Warrior Life Studios

Pam Palmater

Tag: Human Rights

  • Canada Fails Again: First Nation Communities Without Clean Water

    Canada Fails Again: First Nation Communities Without Clean Water

    Unclean water in first nations communities

    AUDITOR GENERAL REPORT ON CLEAN WATER IN FIRST NATIONS

    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had no problem finding $7 billion dollars to buy Trans Mountain oil pipelines – so, where’s the money to pay for clean water pipelines in Indigenous communities? It may be hard to believe, but many First Nations in Canada still lack access to clean drinking water.

    This week, the Auditor General for Canada (AG) released her report on whether Canada is providing enough support to ensure that First Nations have access to safe drinking water. The answer was a clear no. This is despite the Liberal government’s promise back in 2015 to eliminate all long-term drinking water advisories in First Nations by March 2021.

    The report entitled “Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities” found that federal policies and funding amounts did not align with its promise to end all long-term drinking water advisories (DWA) on reserve. But the story doesn’t begin or end with DWAs – that is only the tip of the iceberg.
    Auditor General Report on Clean Water

    WHEN DID THE FIRST NATION WATER CRISIS START?

    This crisis has been a long time in the making. First Nations would not be struggling to protect and access clean water if our sovereign jurisdictions, laws, and governing powers over our traditional territories and resources were respected. Canada has created and maintained this First Nation water crisis after generations of colonization, genocide, land dispossession, and control of our water sources.

    And no, there is nothing in any of the treaties that explicitly stated the Crown could take all the water, control it, monetize it, and then deny access to clean water to First Nations. But that is exactly what has happened, despite the fact that the United Nations has recognized access to safe drinking water as a human right over a decade ago.

    Canada continues to act as an outlaw, breaking Indigenous laws, its own domestic laws, and international laws in relation to human rights. When it comes to the basic human rights of Indigenous peoples – including the right to access, govern and protect water sources – Canada literally ignores its so-called “rule of law”. The continued failure to provide clean drinking water to First Nations or other Indigenous communities like the Inuit, is a prime example of systemic racism.

    The Crown first steals Indigenous lands, resources, and waterways through fraud, deception, and countless breaches of its own laws, and then reserves unto itself jurisdiction in the Constitution Act 1867 over “Indians and lands reserved for the Indians”. In other words, the federal government has assumed legal and financial responsibility for both water and water infrastructure on First Nations reserves. Canada’s willful neglect of its assumed obligations has left numerous First Nations communities without clean water.

    Dirty water in clear jar

    WHAT IS THE FIRST NATION WATER CRISIS?

    First Nations have been calling on the federal government to address the lack of access to clean water for decades. In 1995, Health Canada and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) found that 25% of water systems on reserve posed health and safety risks. In 2001, INAC found “significant risks” to water quality and safety in 75% of water systems on reserve – a shocking number.

    A decade later in 2011, INAC reported to the AG that more than 50% of water systems still posed significant risks to community members. In 2014, it was 43% of water systems in trouble and in 2021, and that risk level hasn’t changed.

    At a press conference about the AG’s report, Indigenous Services (ISC) Minister Marc Miller said that while they had hoped to address all long-term drinking water advisories, they lost “a construction season” due to the pandemic. One construction season? If we only start the clock from 1995 forward, then they’ve lost 25 years of construction seasons.

    The AG pointed out that the delays by ISC were there long before the pandemic and referenced previous AG reports that have consistently raised concerns about the lack of clean drinking water in First Nations.

    And let’s not forget the numbers here. In addition to the 60 long-term DWAs that are left to be resolved – half of those have been in place for more than a decade. Imagine an entire decade in Fredericton, Toronto, Winnipeg or Saskatoon without clean drinking water, where there was only enough water to bathe once a week. That would NEVER be tolerated anywhere else for any other community, but those in First Nations. The situation would be treated as the urgent crisis that it is.

    Where’s Trudeau’s pipeline for water to First Nations?

    FEDERAL POLICIES FOR WATER ON RESERVE ARE DECADES OLD

    The federal government’s less than sincere commitment to urgently address the water crisis in First Nations is betrayed by the fact that their policies are decades old. The sad reality is that no one in the federal government has been concerned enough about the health, safety, and well-being of First Nations families, to treat the lack of access to safe drinking water as a crisis.

    In fact, over the years, AG reports found that the federal government couldn’t even be bothered to do annual inspections for all the water systems, despite their medium to high-risk. It’s as if the words “significant risks” to community members were merely notations in a report and not significant warnings for risks to health, safety and well-being of First Nations. 

    The Auditor General also noted that some of the federal government’s policies in relation to water systems on reserve are decades old and some were written in the 1960’s. She further noted that they have not amended their policy in relation to funding for the operations and maintenance of water systems on reserve for over 30 years.

    This means that the funding that the federal government provides to First Nations to maintain their water systems, does not take into account new technologies, the actual costs to maintain the systems and/or the risk-level and actual condition of the water systems. On top of that, they only provide up to 80% of the costs determined by this outdated policy, while at the same time paying First Nation water operators 30% less than the rest of Canada.

    Is there any wonder why the federal government is constantly chasing long-term drinking water advisories and never seems to catch up? The ever-changing number of First Nation communities without clean water should be considered a national emergency – something that can and should have been rectified by now.

    Think about it this way: if your roof has a leak and it would cost $10,000 to repair but you only “invest” $1,000, what happens? Well, your roof is not entirely fixed, so it continues to leak, causing more damage to the roof and the rest of the house. The next year, it will cost you $30,000 to fix the roof and the extra repairs for the house. Partial solutions to the water crisis serves to make the problem worse.

    This is the point the AG made: “If funding to operate and maintain water systems is insufficient, water systems may continue to deteriorate at a faster-than-expected rated.” This is exactly what has happened.

    First Nations Water Problems a Crisis of Canada’s Own Making

    THE NUMBERS SHELL GAME – HOW MANY FIRST NATIONS COMMUNITIES ARE WITHOUT WATER?

    It’s important to dig into the numbers to truly understand the full scope of this problem. The AG’s report was limited to only 1,050 “public water systems” in 600+ First Nations. This is because ISC’s water policies and funding formulas do not provide support for those who rely on wells or cisterns. Worse than that, their water policies do not support those First Nations without any running water, let alone clean water!

    And this isn’t a small number. More than one third of all households on reserve are in the category of wells and cisterns, or have no running water at all. So, the number of First Nation communities without access to clean water is a far bigger problem than it would first appear.

    It’s also important to look at how ISC has differentiated between short-term and long-term DWAs. The government seems to be congratulating itself for having “only” 60 long-term DWAs left, meanwhile over the same period, the AG confirmed that there were 1,281 short-term DWAs.

    More than 10% of those short-term DWAs were for periods of two months or more. But worse than that, the AG also found some First Nations had multiple short-term DWAs, that when added up, were more than a year in total cumulative length. But they don’t get counted in long-term DWAs, which effectively misrepresents the seriousness of short-term DWAs. Further, with long-term DWAs, they get counted as “lifted” or “resolved” if temporary measures are made to bring in water – even if the deficiencies in the water system have not been remediated.

    DWA numbers are clearly not the most transparent or effective way to measure whether or not the water crisis has been remedied. The more transparent measure would be whether each household on First Nation reserves and each daycare, school, healthcare centre, community building, and business, has consistently safe, reliable, clean drinking water and sanitation. These numbers could easily be recorded as an aggregate and disaggregated set of statistics.

    That’s the number that matters – how many First Nation households are without access to clean water – not how many DWAs you lifted one day, but were re-imposed the next. That’s a shell game that only serves to hide a much larger problem and certainly doesn’t respect the human right of First Nations to access clean water.

    CTV News: AG Reports Released

    LET’S TALK PIPELINES…

    Canada brags about having 84,000 kms of pipelines all over the country servicing the oil and gas industry. When confronted with losing the Trans Mountain oil pipeline, Trudeau managed to find $7 billion dollars in a hurry to buy it. So, where are the pipelines bringing clean water to First Nations Trudeau?

    There are mancamps full of thousands of mostly men flown into First Nation territories, in even in the remotest of places, that have access to healthcare, safe, mould-free housing, healthy food, and clean drinking water and sanitation. So, where is the healthcare, housing, food, and clean water for First Nations?

    Canada’s military brings millions of litres of fresh water to other countries in emergencies – so where’s the clean water for First Nations? Canada has spent more than $240 billion dollars on pandemic relief measures, but there isn’t enough money to ensure that no First Nation goes without access to clean water during a pandemic? This isn’t a matter of lack of resources, these are conscious policy choices being made to breach the rights of First Nations, with significant impacts to their physical and mental health and well-being.

    Minister Miller says they lost a construction season during the pandemic and that’s why they couldn’t address the water crisis. Yet, the construction season for oil and gas pipelines, the tar sands, mining projects and other extractive projects and infrastructure continued during the pandemic. But construction couldn’t proceed on water pipelines? These excuses are unacceptable.

    CTV Your Morning: First Nation Boil Water Advisories

    No one is buying the excuses made by Liberal politicians anymore. The reason all First Nation households don’t have access to clean water is widespread, longstanding, systemic form of racism and a denial of basic human rights.

    It is the same reason why there is a housing crisis on reserve; a humanitarian crisis of First Nations children in foster care; crisis-level incarceration rates of First Nations; and why there are thousands of murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls in this country. Policy choices are being made by bureaucrats with full knowledge of the harms inflicted.

    HOW CAN CANADIANS HELP ADVOCATE FOR ACTION ON CLEAN WATER FOR FIRST NATION COMMUNITIES?

     Until we address the racism in Canada’s laws, policies, and practices, we’ll never end the ongoing breaches of human rights against First Nations or their current lack of access to clean water. There is no such thing as incremental equality or partial human rights. You either have them or you don’t. And clearly, First Nations have neither equality nor the protection of human rights.

    We need Canadians to stand up and say this isn’t right. We need Canadians to use their voices, their numbers, their powers and spheres of influence to demand better. Demand that the federal government bring every resource to bear to ensure safe, reliable, clean drinking water and sanitation to every single household on First Nation reserves. Not in two years, three years or after the next election – but this year. Next year’s reports need to count First Nation households without access to clean water and sanitation – not DWAs.

    You can send emails, letters and petitions to Ministers, MPs, Senators and even the Prime Minister. You can withhold political and public support for politicians and make it conditional on ending the crisis. You can use your research, social media or publicity skills to support First Nations educate the public. There is no end to what Canadians can do. Now that you know better, you can put that knowledge into action for justice.

    CONCLUSION

     Canada needs to treat this water crisis as the national emergency it is and work in partnership with First Nations to address the entirety of the crisis – not just long-term DWAs. Canada needs to treat this situation with the same priority, urgency and resources as if this was in their own backyards.

    We all know it would only take a week without access to clean water for any of these politicians to call in the army in their town or city if this happened to them. So, they need to stop with the excuses and simply get it done. And while they are at it, they should also return some of the lands, resources, and waterways they took – so this isn’t a problem in the future. 

    Access to clean water for all First Nations should never be considered a policy option.

    Pam Palmater Website

  • Transitional Justice Plan Urgently Needed to End Genocide in Canada

    Transitional Justice Plan Urgently Needed to End Genocide in Canada

    Pam Palmater, Shelagh Day and Sharon McIvor testifying before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, DC – fall 2019

    For decades, the families of murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls and their communities; together with Indigenous women leaders and experts and allied human rights organizations, advocated for government action to end the crisis. Many families had called for a national inquiry, which was supported by various international human rights treaty bodies. After a tumultuous start and numerous set-backs, the National Inquiry concluded its work and released its final report at a ceremony on June 3, 2019, before hundreds of Indigenous family members, leaders and advocates. They found Canada guilty of both historic and ongoing genocide.

    Throughout the National Inquiry’s proceedings, Minister of Indigenous Affairs Carolyn Bennett committed that Canada would not sit idly by while the inquiry proceeded. They committed to take action to end the violence, which was well documented in numerous reports. Yet, they failed to act. Since the release of the final report, very little, if any substantive action has been taken by PM Trudeau’s Liberal government to end genocide against Indigenous women and girls in Canada.

    The abuse, exploitation, violence, disappearances and murders of Indigenous women and girls continues unabated and represents the largest human rights crisis ever facing Canada. The National Inquiry confronted this reality head on when it concluded that Canada is guilty of genocide that is both race-based and one that has specifically targeted Indigenous women. They found that:

    While the Canadian genocide targets all Indigenous peoples, Indigenous women, girls and 2SLGBTQQIA people are particularly targeted.

    This finding was based on an independent legal analysis and the extensive evidence
    gathered during the inquiry. They further explained:

    Canada’s colonial history provides ample evidence of the existence of a genocidal policy – a manifest pattern of similar conduct which reflects an intention to destroy Indigenous peoples.

    What resulted from this finding was a media blitz of commentators engaging in debates as to whether the inquiry went too far; whether they were using the word to strategically to get attention; or whether anything other than the Holocaust could ever amount to genocide. Very few of those commentators had specifically worked in, were educated in, or conducted research on genocide; nor were most of them lawyers. Yet, these emotional or political reactions to the finding is what led the discussion versus the very pressing need for governments to take urgent action.

    Even the United Nations High Commissioner Michelle Bachelet expressed great concern and called on Canada to examine this finding. Similarly, Luis Almagro who heads the Organization of American States, expressed his concern that Canada was too slow to act on the national inquiry’s findings. Meanwhile, some commentators reacted by saying that the inquiry’s finding should be investigated. There is no utility in reinvestigating this finding. It is a legal finding based on fact and law. What was needed then and what is needed now is action to end the genocide.

    None of this should come as a shock to government officials, Indigenous leaders, scholars and activists have long been calling Canada’s historic and ongoing treatment of Indigenous peoples genocide. Some have also highlighted the fact that sexualized genocide towards Indigenous women and girls has been an integral part of Canada’s violent colonization of Indigenous lands. While not a specific focus of Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) investigation into residential schools, their final report also concluded that Canada’s actions towards Indigenous peoples amounted to cultural, physical and biological genocide: “part of a coherent policy to eliminate Aboriginal people as distinct peoples and to assimilate them into the Canadian mainstream against their will.”

    The crime of genocide is a crime under international law that developed over time – even before the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted in 1948. A state need only be guilty of one of the five ways to commit genocide against a racial group like Indigenous peoples, which include:

    (1) killing;

    (2) physical/mental harm;

    (3) conditions of life to bring about
    destruction;

    (4) preventing births; and

    (5) the forced transfer of children.

    Canada is guilty of all five.

    The National inquiry, without excluding the possibility that individuals could be held liable for genocide in Canada, and duly noting that acts and omissions of provinces within Canada, draws a conclusion on the responsibility of Canada as a state for genocide under international law.

    The inquiry also found that pre- and post-colonial settler governments have created, maintained and reinforced an infrastructure of violence towards Indigenous women and girls. This infrastructure of violence is a complex set of institutional laws, policies, practices, actions and omissions that treat Indigenous women as lesser human beings, who are sexualized, racialized and treated as disposable because of their sex and their race. This infrastructure remains firmly in place today manifesting in high rates of violence towards Indigenous women and girls.

    This genocide has been empowered by colonial structures, evidenced notably by the Indian Act, the Sixties scoop, residential schools and breaches of human and Indigenous rights, leading directly to the current increased rates of violence death and suicide in Indigenous populations.

    The National Inquiry considered the following as examples of genocide:

    • Deaths of Indigenous women and girls in police custody;
    • Failure to protect them from exploitation and trafficking;
    • Failure to protect them from known killers;
    • Taking their children and placing in foster care at high rates;
    • Physical, mental and sexual abuse in state institutions (residential schools, hospitals, prisons, etc);
    • Denial of Indian status and band membership;
    • Forced and/or coerced sterilizations; and
    • Purposeful chronic underfunding of essential
    • human services like food, water, health, housing.

    These modern day examples discussed in the inquiry’s report would be in addition to
    earlier pre-meditated killings:

    • small pox blankets,
    • scalping bounties,
    • mass murders of some native groups, like the Beothuk; and
    • starvation policies and ethnic cleansing on the prairies.

    When considering the testimonies of thousands of families, Indigenous women leaders, and advocates, as well as subject-matter experts, together with extensive legal, historical and social science research; the inquiry could come to no other conclusion but genocide.

    Canada has displayed a continuous policy with shifting expressed motives but an ultimately steady intention, to destroy Indigenous peoples physically biologically and as social units.

    All governments and state agencies are still active perpetrators and perpetuators of genocidal violence against Indigenous women and girls in Canada. Ending the genocide which is embedded in state institutions and society as a whole, will require immediate and urgent remedies that match the scope and character of these grave human rights violations – i.e. a comprehensive national action plan that is well-resourced and focusing on transitioning Canada out of genocide. That is no small feat. This will require external oversight but international human rights bodies or experts, with Indigenous women as core decision-makers.

    Organizations like the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) have access to experts in genocide – experts who have worked with other countries to transition out of genocide. It makes no sense to ask the perpetrator of genocide to be the one to design the plan and implement the plan to get out of genocide. Indigenous women and human rights experts must be the ones to lead this process, together with international genocide experts to design this plan. Canadian officials must then work directly with Indigenous women and their Indigenous governments to oversee a fully- resourced transitional justice plan that is national in scope, applies to all levels of government and related agencies, and focuses on:

    1. ending ongoing genocide;
    2. reparations for harms done; and
    3. the prevention of future genocide.

    This will require an Indigenous and human rights framework and gender-based analysis for all stages of the plan. While Canada promised the United Nations that it would come up with a national action plan by June 2020, few expect more than their standard action plan framework that tends to be overly general with no measurable outcomes. This is why several Indigenous women and human rights advocates attended the IACHR in the fall of 2019 to ask for international intervention and oversight. Canada’s response at the time was that they were too busy with the election. Then, they were too busy with holidays. June is several weeks away and in all likelihood, Indigenous women and girls will be left behind again.

    Genocide is the worst crime and human rights violation that can be committed against a people. But you wouldn’t know it by looking at Canada’s lack of action on the crisis. Pipelines get more money and attention than Indigenous women and girls.

    It’s truly time for more international intervention before thousands more lives are lost.

    Video of IACHR session

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkQ4G5iEnAI&list=PLDnK0xT7aXRAGR7DszneZTPkBn0YJHfxB&index=11&t=292s

    Here is my latest Youtube video talking about the need for a gendered covid-19 plan to take into account that Indigenous women and girls face not only the pandemic, but also ongoing genocide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM6OBq1fo10
  • Template Letter to Send to Federal Government re Prisoner Safety During Covid-19

    Template Letter to Send to Federal Government re Prisoner Safety During Covid-19

    Picture from United Nations 2020

    Dear social justice allies, Several weeks ago, I wrote an article for APTN News about the need for all levels of government to work with Indigenous governments and prison justice experts to develop a decarceration plan for Indigenous peoples to avoid a massive covid19 outbreak in prisons which would disproportionately impact Indigenous peoples.
    COVID-19 pandemic plan needed for Canada’s jails and prisons

    I then did a Youtube video providing more context on this issue and why a strategic, decarceration plan is needed for Indigenous peoples, especially Indigenous women who are the most over-represented prison population. Indigenous peoples are already in a  high risk category for covid19 health issues and prisons would only make the matter worse.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3gx_skSDX8

    The Canadian Association for Elizabeth Fry Societies is also calling on governments to release some prisoners, including Indigenous women. pregnant women, and others.You can see their Open to Letter to Government here: https://www.caefs.ca/caefs-calls-for-release-of-prisoners-at-risk-due-to-covid-19/

    Many of you contacted me after seeing my video asking about a template letter they could use to Please see the below template letter that you can use and/or edit to your specific needs to send to the federal government regarding prisoner health and safety during the covid-19 pandemic.

    The below draft template letter was provided by Senator Kim Pate, who has been a life long prison justice advocate for women. She has long called on the government to find alternatives to prison for women, especially Indigenous women who are grossly over-represented in prisons and women with physical and mental health issues. She is advocating that prisons release all minimum security prisoners, elderly and ill prisoners, and Indigenous women.

    Many thanks for those of you who support prisoners at this time, especially the many thousands who have not even been convicted of their alleged crime.

    April , 2020
    The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau
    Prime Minister of Canada
    Office of the Prime Minister
    80 Wellington Street
    Ottawa, ON
    K1A 0A2

    Dear Prime Minister and Members of the Cabinet:

    Re: COVID-19 in Canadian Prisons

    We are gravely concerned that more people are going to die because current preventive measures for some Canadians are inadequate. We are particularly concerned about people living in poverty, people who are already isolated, homeless people, precariously housed and employed people, and prisoners.

    There are 40,000 Canadians in prisons and too many are at particular risk due to COVID-19. In federal prisons, more than 1 in 4 prisoners are over 50, more than 1 in 7 have a respiratory illness or hypertension. Many have mental health issues. Elderly, ill and low risk prisoners can and must be released immediately.

    Locking down prisoners and locking out visitors is wholly inadequate. Without significantly reducing the number of prisoners, prisons are already becoming incubated breeding grounds for COVID-19. Social distancing for prisoners is being achieved via lockdowns, conditions of solitary confinement.

    The responses to COVID-19 in prisons so far raises serious health and human rights concerns. Because social distancing is not possible in crowded jails, the response to positive or suspected cases of COVID-19 are institutional lockdowns. Inadequate cleansers are being distributed to prisoners who often share kitchen and bathroom facilities. It is not effective to distribute hygiene information to those with dementia, learning, language or intellectual disabilities, not to mention those with significant mental health issues.

    Staff in federal prisons are already testing positive in growing numbers and others are refusing to go to work where prisoners are diagnosed with COVID-19.

    Authorities should be releasing all minimum security, elderly and ill prisoners from federal prisons. As you know, such legislative provisions as sections 29, 81, 84, 116 and 121 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act were specifically created to move people out of prisons to address health issues, for treatment, for other personal development, compassionate reasons, as well as for work. Sections 81 and 84 provide options which could be easily expanded to provide for the release of Indigenous and other prisoners.

    As the Parole Board of Canada has urged, temporary absence and work release options could be broadened, whether by legislative changes or broader interpretation of current policies and practices, to provide near immediate alleviation of current conditions. Some families and communities could immediately accommodate their loved ones. Community residential facilities and non-governmental organizations could be funded (at a fraction of the cost of incarceration), to provide additional community accommodation and support.

    Many communities need health clinics, testing centres and housing to alleviate current as well as pre-existing crises. Given the opportunity, construction companies and prisoners could volunteer to assist with the work needed to put this infrastructure in place.

    Recognizing these extraordinary times, the government could further support these goals through amendments to legislation and/or policy. One option could be a “presumptive” release on parole at one-sixth of a sentence for all first-time, non-schedule convictions, that could function similarly to current statutory releases, supervised by parole officers with the Parole Board of Canada setting any necessary conditions. Alternatively, currently available measures, such as section 116(6) of the CCRA which permits unescorted temporary absences for renewable periods of 60 days for “specific personal development” programs, could be made applicable to prisoners with vulnerable health issues. Existing measures for release could likewise be expanded to permit individuals to be released with other forms of distance monitoring, such as video reporting.

    The public safety risk of releasing minimum security prisoners, those who are ill and those who are elderly to receive treatment and contribute to their communities is negligible. The public health risks—for all Canadians—of keeping these individuals and correctional staff in overcrowded and under-prepared prisons and allowing the virus to spread further is significant, irresponsible and preventable.

    Provinces like Ontario and Nova Scotia have taken steps: allowing those who serve sentences only on the weekends to serve sentences at home. In the United States,[i] Europe,[ii] New Zealand[iii] and beyond, legal advocates are working to post bail and encourage release of prisoners. Canadian civil society organizations, medical and legal experts are echoing these calls. Canadians are calling for bold and effective measures. Protecting Canada from a healthcare crisis means protecting those most marginalized, including those in prisons and other institutions.

    [i] See e.g. Bill Quigley, Six points about Coronavirus and poverty in the US (Louisiana Weekly): http://www.louisianaweekly.com/six-points-about-coronavirus-and-poverty-in-the-us/ ; Lisa Backus, Advocates Urge Prisoner Releases Before Virus Strikes (CT News Junkie):

    https://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/archives/entry/20200316_advocates_urge_prisoner_releases_before_virus_strikes/?utm_source=CTNewsJunkie+Main+List+With+Publication+Groups&utm_campaign=2f91d903e6-MCP_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a493d2308d-2f91d903e6-95944325.

    [ii] Penal Reform International, Coronavirus: Healthcare and human rights of people in prison: https://www.penalreform.org/resource/coronavirus-healthcare-and-human-rights-of-people-in/.

    [iii] Penal Reform International, Coronavirus: Healthcare and human rights of people in prison: https://www.penalreform.org/resource/coronavirus-healthcare-and-human-rights-of-people-in/.

    Senator Kim Pate’s office also provided the following information to help families advocating on behalf of their loved ones in prison. Here is her note:

    In order to assist in the release of your loved one/family/community member, you may wish to write to their parole officer, as well as the Warden of the prison where they are currently incarcerated. You might also want to write or copy Anne Kelly, Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada, Jennifer Oades, Chair of the Parole Board of Canada, Bill Blair, Minister of Public Safety and Security, David Lametti, Minister of Justice, the Prime Minister, the leaders of the other federal political parties, as well as MPs and Senators.

    In your letter requesting release on compassionate grounds, or for personal development, or perhaps a work release program in order to care for family members, or a section 81 0r 84 release, you will want to identify why you think they can be released safely in to the community at this time, as well as the types of supports available to them. If you need some resources to assist with community infrastructure, you can encourage the community to apply directly to the Minister of Public Safety.

    Email addresses for some of the individuals listed above are:

    Many are copying our office on their correspondence so that the recipients are aware that we are monitoring developments in the matter.

    Additionally, please see below the link to an article by former Minister of Health, Dr. Jane Philpott and Senator Pate published recently in Policy Options regarding releasing prisoners in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, which may be of interest:

    https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/march-2020/time-running-out-to-protect-prisoners-and-prison-staff-from-calami

    Thank you once again for writing and take good care.

    Senator Kim Pate’s Office:

    https://sencanada.ca/en/senators/pate-kim/

  • A Modern Treaty to Save Our Peoples and The Planet

    A Modern Treaty to Save Our Peoples and The Planet

    Left to Right: Stephen Lewis, Pam Palmater, David Suzuki, photo by Ian Mauro Climate Tour 2019

    This blog is an excerpt of the speech that I gave at the Climate Tour with David Suzuki and Stephen Lewis, on October 4, 2019 in Winnipeg, Manitoba at the University of Winnipeg on Treaty 1 territory. (Check against delivery).

    Kwe n’in telusi Pam Palmater. It is an honour to be here on Indigenous territory covered by Treaty one. Thanks to the elder for opening & to UofW for hosting us. Oct.4th important day to remember lives lost due to murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls.

    We have a hard truth to face. We are in the middle of two major crises: Canada is killing our people and the planet and we are here to stop it!

    The first crisis is that the National Inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls found that Canada has and continues to commit genocide against Indigenous peoples – specifically targeting Indigenous Women and Girls.

    The second crisis is that Indigenous science and western science have both confirmed that we are headed for a massive climate disaster.

    To say that we are in a crisis of epic proportions would be an understatement. We need to act now to end the genocide of Indigenous peoples & stop the ecocide of the earth. Because we know that the pain of Indigenous peoples is the same pain felt by the planet. And the pain of this planet is felt first and foremost by Indigenous peoples.

    Settler governments in Canada, the United States, Australia, New Zealand and all over the world have colonized Indigenous territories with horrific acts of violence to peoples and the earth. The colonizing mentality pervades our governing systems and allows governments and corporations to treat people and the planet as resources to exploit – as though they were lifeless commodities. Extractive economies – now largely benefiting transnational corporations – have been authorized by governments land leave destruction in their wake.

    We’ve seen tears from Indigenous mothers whose daughters have been murdered by the thousands. We’ve also seen the heartbreak of killer whale mothers mourning the losses of their offspring who can’t survive in an oil tanker dominated eco-systems.

    And if we, as First Nations and Canadians, don’t act quickly – many more people, plants and animals will die. We no longer have the time to debate politics – the crisis in Canada is now a matter of life and death for all of us. It won’t be good enough in 50 years to look back and say we tried, we had the best intentions, or we gave it our best effort. We either do or die. And right now, Indigenous peoples are dying. Our planet is dying. But you all know this. We can no more deny the ecocide of climate change, than we can deny genocide of Indigenous peoples. The statistics, the research and the scientific evidence before our eyes is too overwhelming. Climate change is greatest threat to all life on earth – humans, plants and animals.

    Who bears the disproportionate burden of environmental destruction, water contamination and more pipelines? Indigenous peoples do. That is because genocide and ecocide go hand in hand. This earth has suffered a great assault, in part because of massive human rights violations to its caretakers – Indigenous peoples. Similarly, Indigenous peoples have suffered a great genocide in part because of the violence committed against our lands, waters, and ecosystems on which we depend.

    Our society’s economy has been constructed in a way which exploits ands abuses Indigenous women and the land with relative impunity. Well now, we all stand to pay the price of the impending climate disaster and corresponding the human disaster that will follow – all while large corporations reap the benefits.

    In the end – we will all suffer – if there is no drinkable water, farmable land or pollinators.

    What we need is a new treaty – a modern treaty that binds us all together – the people and the planet. A treaty that commits us to work together for the benefit of all Nations of peoples and living beings without discrimination, racism, sexism genocide or ecocide. A treaty that commits all people to heal our divisions so we can commit to protecting our collective futures.

    We must remember that our collective futures includes the plants, animals, birds ,fish, and insect Nations. They too have as much right to live on this planet as we do and if we have any hope of surviving, we’ll need every bee hive, every coral reef and every killer whale pod to maintain our precious eco-systems.

    This modern treaty can be a reality.

    It doesn’t matter what we call it, whose idea it was, where it originated or whether we agree on all aspects of it. This new treaty is about combining social justice and earth justice together to pave the way to a better future for all. The dual crises facing us requires that we do everything in our collective power to save our planet.

    This will require a societal revolution that goes beyond superficial changes and the glacial pace at which governments operate. It will require that we change everything and that will mean we need to get uncomfortable.

    We don’t need everyone for a revolution to save the planet. We don’t have time to wait around until the genocide and climate change deniers are convinced. If we wait, it will be too late for us all.

    Every single right we have ever gained – human rights, environmental protections or native rights – have been advanced by small numbers of people – sometimes only individuals pushing forward despite the odds. We can do this with all of you in this room. But we cant wait for all of you. We will forge ahead because we have to – its the only way to give Indigenous peoples and this planet a fighting chance.

    Other people will join when they see our successes. There will always be genocide deniers & climate change deniers, but we have an obligation to forge ahead anyway. If the lands are toxic from tar sands, and the water polluted from mining, none of our children will survive – whether they are Canadian or Indigenous. That’s why we need to work together.

    Together, we not only have the power to stop these abuses, but we can return Canada to its original treaty vision. Every single one of you has the power to stand up for what is right and save not only yourselves, but all those who can’t advocate on their own – for all of those whose voices that are not counted – the bees, the whales, the trees and the tiniest insects.

    None of you can do it alone and we don’t expect you to – the original treaty vision for Canada was premised on us working together to benefit from and protect the lands and waters which sustain us. Our advantage and our strength is in our collectives.

    Canada wouldn’t even exist without the treaty agreements between sovereign Indigenous Nations and the Crown. This original treaty vision was meant to protect the ecosystem on Turtle Island for as long as long as the grass grows, the rivers flow and sun shines.

    We are faced with two global crises – genocide and ecocide.

    We must use the spirit and intent of our original treaties to forge a new future Canadians – get out and vote in your system – use your numbers, your wealth, your influence and your privilege to force the change. But don’t stop there – the pressure must continue in full force post election in all forums – in Parliamentary and Senate Committees, in where you spend you money (or don’t), in the media, in the boardroom, in your advocacy and at the United Nations.

    Indigenous peoples will always be there on front lines, but we cant do it alone – we need you and you need us. Our very lives depend on it.

    We can protect the lands and waters and we can save lives. I believe in the power of the people to rise up and be the government of the people, by the people, for the people as it was intended. This generation was meant to lead our Nations back to balance. We were meant to protect this territory for our future generations. I believe in the power of our peoples to unite under a new treaty.

    Let’s end genocide against Indigenous peoples and ecocide against our planet.

    Lets work together for the radical changes we need to save our people and the planet.

    Wel’al’iog.

  • Overincarceration of Indigenous peoples nothing short of genocide

    Overincarceration of Indigenous peoples nothing short of genocide

                                                                                        (Public domain image)

    Canada’s colonial objectives have always been to clear the lands for settlement and development by whatever means necessary.

    After signing peace treaties in the 1700s, clearing the lands meant laws offering bounties on the heads of Mi’kmaw men, women and children. In the 1800s, clearing the lands meant ethnic cleansing on the Prairies – laws, policies and practices that confined native peoples to reserves

    and gave them insufficient rations to survive. In the 1900s, clearing the lands meant the theft of thousands of native children to be forced into residential schools where thousands died from abuse, torture and starvation. In the 2000s clearing the lands means the mass incarceration of Indigenous peoples in prisons paving the way for the extractive industry.

    The overincarceration of Indigenous peoples in federal, provincial and territorial prisons in Canada today is nothing short of genocide.

    On Jan. 21, 2020, Dr. Ivan Zinger, who heads the Office of the Correctional Investigator, issued an urgent statement about the rates of Indigenous peoples in federal prisons being at historic highs. While Indigenous peoples only make up five per cent of the Canadian population, they represent more than 30 per cent of those in federal prisons. Those statistics are even worse for Indigenous women who now make up 42 per cent of the prison population. A Statistics Canada report released in 2018 shows that almost half of all youth in corrections are Indigenous as well. This is all happening at a time when incarceration rates for the rest of Canada continue to decline. Why is this happening? Zinger states that federal corrections is “impervious to change” – a well-founded conclusion given the decades of commissions, inquiries and reports highlighting both racism in the justice system and the devastating impact it has on Indigenous peoples.

    In 1989, Chief Justice Thomas Hickman issued the final report of the Royal Commission on the Donald Marshall, Jr., Prosecution (Marshall Inquiry). Donald Marshall was a Mi’kmaw man from Nova Scotia who had been wrongly targeted by police and convicted of murder, spending 11 years in prison. The Marshall Inquiry found that the criminal justice system had failed Marshall “at virtually every turn” due “to the fact that Donald Marshall Jr., is a Native.” The report provided numerous recommendations to ensure more equitable treatment of native peoples in the future.

    A decade later, the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry of Manitoba released its report in relation to the

    murder of Helen Betty Osborne whose assailants had not been brought to justice; and John Joseph Harper, an unarmed native politician shot dead by Winnipeg police. Murray Sinclair, co-commissioner for the justice inquiry and chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, made similar findings to the Marshall Inquiry: “[t]he justice system has failed Manitoba’s Aboriginal people on a massive scale.” His report also made numerous recommendations in relation to addressing racism and discrimination against Indigenous peoples in the justice system and beyond.

    In 2004, the Saskatchewan Commission on First Nations and Metis Peoples and Justice Reform found that racism was a major issue in police forces in their dealings with native peoples. This came on the heels of the Commission of Inquiry into Matters Relating to the Death of Neil Stonechild, also in 2004. This was an inquiry that investigated “Starlight Tours,” the arbitrary detention of native peoples by police who are driven out of town to freeze to death at night. Both reports offered recommendations, but like the other reports, most were largely ignored.

    In 2007 came the Ipperwash Inquiry in Ontario and most recently, in 2019 came the Final Report of the National Inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls, which found Canada guilty of both historic and ongoing genocide. Racism in the justice system is a common theme in all of these reports and the Office of the Correctional Investigator has been raising the alarm for the overincarceration of Indigenous people for two decades.

    The statistics clearly show a steady rise in Indigenous incarceration from 17.5 per cent in 2000 to 30 per cent in 2020. But these represent the national statistics and, like rates of murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls, and Indigenous children in foster care, the provincial rates can be double the national rates.

    In Manitoba, more than 80 per cent of prisoners are Indigenous — the same province where 50 per cent of all women murdered and missing are Indigenous and 90 per cent of all children in foster care are Indigenous. In Saskatchewan, 76 per cent of prisoners were Indigenous, the same province which has more than 55 per cent of women murdered and missing as Indigenous and 85 per cent of children in foster care are Indigenous. We also know that more than two-thirds of Indigenous prisoners have been impacted by the foster care system. This is exactly the kind of colonial legacy that the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Gladue [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688 and R. v. Ipeelee 2012 SCC 13 cases meant to address when they instructed judges to find alternatives to prison for Indigenous peoples. Is no one listening?

    From the evidence, it is clear we have a direct pipeline from foster care to prison that seems to clear the way for pipelines on native territories. What the statistics don’t show is the history of thenRCMP and other police forces as an integral part of colonial settlement and development policies that have created this current crisis.

    From the RCMP’s Project Sitka to its massive military-style operation on Wet’suwet’en territory right now, native lands continue to be cleared by Canada’s laws, policies, practices, actions and omissions. The overincarceration rates will continue to increase unless we address these genocidal policies once and for all.

    While I agree with Zinger’s call for “bold and urgent action,” cultural programming and Indigenizing the prison will not get us there. We must confront racism against Indigenous peoples head on and prevent incarceration in the first place. This means addressing racism in federal and provincial laws and policies, as well as rampant racism in policing. In the meantime, we must begin the urgent process of decarceration for Indigenous women and children; Indigenous peoples with mental health issues; and Indigenous men languishing in prisons for little more than navigating poverty.

    This article was originally published by The Lawyer’s Daily (www.thelawyersdaily.ca), part of LexisNexis Canada Inc on January 30, 2020. https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/17658

  • Federal Budget 2019: Indigenous Women and Children Left Behind – Again

    Federal Budget 2019: Indigenous Women and Children Left Behind – Again

    As expected, the Assembly of First Nations was first out of the gate offering glowing praise for this Liberal government’s federal budget, followed shortly thereafter by the Metis National Council and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami – the three male-dominated national Aboriginal organizations. Their organizations have seen substantial increases in funding for their political organizations in recent years. Meanwhile, the Native Women’s Association of Canada – the only political organization representing Indigenous women at the national level – issued its own press release criticizing the government for failing Indigenous women. They accused the federal government of, once again, ignoring the pressing needs of Indigenous women and in so doing, not only hampering reconciliation but breaching their core human rights. NWAC is especially aggrieved about this lack of funding for Indigenous women and families, given the urgent need to address murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls.

    The exclusion of Indigenous women and girls as a priority in this federal budget is a glaring example of the ongoing racism and sexism that is so deeply embedded in Canada’s laws, policies, practices and institutions – the very same racism and sexism the Liberal government claims to be against. When the federal government announced the National Inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls in 2016, former Liberal Minister for the Status of Women, Patty Hadju, spoke of the urgent need to address the longstanding racism and sexism embedded in Canada’s institutions.  Yet, this urgent policy objective is not reflected in any substantive way in federal budget 2019. In fact, there are no funds allocated for a comprehensive plan to address violence against women generally, and no funds for a targeted comprehensive of plan of action to address violence against Indigenous women and girls specifically. Indigenous and women’s organizations have called on Canada to take comprehensive action now to implement recommendations from the United Nations treaty bodies to reduce murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls before the national inquiry’s report is released.

    http://fafia-afai.org/en/press-release-coalition-calls-for-urgent-action-to-stop-violence-against-indigenous-women-and-girls-%EF%BB%BF/

    The National Inquiry’s report is due out in less than a month and there is no budget set aside to implement whatever recommendations come from that report either. The limited funds for commemoration seems not only inadequate, but also premature given that the crisis has not abated. Where is the urgent and sustained help for the many families deeply impacted by the abuse, exploitation, trafficking, disappearances and murders of thousands of Indigenous women and girls?

    A particularly shocking exclusion from the budget is the lack funding for First Nations child and family services to address the crisis of First Nations children in foster care. Former Minister of Indigenous Services, Jane Philpott called the staggering statistics related to First Nation kids in care a “humanitarian crisis” – comparing it to the residential school system. She pledged to work with First Nations to address the critical need for funding to prevent apprehensions and address the root causes of over-representation, which include conditions of poverty. This glaring omission from the budget is confounding given the fact that Parliament had previously committed to targeted funding to accompany Bill C-92 An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Metis children, youth and families, which already been introduced in Parliament. Although the federal government promised significant funding to support Bill C-92 – there is no specified funding either in the bill or the budget. Not a single dollar has been allocated to support First Nations develop their own laws and institutions specific to child and family services, hire and train staff, as well as provide the much-needed wrap around social, educational and health services to families in need as advocated in the Spirit Bear Plan.

    https://fncaringsociety.com/sites/default/files/Spirit%20Bear%20Plan%20%28EN%29.pdf

    Dr. Cindy Blackstock, the head of the First Nation Child and Family Caring Society welcomed the additional funding for Jordan’s Principle, however explained that it does not go far enough and many children – like non-status Indian children are still excluded. Jordan’s Principle is a child-first principle which aims to ensure First Nation children can access all public services in a culturally-appropriate way, without any delays or hurdles because they are First Nations. The federal budget pledges $1.2 billion over three years. However, the flat funding does not take into account population growth over the funded years, or the rising cost of inflation. There are also no additional funds to address the thousands of First Nation children who will be newly entitled to Indian status as a result of Bill S-3 An Act to Amend the Indian Act (elimination of sex-based inequities in registration) or from the revised unstated paternity policy in relation to registration. Both of these issues are the result of the federal government losing two court cases (Descheneaux and Gehl) on discrimination against First Nations women and children.

    Yet, despite the legal obligation to provide funding, none has been identified in this budget. This limited funding is not an act of reconciliation. The federal has been dragged to this point – kicking and screaming – by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, with no less than five non-compliance orders for failing to end discrimination in funding of First Nation children in care. So, while the extra funding is welcome, it is not a “gift”.

    A particularly disturbing omission is the lack of targeted funding for First Nation women and their descendants who would newly entitled to Indian status under Bill S-3. The bill has been in place for a year and will add thousands to the registration list, yet no new funds have been identified for education, health or housing for individuals or First Nations. This is despite the fact that the United Nations just agreed with Sharon McIvor that the Indian Act still discriminates against the descendants of First Nations women who married-out, and directed Canada to provide full reparation. This means registering them and providing much-needed social programs. Similarly, there is no targeted funding to address the increase in registration due to Lynn Gehl’s successful court case against Canada for it’s discriminatory unstated paternity policy. At every turn, First Nations women and children are forced to wait for justice and are denied their basic human rights and access to the same programs and services available to their fathers, brothers and uncles.

    One of the most under-served categories of First Nations are those living off-reserve. Approximately 33% of First Nations live off-reserve in Canada, and a disproportionate number of families are headed by single Indigenous mothers. Metis and Inuit don’t live on reserves at all – therefore the majority of Indigenous peoples live off-reserve. The amount allocated in the budget is a mere $60 million over 5 years to help fund off-reserve organizations like native friendship centres. That is barely $10 million a year – nowhere near what is needed to address urgent housing, education, and health needs for more than 800,000 Indigenous peoples living off-reserve – let alone the growing homelessness crisis plaguing Indigenous peoples. Niigaan Sinclair reports in the Winnipeg Free Press that the chronic under-funding is made worse by the fact that federal bureaucrats and other consultants and contractors, suck up nearly 50% of all funding appropriated by Parliament for First Nations. With three departments now directly responsible for Indigenous and Northern Affairs, who is to say whether First Nations will see much of this funding at all, let alone Indigenous women and children.

    https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/new-dollars-sure-but-same-political-game-507393892.html?fbclid=IwAR3jyFhBNuvatzHwVlW-JLWn28sw4MWAdhaGPfD2_strkkdgeiRGRJ0nQsU

    While there are many other problems with federal budget 2019, the most glaring omission is the exclusion of Indigenous women and children. Back in 2016, the Liberal government promised a gender based analysis for future budgets. Yet, this budget lacks a gender-based, human rights-based and Indigenous rights-based analysis that focuses on not just policy objectives like reconciliation, but concrete domestic and international legal obligations. There is no mention of returning lands and resources back to First Nations, no mention of a financial plan in relation to treaty implementation or how the federal government will ensure Indigenous women’s voices are at the many negotiating tables they fund. This budget is a disgrace and does little to address any of the pressing Indigenous issues impacting Indigenous women and children like kids in care, murdered and missing Indigenous women, over-incarceration, homelessness, unequal access to Indian status, poverty and poor health outcomes. Trudeau makes good use of flowery speeches and tearful apologies to Indigenous peoples,  but has left Indigenous women and children far behind – again.

    Perhaps Prime Minister Trudeau should give some Indigenous women a call and figure out how to amend the budget so it better reflects the law in this country. At least, that’s what a feminist Prime Minister would do.

    APTN Panel discussion on Federal Budget 2019 and what it means for Indigenous Peoples:

    https://tinyurl.com/y689zmyh

  • What You Need to Know About Sharon McIvor’s Major UN Victory on Indian Status

    What You Need to Know About Sharon McIvor’s Major UN Victory on Indian Status

    (Picture of Sharon McIvor and I at the United Nations in Geneva)

    Sharon McIvor has won yet another landmark legal victory for First Nations women – this time at the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC). On January 14, 2019, the UNHRC released their decision which found that Canada still discriminates against “Indian” women and their descendants in the registration provisions of the Indian Act. Despite the fact that Sharon had already proven her discrimination case at trial and on appeal here in Canada, the federal government refused to eliminate all the remaining sex discrimination from the Act. This meant that Sharon and her descendants still have lesser or no Indian status as compared to her brother and his descendants – simply based on sex. Sharon was therefore forced to bring a human rights claim to the UNHRC under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The UNHRC found Canada had violated Sharon’s human rights and directed Canada to provide an effective remedy for Sharon McIvor, her descendants, and others who have suffered the same discrimination.

    It is important to note that Canada is bound by this decision. The ICCPR came into force for Canada on August 19, 1976 and Canada has agreed to be bound by the jurisdiction of the UNHRC to make decisions on matters coming before it. This means that Canada has chosen to be bound by the rights contained within this Covenant for the benefits of all those in Canada. In this case, the UNHRC found that Canada had violated Sharon’s human rights under articles 3 and 26, read in conjunction with article 27 of the ICCPR.

    Article 3 guarantees the equal right of men and women to enjoy the rights contained in the ICCPR. Article 26 provides that all people are equal under the law and specifically prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, sex, birth or other status. These two articles were considered in conjunction with article 27 which provides that ethnic minorities within States shall not be denied their right to enjoy their culture in community with other members of their group. The UNHRC found that Canada had violated Sharon’s rights under all three articles and directed Canada to do make “full reparation” to Sharon, her descendants and others in her position. Canada was directed to:

    (1)   Register all those like Sharon and her descendants, under section 6(1)(a) of the Indian Act;

    (2)   Take steps to clean up any residual discrimination within First Nation communities arising from sex discrimination in the Indian Act; and

    (3)   Take any additional steps necessary to avoid similar violations in the future.

    The federal government has been given a 180 days to inform the UNHRC about how it will implement this decision. The good news is that the federal government has the capacity to comply with the first part of the decision this month. The federal government already drafted amendments to the Indian Act’s registration provisions in Bill S-3 that would remove the remaining sex discrimination raised by Sharon McIvor’s case. The problem is that Parliament didn’t enact those provisions into force. While all the other amendments contained within Bill S-3 were brought into force in 2018, they purposely left our remedy for sex equality for “someday” – a hypothetical right that we can only hope is fulfilled someday. First Nations women deserve better than this.

    While the Indian Act’s registration provisions have a long, complicated history, and the various amendments made over time, including Bills C-31, C-3 and the most recent S-3 have created a complex mess of criteria almost impossible to understand; the core issue is simple. Indian women who married non-Indians and their descendants have lesser or no status compared to Indian men who married non-Indians and their descendants. Sex discrimination in federal legislation, like the Indian Act, is against Canadian law as well as international human rights laws to which Canada has agreed to be bound. There is simply no legal justification for continuing to deny the basic right of sex equality to First Nation women and children. To do so makes the federal government an outlaw – both in Canada and internationally.

    The question now is whether the self-professed “feminist” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his Liberal government will abide by the UNHRC decision or continue to violate the core human rights of First Nations women and children. Reconciliation with First Nations demands immediate implementation of this decision, but the Liberal (and Conservative) record is very poor when it comes to respecting the human rights of First Nations women. They have the power to do it – but it always has been, and always will be, a matter of political will.

    Sharon has sacrificed more than 33 years to this battle to protect the rights of First Nation women and our children. It is because of Sharon that I have a political voice as a First Nations woman. Implementing this decision will not only mean that my children will finally be able to be registered and included as members of my First Nation, but Sharon and I, and thousands of others like us, will finally be treated equally with our First Nation brothers.

    Canada cannot claim to stand as a champion of human rights in the global context while continuing to deny First Nations women and children basic human rights. Reconciliation requires shedding the hypocritical rhetoric and taking action to do what is morally right and legally required.

    The world is watching Canada. Here is our press conference calling on Canada to abide by UN decision and end sex discrimination: https://youtu.be/gy9evq7a6hg

    Link to the UNHRC decision.

    Link to CBC article about the case: https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/indian-act-sex-discrimination-un-committee-1.4982330

  • NAFTA 2.0 – Time to Get it Right or Kill It

    *Originally published in Lawyer’s Daily on October 10, 2017

    There is a long list of items that U.S. President Donald Trump has put on his “to kill” list, including Obamacare, Planned Parenthood, the Department of Education, immigration and most recently, NAFTA. Trump called the North American Free Trade Agreement the “worst trade deal ever made” in U.S. history and indicated he may have to kill the deal.

    Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexico’s President Enrique Pena Nieto, on the other hand, are scrambling to renegotiate with Trump in order to save NAFTA. But why the mad rush to feverishly save NAFTA? It’s not like it has widespread support among the people of those three countries and I am sure if the planet had a vote — it would be a resounding no.

    So what’s the big deal about NAFTA? NAFTA is a legal agreement that came into effect on Jan. 1, 1994, to eliminate most of the tariffs on trade between the three signatory countries with the intention of encouraging trade on a massive scale. However, it is important to note that Canada and the U.S. already had massive trading relations prior to NAFTA and would continue to trade on a large scale, even if Trump kills NAFTA.

    Although NAFTA is clearly a trade deal, the promise made to the citizens of all three countries was that it would improve the standard of living for all. While it is hard to analyze NAFTA’s impact on the Canadian economy in isolation from many other factors — by many accounts, NAFTA has not been the economic saviour it was originally touted to be when it was first signed.

    More recent studies have concluded that there have been minimal, if any, positive impact on welfare in the three countries. In fact, Canada’s welfare shows an actual decline of 0.06 per cent. Some experts have argued that NAFTA has created more economic instability than actual benefit as millions have lost their jobs, wages have stagnated generally and decreased in Mexico. Similarly, while Canada’s trade increased by 11 per cent during NAFTA, its terms of trade (relative price of imports to exports) decreased by 0.11 per cent. This doesn’t even take into account the true cost of environmental destruction or the localized impacts on Indigenous peoples in all three countries.

    Some have referred to NAFTA as the end result of negotiations between self-interested transnational corporate elite largely benefitting corporations — not people or the planet. Numerous civil society organizations in all three countries have rallied against NAFTA 2.0 unless there are substantive amendments — including many thousands protesting in the streets in Mexico. First Nations in Canada, tribal governments in the U.S., and Indigenous peoples in Mexico have been left in the dark and have no meaningful say in whether NAFTA goes ahead and if so, on what conditions. Here in Canada, the negotiations themselves are taking place in relative secrecy and there are no widespread consultations with Canadians, civil society organizations, experts and no legal consent by First Nations.

    The important question is whether we want to save NAFTA at all costs and what are those costs?

    We have a great deal to worry about after all. Remember former Canadian Prime Minister Harper’s secret Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations? Just like Trudeau’s process, there were no widespread consultations with First Nations for the TPP either. The draft TPP agreement was eventually leaked and revealed that there were no real protections for human rights, First Nation’s rights, the environment or women. There is a very real concern that Canada’s negotiators are relying on similar TPP wording for NAFTA — so as not to rock the trade negotiations.

    While we are all distracted with NAFTA, the TPP negotiations we thought were dead — continue under the radar. On Sept. 30, Canada announced a 30-day consultation period regarding its ongoing TPP discussions with other nations including Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Peru and Singapore and others (minus the U.S.).

    First Nations and Canadians alike have a great deal to worry about. While welfare has decreased for Canadians since NAFTA, socioeconomic conditions have decreased to crisis levels for First Nations. NAFTA has had other devastating impacts. Many Mexicans have lost their farms and were subjected to substandard working conditions. There has been significant environmental destruction in all three countries and current NAFTA rules undermine attempts to address climate change by states. Indigenous women and girls suffered increased violence at the hands of the extractive industry bolstered by NAFTA — think about the thousands of murdered and disappeared in Canada-U.S.-Mexico near mining projects or man-camps. To make matters worse, there are no concrete legal protections, enforcement mechanisms or redress for violations of Indigenous rights, human rights or the environment under NAFTA.

    If that were not bad enough, Investor-State Dispute Settlement — known as ISDS — leaves the decision-making for all disputes in the hands of a couple of trade lawyers. The relevant laws considered in their decision-making are rooted within NAFTA and laws relating to human rights, Indigenous rights and environmental protections are not factored in. Under NAFTA’s controversial ISDS provisions, Canada has earned the “most-sued country” title having paid out hundreds of millions of taxpayer money to large corporate investors who have sued Canada under ISDS. While the U.S. has yet to lose a single case under ISDS, Canada stands to potentially lose billions more — not including the millions in legal fees.

    The perceived benefits of NAFTA are far outweighed by the significant harms to people and the planet. If Trump kills the deal, the world would not end. Trade between the three countries would continue. We must keep in mind that this deal impacts the lands, waters, resources and safety of First Nations in Canada and legally, this deal cannot go ahead without their free, prior and informed consent. That is, assuming Trudeau meant what he said at the United Nations General Assembly last month when he said Canada accepts the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) without qualification. Article 19 is very clear that Canada must obtain the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous peoples before adopting any measure that may affect them.

    So, perhaps the solution lies with First Nations? NAFTA is dead without First Nation consent anyway — so, Trudeau ought to start the good faith consultation process before his negotiators make promises they can’t keep.

    Link to the article as originally published in Lawyer’s Daily on Oct.10, 2017:

    https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/4808/nafta-2-0-time-to-get-it-right-or-kill-it-pamela-palmater?category=columnists Please check out a related video on my Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIkzNTv6_X0&t=1s

  • United Nations Human Rights Committee Critiques Canada’s Human Rights Violations of Indigenous Peoples

    Today, the United Nations Human Rights Committee released its Concluding Observations on Canada’s sixth report in relation to Canada’s compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (advanced unedited version). While it commended recent legislation adopted by individual provinces in relation to human rights, there was no overall commendation for Canada. In fact, the majority of the report expressed numerous concerns about Canada’s failures in relation to the basic human rights of Indigenous peoples. The United Nations Human Rights Committee directed Canada to “widely disseminate” this report among judicial, legislative and administrative authorities, civil society, non-governmental organizations and the general public. It is not likely that Canada will do so, therefore, here is a summary of some of their concerns and key recommendations specific to Indigenous peoples: GENDER EQUALITY Concern: “persisting inequalities between women and men” including “high level of the pay gap” which is more pronounced for Indigenous women and the “underrepresentation of women in leadership positions in the public and private sectors”; Recommendations: (a) guarantee equal pay for equal work, with special focus on Indigenous women; (b) promote better representation of women in leadership; VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN Concern: “continued high prevalence of domestic violence in the State party, in particular violence against women and girls, that mostly affects indigenous and minority women” as well as insufficiency of shelters and failure of police to investigate and prosecute; Recommendations: (a) make efforts to “firmly combat” domestic violence against women in all forms, especially Indigenous women; (b) investigate all reported cases and follow through with prosecutions; (c) increase shelters and support services; MURDERED AND MISSING INDIGENOUS WOMEN AND GIRLS Concern: “indigenous women and girls are disproportionately affected by life-threatening forms of violence, homicides and disappearances” and Canada’s “failure to provide adequate and effective responses” and failure to provide information about their investigations, prosecutions and punishments of those responsible; Recommendations: (a) conduct a national inquiry on murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls in consultation with Indigenous women’s organizations and families; (b) review its legislation to prevent further murders and disappearances; (c) investigate & prosecute offenders & provide reparations to victims; (d) address the root causes of violence against Indigenous women and girls; EXCESSIVE FORCE DURING PROTESTS AND POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY Concern: “excessive use of force by law enforcement officers during mass arrests in the context of protests at federal and provincial levels, with particular reference to indigenous land-related protests” as well as concerns about “complaints not always promptly investigated and the lenient nature of sanctions imposed”; Recommendations: (a) ensure all allegations of ill-treatment and excessive use of force by police investigated; (b) need strong independent oversight bodies with adequate resources; (c) those responsible are prosecuted and punished with appropriate penalties; INDIGENOUS LANDS AND TITLES Concern: “potential extinguishment of indigenous land rights and titles” and the number of years of unresolved land disputes places financial burden on Indigenous peoples and “Indigenous peoples are not always consulted” on legislation that impacts our lands and rights; Recommendations: (a) seek free informed and prior consent for legislation and actions that impacts our lands and rights; (b) resolve land and resource disputes. INDIAN ACT Concern: “slow” pace at which Canada is removing gender discrimination in the Indian Act thereby preventing Indigenous women and their descendants from transmitting Indian status equally with men Recommendation: (a) remove all remaining discriminatory effects of Indian Act for Indigenous women and children so they enjoy rights of Indian status on equal footing with men; OVERREPRESENTATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN JUSTICE SYSTEM Concern: “disproportionately high rate of incarceration of indigenous people, including women, in federal and provincial prisons across Canada” Recommendation: (a) prevent excessive use of incarceration of Indigenous peoples; (b) wherever possible use alternatives to detention (including serving sentences in communities); SITUATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES Concern: “risk of disappearances of indigenous languages”, “lack of access to basic needs”, lack of funding for child welfare, and not all students of residential schools have been given redress; Recommendations: (a) implement and reinforce programs to provide basic needs; (b) programs to preserve Indigenous languages; and (c) provide child and family services on reserve with sufficient funding; (d) implement TRC recommendations; Canada should be ashamed that it has such a poor record on protecting the basic human rights of Indigenous peoples – especially in relation to Indigenous women and children. It is a disgrace that Canada sits with other countries, like Mexico, for the continued murders and disappearances of Indigenous women and girls. Even after decades of litigation, Canada has still has not addressed Indian Act gender discrimination which excludes thousands of children of Indigenous women. Canada has no defense for its discriminatory under-funding of First Nations children in care which causes hardship for our most vulnerable. The extreme poverty, over-representation of our people in prison, dying languages, and Canada’s continued failure to respect our Indigenous rights and title have all been noticed by the United Nations as violations of our basic human rights. It is long past the time for Canada to address these long-standing human rights violations of Indigenous peoples – this is not the Canada anyone envisioned – including our mutual ancestors who signed peace and friendship treaties.

  • My Brief for the Human Rights Committee’s Concluding Observations of Canada: Clarifications Related to Canada’s Testimony

    My Brief for the Human Rights Committee’s Concluding Observations of Canada: Clarifications Related to Canada’s Testimony

    Corporate Social Responsibility

    In the review, Canada stated that international treaties ratified by Canada are not binding law in Canada. Canada also stated that Canadian companies doing business abroad are expected to demonstrate Canadian values and follow applicable human rights laws. However, if the State does not consider ICCPR applicable law in Canada, then its corporate entities would have no reason to respect the human rights contained therein.  I would thus recommend that the Committee both clarify the UN’s position in this regard and recommend to Canada to specifically implement the ICCPR into domestic law.

    Gender Equality

    In the review Canada stated that it is committed to gender equality and claimed that women make 91% of what men make. In fact, the national wage gap in Canada is 18%, much higher than other countries. In some provinces like Ontario, that gap can reach 31%. The gap is significantly higher for Indigenous peoples at 30% compared to average Canadian, and in some areas of Canada, the gap is as high as 88%. 

    I would recommend that the Committee recommend that Canada undertake specific measures and develop specific targets and measures to address sex discrimination generally and the wage gap specifically.

    The Federal Court of Appeal in McIvor case confirmed gender discrimination, but Canada enacted Bill C-3 without consulting with First Nations, and which specifically denied any compensation for Indigenous women impacted. Indigenous women and descendants are the only group in Canada that has ever been denied compensation for a Charter right violation. 

    The Committee should also recommend that Canada negotiate a compensation package for all the Indigenous women and their descendants reinstated by Bill C-3 for loss of services (education, housing, health benefits, training). 

    Violence against Indigenous Women

    Canada stated that one measure to combat violence against Indigenous women are the 40 shelters on reserve. It should be noted that there are 633 reserves in Canada, which means there are shelters in less than 6% of on-reserve communities. Canada also portrayed the crisis of murdered and missing Indigenous women as one of crime, when domestic and UN reports have confirmed the root causes are in Canada’s discriminatory laws and policies, the culture of violence against Indigenous women, and the chronic and discriminatory underfunding of essential human services, like food, water, housing, education and health. 

    I would recommend that the Committee support the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, IACHR and CEDAW to develop a national action plan to address the socio-economic conditions which result in the disproportionate vulnerability to violence in partnership with Indigenous communities and Indigenous women’s organizations and commit to a national inquiry.

    Indigenous Children in Care

    Canada submitted that it does not know what factors are at play to explain the gross over-representation of Indigenous children in state care. 50% of all children in care in Canada are Indigenous, despite being only 4% of the population and represent 90% of children in care in provinces like Manitoba. Canada’s own studies have shown that the root causes are poverty, the chronic underfunding of child and family services for First Nations on reserve, inter-generational trauma from residential schools and state discrimination. 

    I would recommend that the Committee recommend that Canada fund Indigenous Child and Family Services at levels no less than provincial levels, with extra funding to address the backlog and volume of cases and for additional Indigenous staff, training, and infrastructure for CFS services on reserve with a focus of keeping children in their families, communities and cultures.

    Indian Act Sex Discrimination

    Canada stated in its response to the List of Issues at para.125 that: “the Indian registration provisions in the current Indian Act do not discriminate against women”. When questioned by Committee about unresolved sex discrimination in the Act, it responded that Bill C-3 was “a step forward” and “no one sees it as anywhere near being concluded”, but that Canada prefers an “incremental approach”. This is not a good faith application of either domestic or international law obligations in relation to gender equality. Practically, this means Canada prefers to defend lengthy and costly law suits which take upwards of 25 years to reach the Supreme Court of Canada. There is no justifiable reason for Indigenous women and their descendants to wait 139 years for the Act to be slowly amended to eliminate gender discrimination. 

    Indigenous women and their descendants are already impoverished and without Indian status, miss out on health benefits, post-secondary education, and other social programs critical to their health, safety, and well-being; which we already know makes them vulnerable to violence. Canada also stated that they have a “Special Rapporteur” that is currently “consulting” with First Nations on how to clean up the Indian Act discrimination. This is simply not true – and if it has done so, they have not informed anyone. 

    I would recommend that the Committee recommend to Canada that it amend the Indian Act to eliminate all sex discrimination in the Indian Act’s registration provisions and it could start by immediately by amending the registration provisions as follows:

    (a)    remove the 1951 cut-off and ensure that all direct descendants on the female Aboriginal line, born prior to April 17, 1985, are accorded the same 6(1) status as the descendants on the male line;

    (b)   ensure that no one born prior to April 17, 1985 who is entitled to status is consigned to s. 6(2) status;

    (c)    ensure that entitlement to 6(1) status is extended to the female child of the status man and non-status woman who were unmarried; and

    (d) all administrative barriers are removed so that unmarried status Indian women are able to transmit their Indian status to their children, even if the father is unstated.

    Police Misconduct

    In responding to various concerns raised in Committee related to sex discrimination, violence against Indigenous women, and police misconduct, Canada failed to mention the major class action suit filed against the RCMP by female staff and officers for sex discrimination. It failed to mention the Human Rights Watch report which documented instances of RCMP sexually and physically assaulted Indigenous girls. It also did not mention the Donald Marshall Inquiry, Manitoba Justice Inquiry or Ipperwash Inquiry which all found that racism against Indigenous peoples in Canada’s police forces is a major problem that has yet to be addressed. 

    I would recommend that the Committee recommend that Canada develop a more robust and transparent oversight mechanism for all police forces that is completely independent from both political and police interference which a specific focus on and Indigenous ombudsperson for Indigenous peoples.

    UNDRIP

    In the review, Canada did not orally respond to the question in committee about whether Canada has changed domestic law and policy to align with its endorsement of UNDRIP. In Canada’s Statement of Support it states: (1) it is an aspirational document (2) it’s not legally binding in Canada (3) it does not reflect customary international law (4) it does not change Canadian law. When former Minister of Indian Affairs John Duncan was questioned on the impact of UNDRIP, he responded that Canada has its “own agenda” and as a result does not “anticipate any significant change”. Canada’s endorsement of UNDRIP is not done in good faith or with intention to have any practical effect. 

    I would thus recommend that the Committee recommend to Canada that Canada implement the UNDRIP in good faith.

    Indigenous Languages

    In the review, Canada stated that the reason for Indigenous language loss included migration and the media. The real cause of language loss stems from Canada’s assimilatory laws and policies, like residential schools, which tortured, abused and shamed children for speaking their languages. Indigenous languages were literally beaten out of many generations of Indigenous children. Canada admitted this in its residential school apology: “The government now recognizes that the consequences of the Indian Residential Schools policy were profoundly negative and that this policy has had a lasting and damaging impact on Aboriginal culture, heritage and language.”

    Immediately after this apology, Canada cut funding to Indigenous languages further exacerbating the problem. Canada’s legal and economic promotion and support of English and French has not been extended to the same degree for Indigenous languages and they have no data to show that their minimal efforts in this regard have increased language use. In fact, Canada’s $5 million/year language budget amounts to less than $5 per Indigenous person in Canada annually. It is simply impossible to save languages at this token level. 

    I would recommend that the Committee supports the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Report and recommend that Canada provide immediate and significant funding to First Nations on par with funding that supports English and French languages, to ensure immersion and adult programs in every First Nation in Canada.

    Submitted by Dr. Pamela D. Palmater, Mi’kmaw Nation, sponsored by Franciscans International, on July 9, 2015 in Geneva, Switzerland.

     Note:

                                  (Some of the NGOs in Geneva Switzerland)

    After hearing a great deal of misinformation and non-answers from Canada during the United Nations Human Rights Committee’s review of Canada’s obligations under ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights); some of the NGO’s (non-governmental organizations) that attended asked if we could submit clarifications to the committee before they conclude their review. We were given permission to do so, and some of us submitted briefs which were to be no longer than one page. My original submission contains footnotes and links to sources not provided here.

    Some of the other NGO’s (like FAFIA and Amnesty International), made clarifications and recommendations related to various issues, some of which included:

    – addressing homelessness as part of the right to life;

    – insufficient review and oversight of security and law enforcement under Bill C-51; 

    – the need to support unanimous recommendations by all international human rights bodies recommending a national inquiry and action plan on murdered and missing Indigenous women; 

    – need to Canada to respect laws related to free, informed and prior consent of Indigenous peoples for land use, including extractive industries;

    –  removal of sex discrimination from the Indian Act registration provisions; and 

    – clarifications around the skewed RCMP statistics which try to paint a discriminatory picture of Indigenous peoples.

    Canada was given 48 hours to submit written material to supplement their oral testimony. The Committee’s conclusions are due July 23, 2015.