A/HRC/27/52/Add.2 residents,21 typically have to produce 100 or more reports a year for various federal agencies.22 The Government acknowledges that “reliance on annual funding agreements and multiple accountabilities … can impede the provision of timely services and can limit the ability of First Nations to implement longer-term development plans”.23 44. Furthermore, if a First Nation government functioning under the Indian Act has financial difficulties as a result of funding delays, reporting delays or other situations, it faces the potential imposition of a co-manager or federally appointed third-party manager who takes over control of all the nation’s federally funded programmes and services. There do not appear to be significant financial management resources available from the federal Government for First Nations, at their own request, before they are in a default or deficit position. There is clearly a perception among indigenous leaders that third-party management can be imposed for punitive or political reasons. 45. The Special Rapporteur heard criticisms over the relatively new “own-source revenue” policy, which is likely to be phased in to all funding agreements between the federal Government and First Nations. Under this policy, First Nations will be expected, as they are able and over time, to contribute to the costs of their government activities, with the expectation that indigenous reliance on federal funding will decline. Specifically, aboriginal representatives have expressed the feeling that they are being “punished” when they demonstrate success, in the sense that their funding will be reduced. 4. Partnership and participation of indigenous peoples in decision-making 46. As noted above, the Government of Canada has a stated goal of reconciliation, which the Special Rapporteur heard repeated by numerous government representatives with whom he met. Yet even in this context, in recent years, indigenous leaders have expressed concern that progress towards this goal has been undermined by actions of the Government that limit or ignore the input of indigenous governments and representatives in various decisions that concern them. These actions in part sparked the “Idle No More” protests throughout the country in December 2012. 47. Most notable were concerns expressed about a lack of effective participation of indigenous peoples in the design of legislation that affected them. In 2012, the federal Government enacted or amended a number of statutes affecting Canada’s indigenous peoples, including the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the National Energy Board Act, the Fisheries Act, the Navigable Waters Protection Act and the Indian Act, through two “omnibus” budget implementation acts, the Jobs and Growth Act 2012 (Bill C45) and the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act (Bill C-38). Despite the vast scope and impact on indigenous nations of the omnibus acts, there was no specific consultation with indigenous peoples concerning them. 48. Other legislation of concern includes the Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act, which vests broad power in the federal Government in relation to drinking and wastewater systems on First Nations lands. As noted above, indigenous peoples have also complained about a lack of consultation regarding the proposed First Nations Education Act and the Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act. 21 22 23 AANDC “deck” presentation to the Special Rapporteur, The Context, p. 8 (citing Statistics Canada, 2011 Census). Auditor General 2011 report (see footnote 11 above), para. 4.72. John Duncan, “Government of Canada response to second report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts” (2012). 13