In the FraGer case, the Supreme Court had found that, in the Covenant. circumstances, the Government was justified, aG an employer, in expecting that its employeee should not engage in an activist campaign against one of it6 major policies. t of versons . belonarna_toitiea 80. With regard to that issue, members of the Committee wished to know what factors and difficulties, if any, existed with respect to the implementation They alao and enjoyment of the rights under article 27 of the Covenant. inquired about the content of the self-government proposals being negotiated with Indian communities and the current prospects for a Guccessful outcome of those negotiations; how many members of Indian minority groups had been measures elected to the Senate or the House of Commons; and what legislative were envisaged by the Canadian Government for making progress in the recognition of linguistic rights. 89. In addition, further clarification was requested regarding the programme It was asked, in particular, whether that of assistance to minorities. programme contained measures, other than mere asGiGtance, that would ensure the minority groups’ participation and full incorporation into Canadian society; whether there was any relationship between indigenous treaty rights and self-government proposals and the settlement of land claims; who had control over the natural resources of the indigenous arears: what measures had been taken with a view to guaranteeing the right to aboriginal self-government; and whether the First Ministers’ Conference, mentioned in the second periodic report, had in fact been convened. Further information was also sought on the representation of indigenous people in the provincial governments and, in particular, on whether their representation depended on the electoral system or on other factors. the concept of minorities in Canada, it was asked status aG cultural minority groups, the indigenous minorities were recognised as a people1 whether any consideration had been given to amending the Constitution in order to take account of Canada’s multicultural heritage ; what rights and privileges were enjoyed by languages other than French and English; to what extent Indians could use their language to communicate with the authorftiest whether there were any books or newspapers published in languages other than French and English: how the protection of minority-language educational rights mentioned in the report WBGassured: what cultures were coverod by the Multiculturalism Act} whether French speakers were considered as a minority in Canada or English speakers regarded as a minority in Quebec; what were the activities and functions of the Canadian Heritage Languages Institute; and what was the meaning of the term “visible” minorities, used in the second and third reports. 90. In connection with wile ther , over and above their 01. With reference to the revision of the Indian Act a8 a result of the asked whether there had Seen any perceived difficulties relating to the fact that Indian rights were restored to the first genaration only} how the changes had been received by the various Indian bands : and why the Indian Act was excluded from the Canadian HumanRights Act and what the implications of that exclusion were. Concerning the recent events in Oka, members wished to know what had been the reaGonG underlying the conflict: what were the prospects for a solution: why civil rights had been Committee's viewG, members -22..