundingforaboriginal people compared to what other Canadians get.

Access to special education for on-reserve children and equal policing in First Nations communities are two of the complaints before the commission, she said.

The tribunal decision, that failing to provide equal funding and resources for child welfare amounts to discrimination, sets "a really excellent precedent for all of these other cases or arguments in the queue about ... all of these services that are substantially underfunded," Metallic said.

Hensel hopes the ruling goes beyond establishing a precedent and prompts the government to address the broader issue of underfundingfor First Nations services, making further human rights complaints unnecessary.

"There's child welfare, there's health, there's education, there's water, there's infrastructure, housing," she said. "Every single element of government services that Canadians take for granted, First Nations people do not.

"These are, for the most part across the country, treaty people who gave up a tremendous amount based on assurances that they would have access to what the rest of Canada had access to, and they simply haven't," she added.

'Adult conversation' about funding

Jean Teillet, an aboriginal rightslawyer reached in Vancouver, said Tuesday's ruling criticized Canada's treatment ofFirst Nations people "as if they are not an investment in our future," emphasizing the"minimal amount [of resources] we can get away with."

Although human rights cases don't cite precedent the same way courts do, Teilletsaid, the "damning evidence" inthe judgment will have a significant effect on other human rights complaints involving services on First Nations.

"[It]will be very hard for them to turn around and make some kind of contrary finding," she said.

Despite the legal victory, the lawyers said, the federal government faces an enormous task when it comes to taking action.

The next step has to be a "sea change" in its relationship with aboriginal people, Hensel said.

"The newly elected Liberal government has said a lot of very fine words about their perception and their intentions in this regard," shesaid. "And now it's time for implementation."

Despite her hope that further human rights complaints won't be necessary, if that implementation doesn't happen quickly, "They're coming," Henselsaid.

Metallic said she recognizes the necessary changes carry a bigfinancial cost.

"There's going to have to be an adult conversation about funding things appropriately," she said.