Tag: Aboriginal policy

Canada’s Genocide?: Death by Poverty in First Nations

I apologize to all my readers about not posting lately. There are so many issues that I want to deal with and that need more attention, like: the failure of BC to provide funding to Aboriginal women’s groups to be able to participate in the Pickton Inquiry; the Conservative government’s subversion of the specific lands claims process by offering take-it-or-leave-it offers; the expert First Nation panel which has been a fiasco from its troubled beginnings, or the Conservatives pattern of censoring information. All of these issues I have tweeted about, but are deserved of their own blogs. However, as one person I only have so much time to do more things than I could finish in a lifetime. Currently, I am working on a journal article that will be published this fall on the pre-mature deaths of First Nations caused by the crisis of poverty created and maintained by Canada. This article is taking me much longer to write than usual because of the subject matter. As I type the words on each page, my heart gets heavier and heavier until I cannot hold my feelings anymore and have to walk away from the paper. Sometimes, when I am referring to very specific examples, stories of specific communities and individuals, I can’t help but cry. I am not crying for me, but for our Indigenous brothers and sisters who are denied their very lives by all the discriminatory laws, policies, and barriers imposed on First Nations by Canada. Often times we hear these words so often from our leaders and various advocacy organizations that the public hears it only as rhetoric – an exaggeration of the actual situation in First Nations. Any publicity about a crisis in one of our communities is quickly downplayed by allegations of corruption or mis-spending in another. We are often blamed for the ill effects of colonization and systemic racism. Canada has perfected the ability to “defer, deflect and deny” the fact of First Nations dying by poverty. Creating these situations of life and death make “negotiations” about our Aboriginal and treaty rights and land claims much easier. We are so far from an equal bargaining position with Canada that any agreement arrived at today should be challenged as an imprudent bargain. This is what I am writing about in my article. This is the reason why I haven’t been able to post any blogs lately or update my website (which is in desperate need of an update). Here is an excerpt from my article that I am working on: However, it is not just the federal government’s own offices and agencies that have noted Canada’s lack of action on First Nation poverty and discrimination. The Ontario coroner’s report referred to earlier clearly linked the extreme poverty in Pikangikum First Nation to the high suicide rates among their children:

Pikangikum is an impoverished, isolated First Nations community where basic necessities of life are absent. Running water and indoor plumbing do not exist for most residents. Poverty, crowded substandard housing, gainful employment, food and water security are daily challenges. A lack of an integrated health care system, poor education by provincial standards and a largely absent community infrastructure are uniquely positioned against a backdrop of colonialism, racism, lack of implementation of self-determination and social exclusion. They all contribute to the troubled youth…[1]

What health care residents do receive is “fragmented, chaotic and uncoordinated” with “clear gaps in service”.[2] Their school burnt down in 2007 and has never been replaced despite empty promises by INAC to do so. The significant funding disparities that exist between First Nation and Canadian students means that the students who are the most disadvantaged and have the greatest needs, receive the least. A community of only 2400 people has 200 child welfare files open with 80 children in care. Due to the lack of housing and the high levels of overcrowding, these children are sent to foster homes far away from their communities. Should anyone be surprised by the fact that 16 children between the ages of 10-19 took their own lives between 2006 and 2008? Under the Criminal Code of Canada, section 318(2)(b) defines genocide as:

(2) In this section, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,

(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.[3]

At what point does Canada’s denial of the problem equate with a de facto policy of genocide?

[1] Coroner report, at 93-94

[2] Ibid. at 95

[3] CCC section 318(2)(b)

As always, I welcome any comments or feedback you may have about any of my blogs. For the next little while however, there may be delays in my response so that I can finish this article.

July 27, 2011
Shiny New Beads and Trinkets: Old Assimilation Policies Repackaged

There has been a great deal of publicity lately related to all the great work the Conservatives are doing in relation to Aboriginal peoples. Some media outlets have called this a “historic shift” and even gone so far as to characterize the plan as a “sweeping overhaul of reserve life”. http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-native-leaders-commit-to-sweeping-overhaul-of-reserve-life/article2053099/?service=mobile While there may be some useful tidbits in the plan, to call it historic or sweeping is misrepresenting what is actually taking place. One must keep in mind that this announcement coincided with the Auditor General’s damning report about Canada’s gross failure to address conditions of extreme poverty on reserve. In fact, according to Fraser, conditions have even become much worse. INAC has knowingly failed to address “inequities” in funding for post-secondary education, child and family services, housing and many other programs. http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/docs/parl_oag_201106_04_e.pdf Yet, all of this was overshadowed by a strategically-timed joint action plan – anything to take the public’s focus off of the stark reality. The fact that the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) took part in this duck and avoid maneuver leaves me questioning the AFN”s ability to effectively advocate on behalf of First Nations. Some have even questioned whether the AFN had any REAL input into the plan given how quickly it came out. Even if National Chief of AFN Shawn Atleo did have input, that begs the question as to why he would give his blessing to a plan that would leave out critical issues around funding, consultation, First Nation jurisdiction, treaty rights and land claims. All of these issues are significant to the grass roots people, yet nothing has been mentioned about any of them. Similarly, the planned First Nation – Crown Summit also excludes these critical issues – all with Atleo’s stamp of approval. Does any of this signal a significant shift by the Conservatives from their right-wing, pro-assimilation agenda? I would argue that all we are seeing are the same old deal – the exchange of shiny beads and trinkets for our acquiescence or agreement to forgo what makes us strong, independent Nations – our sovereignty, our land and our identity. What follows are some of the reasons why I believe this to be true: Early Indian Policy: Early Indian policy included various measures to control, divide and assimilate Indians to finally rid Canada of the “Indian problem”. These included: (1) Residential schools to remove culture, language and family and community ties from Indian children; (2) Indian Act provisions which removed Indian rights from Indian women; (3) Indian Act provisions which incorporated non-Indian women into communities; (4) Enfranchisement provisions which encouraged Indian men to give up their identities in exchange for education, employment and individual title to reserve lands; and (5) Indian Act provisions which prohibited lawyers from advocating for Indians in relation to their lands and treaties. (See: The Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996) [RCAP] White Paper 1969: The plan argued that “Indian people must be persuaded” that this was the path to a better life: (1) Abolish the Indian Act; (2) End special recognition for First Nations; (3) Give them individual title to their lands (fee simple); (4) Funds for economic development; (5) Full integration into the cultural, social, political and economic life of Canada; and (6) Removal of constitutional responsibility of federal government for Indians. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/arp/ls/pubs/cp1969/cp1969-eng.pdf We all know how First Nations across the country reacted to this policy – they forcefully rejected it and re-asserted their special status in Canada and their land and treaty rights. Harold Cardinal wrote what came to be known as the Red Paper outlining the special rights of Indians in Canada. While Canada backed off of this policy, very little changed in regards to addressing First Nation poverty and the resolution of their Aboriginal and treaty rights, land claims and self-government. RCAP provides a detailed history of the development of Indian policy over time and the rights held by First Nations. Their overall recommendation was to move forward with the resolution of land claims, recognition and implementation of treaties and the negotiation of self-government agreements. Canada’s delayed, non-committal response “Gathering Strength” came to be known as “Gathering Dust” for the lack of action on Canada’s part. Then along comes Tom Flanagan, who, in his book “First Nations? Second Thoughts” argued that since First Nations were “primitive”, “wasteful” and “destructive” that they should not be entitled to self-governing rights, special tax exemptions or federal funding. In his view, First Nations need to “evolve” and become more like other Canadians. This was pretty much the same message that he provided in his second book: “Beyond the Indian Act: Restoring Aboriginal Property Rights”. His plan involved the following: (1) “abandon” “primitive” “communist fantasies” about communal land; (2) implement a system of individual property rights (i.e., mortgage or sell to non-Indians); (2) repeal the Indian Act; (4) shut down the reserves; (3) encourage education and workforce participation; and (4) assimilate into the larger Canadian population. http://reviewcanada.ca/reviews/2010/04/01/opportunity-or-temptation/ This assimilation plan of Flanagan’s raised a great deal of controversy, but was not unique. Others, like Alan Cairns had also advocated for assimilation, albeit less overtly. Since then, many right-wingers have joined the call for the assimilation of First Nations including people like Frances Widdowson and Dale Gibson, to name a few. In fact, Gibson wrote a report entitled “A New Look at Canadian Indian Policy: Respect the Collective, Promote the Individual” which focuses on individual success and material wealth over communal interests. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/display.aspx?id=12783 Not surprising then, that Tom Flanagan became an advisor to Stephen Harper or that the Conservatives are now putting into place the gradual, assimilatory plan which focuses on individual wealth which has been advocated by folks like Flanagan and Gibson. Has anything changed since the early years of Indian policy-making? Does what the Conservatives propose now amount to a significant departure from the assimilatory agenda of the 1969 White Paper? I would argue that it does not. The following overview of the Conservative agenda seems only to confirm my original assessment: 2011 Conservative Election Platform: (1) Expand adult education in the north (no funding for k-12 or university); (2) Increase accountability of First Nations through legislation (no funding or recognition of jurisdiction); (3) Avoided dealing with reserve infrastructure like water and housing (but agreed to fix fuel tanks); (4) Avoided dealing with Aboriginal and treaty rights (but First Nations can sit on hunting advisory panel); (5) Avoided dealing with land claims (but will promote development of reserve lands through legislation). http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf Conservative – AFN Joint Action Plan: (1) Education = Joint Process on k-12 education (expert panel that still has not produced any reports); (2) Focus on “success of individuals” through education; (2) Increase First Nation accountability and transparency; (3) Task force to promote economic development to benefit “all Canadians”; (4) Improve relations. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/mr/nr/m-a2011/cfnjap-eng.asp You will notice there are no funding commitments, measurables or key action words that commit to any specific action. It is important to note here that the AFN has publicly come out in support of this action plan. First Nation – Crown Summit: Then there is the promise of a First Nations-Crown Summit meeting that is supposed to take place this fall. I won’t hold my breath given that Harper has promised such a meeting with First Nation leaders twice in his five years as Prime Minister to no avail. What is being promised at this summit reads eerily like the election platform, joint action plan and other assimilatory policies of the past: (1) The agenda is “deliberately narrow” and will not revisit the substantive commitments in Kelowna; (2) The agenda includes education; (3) governance and (4) economic development. There is to be no discussion about treaties, land claims, self-government or the funding inequities in essential social services. http://www.stalbertgazette.com/article/GB/20110603/CP02/306039861/-1/sag0806/plans-for-first-nations-summit-with-harper-finally-begin-to-solidify&template=cpArt So, if you go back and look at the fundamental aspects of assimilation – being educated, economic development and turning reserves into individual parcels of land, you will see that not much has changed from the 1800’s to the 1969 White Paper, to what is now being advanced. The fact that the Conservatives have a majority in the House and Senate means that will be able to rush through any law or policy they choose. Having the AFN on side only helps the Conservatives legitimize the process. All of this brings me back to my original concern that the AFN is now so far away from what it was originally intended to be when it was the National Indian Brotherhood, that I am left wondering whether it has the capacity to think beyond the organization’s own priorities related to funding and staffing, and advocate on behalf of First Nations and their citizens. It seems to me that far too many people are worrying about their own jobs and making deals than they are about taking the risks inherent in standing up for that which our ancestors died to protect – our sovereignty, lands and identities. It’s about time we called the Conservatives on their deplorable record and highlight the facts brought forward by their own auditor general – that chronic and inequitable funding has made conditions on First Nations worse. We need to stand behind our treaties, protect our territories from further encroachment and go back to focusing on the needs of our future generations instead of focusing on ourselves. Any future “joint” plans MUST engage First Nations as a third order of government and as true partners and reflect the fundamentals of the treaty relationship, First Nations jurisdiction and the integrity of our territories. Don’t be fooled by shiny new beads and trinkets – it is really the same old assimilation policy of control and division repackaged with new titles like “Joint Action Plans”, “Expert Panels” and “Joint Processes” – other words for “we are buying into our assimilation”.

June 21, 2011
2011 Federal Election Platforms and NAO Positions – Woefully Empty

Thanks for all your e-mails, texts, FB messages, and comments. I am encouraged to see so many people interested in the legal and political issues affecting our people. I know first hand that trying to sort out each political parties ACTUAL position on issues can be very overwhelming, confusing, and even impossible at times. There are so many political players out there saying one thing and doing another, or making promises that seem great but are not considered in the whole context, or even worse, saying things that have hidden meanings which are not so great. How are any of us supposed to figure this out? I do am certainly no genie who can know anything for certain, but what I do know is that our issues have no priority in this election – which is a shameful situation given that we are the First Peoples of this land and that so many Canadians live off the prosperity gained from our lands and resources. In my last blog, I provided a chart which compared how the platforms compared with my own list of important issues. I have now fully updated that chart with all the major parties’ platforms. https://pampalmater.com/2011/04/comparison-of-federal-parties-platforms.html I admit that this chart is not the best as blogger has certain space limitations, so I will try to summarize the platforms here in a more concise way: LIBERAL Election Platform: http://cdn.liberal.ca/files/2011/04/liberal_platform.pdf (1) a partial removal of the funding cap on First Nation post-secondary education with an extra $200M in the first 2 years; (2) stable funding for First Nations University of Canada; (3) $5M per year (for 3 years) for a Metis scholarship; (4) $300M for k-12 education in year 2; (5) Will continue support for Aboriginal Headstart; (6) Will create a First Nation Auditor General; (7) Will have an inquiry into the number of Murdered and Missing Aboriginal Women; and (8) “Retain lessons and spirit of Kelowna process”. CONSERVATIVE Election Platform: http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf (1) New investment in First Nation Land Management to promote development of their land; (2) Expand adult basic education in territories; (3) Environmental safety upgrades to fuel tanks; (4) Promote clean energy; (5) Commemoration of War of 1812 celebrating First Nation veterans and others; (6) Work with Aboriginal people and others to create National Conservation Plan; (7) New national park in Rouge Valley and will try to talk to Aboriginal people and others; (8) Hunting Advisory panel that will include some Aboriginal people; (9) Will continue to work cooperatively with Aboriginal people, by enacting accountability legislation publishing salaries of chiefs; NDP Election Platform: http://xfer.ndp.ca/2011/2011-Platform/NDP-2011-Platform-En.pdf (1) Increase Canada Student Grants by $200 million, with focus on Aboriginal people and others; (2) Legislation to target poverty reduction in consultation with Aboriginal and other governments; (3) Recruit Aboriginal and other medical students; (4) Lower carbon future in partnership with Aboriginal governments and others; (5) New partnership with Aboriginal people on nation-nation basis; (6) End discrimination faced by Aboriginal people – access to capital, improve housing and drinking water, remove 2% funding cap and increase education budget by $1 billion a year over 4 years; (7) Federal response to violence against Aboriginal women and support funding their organizations; (8) Work with First Nations and provinces to add 2500 new police officers BLOC Election Platform: http://www.blocquebecois.org/dossiers/campagne-2011/documents/EnoncePolitique-Anglais.pdf (1) Establish nation to nation relations with Aboriginal Nations. GREEN PARTY Election Platform: http://greenparty.ca/files/attachments/vision_green_april_2011.pdf (1) Small scale project funding to restore wild fish stocks; (2) Greater role of Aboriginal people and others in managing fishery; (3) Encourage Aboriginal eco-tourism; (4) Work with Aboriginal people and others to extend land and marine protected areas; (5) End trophy hunting but protect Aboriginal and other hunters’ subsistence hunting; (6) Eliminate exposure of Aboriginal people and others to toxins; (7) No commercial seal hunt, only subsistence hunting by Aboriginal people and others; (8) No bowhead whale hunting for Aboriginal peoples or others; (9) Honour intent of land claims agreements; (10) Regulate all arctic activity, except traditional Aboriginal activity; (11) Restore $5.1B in funding and Kelowna Accord; (12) Create baselines for Aboriginal health; (13) End to policies of assimilation and strong support for health and education; (14) Will ensure governments and corporations respect 1990 Sparrow decision and that Aboriginal people be consulted and accommodated; (15) Nation to nation relations and no more shameful events like Oka, Calendonia etc; (16) Honour fiduciary duty and inherent right to self-government; (17) Implement treaties and land tribunal, respect Douglas Treaties of Vancouver Island; (18) Fully implement Royal Commission on Aboriginal People’s 1996 recommendations; (19) Promote Aboriginal culture, language and history as part of Canadian identity; (20) Set up task forces on violence against Aboriginal women and over-representation of Aboriginal peoples in the justice system; FIRST PEOPLES NATIONAL PARTY Election Platform: http://www.fpnpoc.ca/cgi-bin/news1.cgi?search_for=1302757723&action=’search’ There is no real platform contained on their website. However they have a two-pronged “vision” which includes: (1) Make Native studies courses compulsory in high school and university; (2) Abolish Senate and replace with elected First Nations House. So that is the overview of the party platforms with regard to Aboriginal peoples in Canada. There is also the English leadership debate that can be viewed online at CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/leaders-debate/# While I had fully intended to do a thorough debrief of everything said by the party leaders with regards to Aboriginal peoples, it turns out that Aboriginal issues were not raised or discussed. The SOLITARY comment made about Aboriginal issues was made by Jack Layton of the NDP at 1 hour and 30 minutes into the 2 hour debate. Layton commented that violence against women needs specific attention by addressing underlying issues like those raised by Aboriginal leaders around housing. That’s it – not a single word was raised by anyone else on any other issues specific to Aboriginal peoples. It was simply too brief to debrief. What about information and positions from our own National Aboriginal Organizations (NAOs)? I reviewed the websites for the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), the Native Womens’ Association of Canada (NWAC), the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP), the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK); the Metis National Council (MNC) and even included the National Association of Friendship Centres (NAFC) for good measure. While the AFN had the most information posted, CAP and NWAC’s websites were embarrassingly empty. The AFN provided information related to the AFN’s election platforms, questions they asked of the parties, a survey asking for feedback on election priorities, news releases and statements about election issues and a summary of the party platforms. http://www.afn.ca/index.php/en/news-media/current-issues/2011-federal-election-first-nations-count-our-communities-our-nations-our They also provided an easy to read chart on how the party platforms measured up to the AFN’s priorities: http://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/summary_of_2011_election_platforms_final.pdf The MNC has an “Election Page” which highlights the MNC election priorities, the questions they asked of the federal parties and the corresponding responses they received: http://www.metisnation.ca/2011election/index.html The ITK has one media release about the election questions it asked of the parties but no other information was posted. http://www.itk.ca/media-centre/media-releases/national-inuit-leader-delivers-11-questions-election-2011 CAP and NWAC on the other hand had nothing posted on their websites. In fact, if their constituents relied solely on their organisations’ websites for information, they’d be out of luck. CAP’s homepage has outdated information from October of 2010 and NWAC’s most recent announcement concerns the Joint Process for Bill C-3. These two organisations, which allegedly represent the majority of the Aboriginal population, and especially the urban Aboriginal population should be more “present” in the lives of their constituents. Even the NAFC has information posted on their website for urban Aboriginal people and they are not even a political organization: http://www.nafc.ca/nafc-federal-election-party-questions.htm For all those Aboriginal people that want to vote and want to be informed about the party they may vote for, I think we all need to help inform each other. I hope you all find this summary useful and if not, please keep emailing me about what you would like to see. With regard to my own opinions, I will be offering my commentary on these platforms in the days to come, but for now I will try to highlight as many resources as possible based on the questions and comments I get in the interim.

April 14, 2011

Comparison of Federal Parties Platforms on Aboriginal Policy

Below you will find my chart of some of the election issues that are important to me and my family. What I did was compare what was important to us against the election platforms of the major federal parties. The first three issues are fundamental to First Nation-Crown relations and the most important to me. After that, the issues I listed are in no particular order, but are all important. If you are wondering why there are so many blank spaces in my chart -so am I. I have reviewed all the election platforms on all the parties websites and it is SLIM PICKENS when it comes to real meaningful promises or commitments for Aboriginal peoples. I wonder if the parties think that because Harper was so bad with Aboriginal issues that we are so desperate as to accept any promise, no matter how small? BLOC – The word “Aboriginal” only appears once in the Bloc’s platform and simply says they will deal with First Nations on a Nation-to-Nation basis. http://www.blocquebecois.org/dossiers/campagne-2011/documents/EnoncePolitique-Anglais.pdf NDP – The NDP’s platform outline on their website lacks any details yet and there is no mention of Aboriginal issues – more to come I am sure. http://www.ndp.ca/platform FIRST PEOPLES – Even the First Peoples National Party has next to nothing on their website except for a call to abolish Senate and replace it with elected Aboriginal people and to ensure all schools and universities teach Native Studies courses. http://www.fpnpoc.ca/cgi-bin/news1.cgi?search_for=1301720468&action=’search’ GREEN – The Green Party commits to add $800M a year to federal funding for education, housing, and water. They also promise to have Canada implement UNDRIP as well as Kelowna. http://greenparty.ca/files/attachments/vision_green_april_2011.pdf PC – The Conservatives do far more boasting than offering any real substantial commitments to Aboriginal peoples. It ends up being more assimilation with a side order of paternalism with their tiresome focus on chief’s salaries. http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf LIBERAL – Then there is the Liberal Party, who has produced a detailed platform which does mention Aboriginal peoples. The Liberal promises are as follows: (1) a partial removal of the funding cap on First Nation post-secondary education with an extra $200M in the first 2 years; (2) stable funding for First Nations University of Canada; (3) $5M per year (for 3 years) for a Metis scholarship; (4) $300M for k-12 education in year 2; (5) Will continue support for Aboriginal Headstart; (6) Will create a First Nation Auditor General; (7) Will have an inquiry into the number of Murdered and Missing Aboriginal Women; and (8) “Retain lessons and spirit of Kelowna process”. http://cdn.liberal.ca/files/2011/04/liberal_platform.pdf So, as the weeks go on and the parties speak more about their platforms and release more details, if they make any promises for Aboriginal peoples, I will add them to my chart. In the meantime, this chart should stand as a glaring reminder of how little attention our issues have received so far and to demand more from these parties. What is being promised so far leaves something to be desired. Perhaps if any of the parties are reading my blog, they might want to consider either including or beefing up their sections on Aboriginal peoples. We are the First Peoples of this land and our rights are constitutionally enshrined. We have treaties signed between Nations that have yet to be recognized and implemented. We also have a crisis in First Nation poverty caused by colonial policies of land and resource theft, denial of basic rights and freedoms and an active policy of assimilation. Until those issues are addressed, a few election promises won’t make much of a difference in the everyday lives of Indigenous peoples.

Issue	Liberals	Conservatives	NDP	Bloc	Green	FPNP
Nation-Nation Relations		Honour FN vets in War 1812 commem.	Yes	Yes	Yes	Remove Senate, elect Abs
Treaty Recog & Implementation					Priority funds to enhance fish stocks, greater FN role, Land & treaty tribunal, respect douglas treaty
Address Land Claims		Invest in FN land management			Eco-tourism for FNs, extend protect area, honour intent of land claims agrees, no extinguish
Remove 2% Funding Cap	Partial, $200M/2 yr		Yes plus capital $ for business
Implement Kelowna	“lessons & spirit”				Yes, restore $5.1B in funds	“fight poverty”
Increase PSE Funding	FNUC stable $, $5M Metis scholarship	Adult education in north, skills training in north	Yes, $1B per yr for 4 years, grants for Ab students		Yes *$800M/yr
Increase k-12 Funding	$300M in yr 2				Yes *$800M, promote culture & language	No,Native courses
Proper Funds for Housing		safety upgrades to fuel tanks in north	Yes		Yes *$800M
Proper Funds for Water		promote clean technologies	Yes		Yes *$800M
Child & Family Equal Funds					Reduce toxin exposure
Make all Laws s.35 Compliant		work in collab w FN re national conservation strategy, hunting advisory panel, respect economic groups			Respect s.35, but no commercial seal hunt, no whale hunt
Ab Headstart	Will “support”
Make all laws s.15 Compliant			recruit more Ab doctors		task force re Abs in justice system
Fund FN police, fire & EMS	No, but FN AG
Murdered & Missing Ab Wom. Inquiry	yes		federal response to violence, funds for Ab women orgs
FNs Lead Any Legislative Changes re FNs		accountability legislation re chiefs salaries			phase out Indian Act
Implement UNDRIP					Yes
Consult & Accommodate!!!			Consult with Abs in poverty legislation, lower carbon

I welcome all comments and feedback on this chart as it gets filled out – well, at least I hope it gets filled out. For anyone who is interested, the following link provides details on all the Aboriginal people running as candidates in the federal election for the various parties: http://www.mediaindigena.com/tim-fontaine/issues-and-politics/an-aboriginal-who%e2%80%99s-who-of-canadas-2011-federal-election

April 8, 2011

Tag: Aboriginal policy

Canada’s Genocide?: Death by Poverty in First Nations

Shiny New Beads and Trinkets: Old Assimilation Policies Repackaged

2011 Federal Election Platforms and NAO Positions – Woefully Empty

Comparison of Federal Parties Platforms on Aboriginal Policy