I note the government says it isn't opposed to compensation but it just can't seem to get around to it at the moment. It can always top up the $40,000 later, at its leisure of course.
perhaps you're unaware of ongoing negotiations. As the waldo understands, First Nation negotiators are particularly focused on:
=> the fairness of compensation. As the CHRT ruling provides, there is no qualification to award compensation based on the severity of the absence of on-reserve child welfare services... on the respective degree of the inadequacies of the child and family services provided
=> their own determination of what defines a "First Nations child"... that the CHRT's ruling defined the definition of "First Nations child" as including those who did not live on reserves and did not have Indian Act status
the article I linked to speaks to the issue of a class action lawsuit (presumed to better protect the interests of applicable "First Nations children"), versus the federal government's position challenging the statutory authority of the CHRT itself.
it's too bad you chose to deflect/bluster rather than address the particulars within my post.