Division of matrimonial assets closer to reality

The Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act (Bill S-4) passed through second reading at the House of Commons July 7.
The bill is intended to protect vulnerable Aboriginal women and children, according to lawmakers, by having a mechanism to divide assets of the home when a couple split.
The parent who gets to retain the matrimonial home is one aspect the bill seeks to resolve within First Nations communities.
The bill has yet to be passed through the House of Commons. In previous versions of this bill (formerly C-8 and C-47), opposition parties were united in their objection to pass the bill.
Many First Nation chiefs and councilors were witnesses during the study of the bill by the Senate Standing Committee on Human Rights.
They voiced their strong opposition to the bill based on the premise that many communities already have avenues in place for dealing with family homes.
Alternative dispute resolution, traditional customs and agreements under the First Nations Lands Management Act are just some of those solutions.
Nevertheless, none of the Conservative senators voted against it.
An additional concern expressed is Bill S-4 is unconstitutional as it violates Section 35 of the Constitution that recognizes the inherent rights of Aboriginal people to self-government.
A suggestion voiced by First Nations chiefs, legal experts and Liberal senators to include a non-derogation clause that the bill would not detract from constitutional rights was not inserted into the bill by the Conservative senators.
Senator Lillian E. Dyck, an Aboriginal senator from the Gordon First Nation in Saskatchewan, asks: “Is this the government’s way of attempting to undermine the constitutional rights of First Nations people?”
Dyck wonders why the Conservatives are refusing to listen to First Nations representatives.