Warrior Life Studios

Pam Palmater

Tag: Indian Affairs

  • Genocide or Mass Murder – Canadian and Church Officials Must be Held to Account

    What happened in residential schools was not “cultural genocide”. It wasn’t “language genocide”. And it wasn’t “almost genocide”. What happened in residential schools was genocide. Canadian officials targeted Indians for assimilation and elimination purely for economic and political reasons. Scalping bounties on certain Indigenous Nations are indicative of such a lethal mentality.

    Canada wasn’t killing Indians because of our cultures; it was killing Indians to get rid of the “Indian problem” as Indian Affairs officials kept referring to it. Commentators often refer to Duncan Campbell Scott’s quote regarding Indian policy in Canada as proof that the intention was assimilation and not elimination.

    Scott was the deputy superintendent general for the Department of Indian Affairs from 1913 to 1932, who explained in 1920:

     “I want to get rid of the Indian problem. […] Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question and no Indian Department”.

    However, there is more to the story than this. In 1907, Dr. Peter Bryce, the Chief Medical Officer for the federal government, wrote a report on the conditions in residential schools that detailed the astounding number of deaths of Indian children in those schools.(1)

    The government’s own lawyer also warned Canadian officials in 1907:

    “Doing nothing to obviate the preventable causes of death, brings the Department within unpleasant nearness to the charge of manslaughter.”(2)

    Yet, there was no shock and alarm at the time nor did anyone from Indian Affairs come up with an emergency action plan to protect Indigenous children whom Scott referred to as “inmates”.

    Surprisingly, the deaths of Indigenous children appeared to be in line with the objective of the policy.

    In 1910, Scott explained in a letter he wrote to one of his Indian Agents:

    “Indian children… die at a much higher rate [in residential schools] than in their villages. But this alone does not justify a change in the policy of this Department, which is geared towards a final solution of our Indian problem”.

    Residential schools were never a well-intended policy “gone wrong” as claimed by former Minister of Indian Affairs, John Duncan. They were death camps for nearly half of all the “inmates” who entered some of those schools. The tiny hand-cuffs and the electric chairs speak of horrors completely unrelated to “education”.

    These children didn’t die from smallpox or some other series of unfortunate and unpreventable events in those schools. Many of these children were starved, tortured, beaten, raped, and murdered. Nutritional tests and medical experimentations were done on these children only to be denied to benefit of the very medicines created at the expense of their suffering. This sounds eerily familiar to horrors inflicted on other populations around the world.

    Survivor stories of frequent rapes, forced abortions, and unmarked graves stand in stark contradiction to any notion of a benign education policy – especially once government, church and law enforcement officials became aware of what was happening. Why else did these schools have graveyards instead of playgrounds?

    It is too easy for politicians to claim “cultural genocide” now, when they are well aware that cultural genocide was specifically left out of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.(3)

    Much of the debate has focused on whether or not Canada “intended” to kill Indians. According to international legal experts, leaders can be held accountable if they knew or should have known about the actions and failed to prevent them. Direct evidence of intent is not necessary but can be inferred from circumstantial evidence. The few excerpts above prove that Canadian officials knew not only of the poor conditions in residential schools, but the large number of deaths that were occurring, and that they could be held accountable for “manslaughter”.

    Genocide, by the UN definition, is said to include:

    –        “Killing members of the group;

    –        Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

    –        Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

    –        Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and

    –        Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”(4)

    Many have argued that the totality of Canada’s actions towards Indigenous peoples amounted to genocide. In other words, Canadian officials have been guilty of some or all of the above genocidal acts.

    What is particularly striking is the genocidal act of deliberately creating the conditions of life meant to bring about the destruction of the group in whole or in part. The following acts have been found to be genocidal:

    –        “subjecting the group to a subsistence diet;

    –        systematic expulsion from homes;

    –        denial of right to medical services;

    –        creation of circumstances that would lead to a slow death, such as lack of proper housing, clothing and hygiene or excessive work or physical exertion; and

    –        rape.”(5)

    Think of the historic and ongoing conditions of many First Nations who were prohibited from leaving the reserve by law and given only minimal rations; or the Inuit and First Nations who were forcibly relocated from their homelands. There is also a direct link between Canada’s purposeful chronic underfunding of essential human services for First Nations (housing, water, sanitation) and their pre-mature deaths. In residential schools, children were starved, denied medical care, and many suffered slow deaths.(6)

    Genocide is the material destruction of a group – even if not all members of the group are destroyed. There is no set number of people that must be killed for the crime of genocide to occur. It does not need to mimic the worst holocaust to ne genocide. It must be a substantial part of the group. There is also no need for a government plan or policy to exist in order to find genocide. Even without a finding of genocide, the officials could still be charged with crimes against humanity or related crimes.(7)

    Given the significant death tolls, it does not matter whether the courts have accepted the claim of genocide, whether lawyers agree with the claim, or whether communications specialists think it might be too harsh a term to present to the Canadian public. What happened in residential schools were criminal acts back then, just as they are now. All of the people who had the power to stop these deaths (RCMP, Indian Affairs and the churches), not only knew about the deaths –  but refused to act. At the very least, that is criminal negligence causing death.(8)

    We will never get to reconciliation unless we know the truth – all of it. So far, we have only scratched the surface.

    Residential schools can’t be looked at in isolation. Indian policy included the forced sterilizations of Indigenous women and little girls. Forced sterilizations were never about our cultures – it was about eliminating our populations.(9)

    We are not over-represented in prisons, in child and family services and as murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls because of our cultures.

    We are targeted because we are Indians. Indigenous Nations stand in the way of unfettered land and water use, resource extraction and industrial development – i.e. complete environmental destruction in the name of corporate profit.

    Justice Murray Sinclair and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) team have done the impossible – they succeeded in ensuring the voices of survivors were heard, that the atrocities committed in residential schools were documented, and that the truth be told. So far we have only seen the Executive Summary – the final report, which will be many thousands of pages long, will no doubt shed light on even more disturbing details.(10)

    In addition to the incredible emotional and psychological toll this must have taken on Justice Sinclair and his team, they stood strong in the face of the most aggressive anti-First Nation government Canada has been in years. They, together with the survivors, are true heroes.

    But we can’t expect the TRC to carry this burden alone. Nor is this story complete.

    The TRC went as far as it could to address the issue of genocide in the face of various legal considerations and consistent political denial that these schools were anything other than well-intended educational institutes.

    It’s on the rest of us to stand up for the truth and ensure Canadians know everything that happened in the schools covered in this report and the ones not yet exposed.

    Canada tried in various ways to eliminate our cultures – through residential schools and outlawing our ceremonies and practices in the Indian Act. This is all true.

    But Canada also created the conditions which led to our deaths by the thousands inside and outside residential schools. This is also true and this is genocide.

    Once we can put the truth in the table, then we can talk about reconciliation. We need to act on the TRC recommendations related to truth-seeking: a national inquiry on murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls, an investigation into the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in prison, and immediate action and reporting on the over-representation of Indigenous children in foster care.

    The Indian day school class action has just been accepted by the courts and that will likely also reveal similar abuses suffered by Indian children in even more schools.(11)

    We must focus on getting all the facts so we can finally see justice for Indigenous peoples and true reconciliation. A determination that Canada did not commit genocide does not put an end to the story. It’s only just the beginning and it’s not going to be as easy as saying sorry. Canadian and Church officials who committed such horrific crimes upon Indigenous peoples need to be brought to justice.

    The mass murder or manslaughter of our people requires criminal prosecution – just like it would anywhere else in the world. Canada doesn’t receive a “Get out of Jail free” card simply because it hid its atrocities so well. Real reconciliation requires justice.

    Selected Sources: (1) Dr. Peter Bryce, “A Story of a National Crime: An Appeal for Justice to the Indians of Canada” https://ia802705.us.archive.org/20/items/storyofnationalc00brycuoft/storyofnationalc00brycuoft_bw.pdf (2) CBC News, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission: By the Numbers” http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/truth-and-reconciliation-commission-by-the-numbers-1.3096185 (3) The National Post,  “Canada was ready to abandon 1948 accord if UN didn’t remove ‘cultural genocide’ ban, records reveal” http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canada-threatened-to-abandon-1948-accord-if-un-didnt-remove-cultural-genocide-ban-records-reveal (4) UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%2078/volume-78-I-1021-English.pdf

    (5) Module 6: Genocide (International Criminal Law Services, European Union) pg. 26 International Criminal Law & Practice Training Materials Genocide

    (6) P. Palmater, Stretched Beyond Human Limits: Death by Poverty in First Nations

    http://crsp.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/crsp/article/view/35220/32057

    (7) Module 6: Genocide (see above)

    (8) P. Palmater, Genocide, Indian Policy and Legislated Elimination of Indians in Canada

    http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/aps/article/view/22225

    (9) Karen Stote, An Act of Genocide: Colonialism and the Sterilization of Aboriginal Women

    https://fernwoodpublishing.ca/book/an-act-of-genocide

    (10) Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada

    http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/Exec_Summary_2015_05_31_web_o.pdf

    (11) CTV News, Federal appeal court gives OK on hearing First Nations Day-School Suit

    http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/federal-appeal-court-gives-ok-on-hearing-first-nations-day-school-suit-1.1713809

    PLEASE SEE: Related videos on my Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfFeKGf51lo&t=202s

  • Harper’s Indigenous Manifesto: Erasing Indigenous Peoples from Canada

    Early Indian policy was designed to accomplish two main policy objectives: (1) acquire Indigenous lands and resources, and (2) reduce financial responsibility to Indigenous peoples. The primary way in which these two objectives were to be achieved was through the physical, legal, social and spiritual elimination of Indigenous peoples. I say “elimination” because that is the word which best describes government intentions. Most people today use the term “assimilation” but to my mind, this word is much too soft to describe the design and impact of government policies on Indigenous peoples in Canada. To some readers, the term “elimination” may seem a little harsh, somewhat of an exaggeration, or perhaps rhetoric blown out of proportion which forgets the good intentions governments, churches and traders had for Indigenous peoples. I beg to differ – not because I fall into any externally imposed category of left-wing, liberal, radical or “nutbar”. I beg to differ because the facts – the brutal, uncomfortable facts tell us a much different story. My biggest concern is not that the colonization project devastated Indigenous peoples, because the historical record clearly shows it did; it is that the colonization and devastation of Indigenous peoples continues, albeit couched in softer terminology. Today, the few history books that have been amended to include mention of Indigenous peoples speak of the tragic loss of Indigenous cultures over time. They speak of this “loss” as a romantic part of our history where the strong, noble Indian chief on his horse looks across the horizon and realizes that the ways of his people are fading away with the coming of European trains, traders and technologies. This sort of representation may even invoke feelings of melancholy in Canadians who long for the simplicity of the old days. But it belies the truth about Canada and its direct and intentional “obliteration” of Indigenous peoples, cultures and territories. If the term “elimination” does not make some readers uncomfortable, surely the term “obliteration” will. The purposeful destruction of a people implies the kind of ill-intent, even malice upon which a country like Canada could surely never have been built? Terms like those imply that perhaps what happened to Indigenous peoples was not simply “progress”, “civilization” or a “good policy gone wrong” – no, this falls in the realm of a word that usually upsets the majority of readers: genocide. Many people do not understand the legal definition of genocide, nor are they aware of how genocide is considered internationally. Many are of the misunderstanding that genocide is the mass murder of millions of people all in one shot – something akin to the holocaust. In fact, genocide is defined in the United Nations Convention on Genocide as follows: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

    That is the definition. In Canada and the United States, settler governments have committed genocide against Indigenous peoples, not under just one category, but under every single category noted above. We all know it, but the reality stands in such stark contrast to the mythology created by government about what Canada stands for, that many people resort to denial. Indigenous peoples who have raised the subject have been referred to as “nutbars”, “whackos”, “conspiracy theorists”, “radicals” and “terrorists”. The issue of genocide is radical – not because it is not true, but because it stands so far outside the realm of humanity and human rights that the tendency is to save the term for only the most obvious, horrific, well-known instances of genocide committed in places far away from Canada. http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/pamela-palmater/2011/11/unbelievable-undeniable-genocide-canada The term genocide is usually saved for instances where the victims are considered to be humans – and Indigenous peoples have long been characterized as non-humans for centuries. Aside from the historical depictions of Indigenous peoples as “savages”, “heathens” or “pagans”, they have also been treated by governments as “dangerous and sub-human”. The myth of Indigenous peoples being sub-human allowed governments to steal Indigenous lands under the legal fiction of “terra nullius” (lands belonging to no one). They knew better of course, but it allowed them to justify not only the theft of lands from Indigenous peoples, but the brutal acts of genocide which were committed upon them. The fact that early governments sent small-pox infested blankets to Indigenous communities knowing it would nearly wipe them all out, is a historical fact. These were not the actions of a few bad apples, or something that happened in the stone age. This has been acknowledged as modern “biological warfare” by publications in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The scalping laws in Nova Scotia were deliberate acts of murder which decimated the Mi’kmaw Nation population by almost 80%. The forced surgical sterilization of Indigenous women against their will, and often without their knowledge or consent, destroyed Indigenous peoples in a very physical way. The government and church-run residential schools knowingly created conditions that led to the mass deaths of the Indigenous children who attended – upwards of 40% never made it out alive. Incredibly, not only did government officials know that Indigenous children were dying and even “acknowledged” the high rates of deaths and their causes, but this was part of the overall objective: “But this alone does not justify a change in the policy of this Department, which is geared towards the final solution of our Indian problem.” (SI Indian Affairs, Duncan Campbell Scott) Why do I bring all this uncomfortableness up in my blog? Why am I asking readers to face the brutal reality that is Canada? It is because genocidal acts against Indigenous peoples continue to this day, hidden in government policies which purport to be in the best interests of Indigenous peoples. It is because every government (Libs and Cons) has had a hand in continuing the situation, but mostly because this Harper government has ramped up efforts to eliminate Indigenous peoples. In my opinion, the Harper Indigenous Manifesto is about erasing Indigenous peoples from Canada socially, culturally, legally and physically. What used to be forced sterilizations to prevent child births and control Indigenous populations is now pre-mature deaths from the extreme poverty directly linked to chronic, purposeful under-funding, over-prescription of addictive drugs, and lack of housing, water and sanitation. What used to be residential schools became the 60’s scoop and is now child and family services removing our children from our communities at alarming rates. What used to be European/western education forced on our children through residential schools, is now the provincial school systems, which for the most part, teach the same western ideologies, histories, sciences and politics to our children and specifically exclude our traditional Indigenous knowledges, languages and cultures. What used to be scalping laws, are now starlight tours, murdered and missing Indigenous women by the hundreds, and quelling land claims with brute military and police force. What used to be laws against Indigenous peoples leaving their reserves are now laws which take away rights when one leaves the reserve (taxes, governance, jurisdiction, trade, identity). What used to be laws against Indigenous peoples gathering in one place is now CSIS, RCMP, DND and INAC putting us on terrorist watch lists, monitoring our movements, and over-incarcerating our men, women and youth at increasing rates. What used to be laws against Indigenous peoples hiring lawyers to advocate on their behalf, are now devasting funding cuts to local, regional and provincial First Nation political organizations. All coming at a time when Harper wants chaos, confusion, and lack of political capacity to ensure there is little resistance to his comprehensive Indian Act-based legislative agenda. He hopes to strike fear and confusion in chiefs so that they don’t know whether to stay quiet and hope it doesn’t get worse, or take action. Either way, funding cuts will be imposed on local First Nations as well. This is not about whether regional political organizations are doing a good job or not – this is about Harper fulfilling the original intentions of Indian policy (1) accessing Indigenous lands and resources and (2) reducing financial obligations to Indigenous peoples. He just happens to see striking at political organizations as the best way to isolate individual First Nations, already overwhelmed with issues, so they are easier to bully into submission. The Assembly of First Nations (AFN) either does not have the capacity or inclination to take these issues on. Regardless of the reasons, it is clear that local community members are going to be looking to their local First Nation governments to take action. In the same vein, First Nation leaders will be looking for assistance from their treaty, regional and provincial organizations. The days of waiting for the AFN to do something are over. If these funding cuts are ok, so will be the ones that come to individual First Nations, then will come the eventual constitutional changes, the accelerated extinguishment of Aboriginal and treaty rights, and the division and sale of the rest of our lands. If Canadians think that this does not concern them – they should think again. As your “Canada” slowly becomes a dictatorship led by a rogue Prime Minister who is obsessed with power, Canadian laws, rules, and regulations are breached with impunity. Everything from elections, ethics, budgets, and legislation are manipulated without regard for the rule of law. The damage done by these renegade Conservatives is already so severe that analysts feel it will take years to undo the harm. In standing beside Indigenous peoples to oppose these destructive policies, Canadians would be living up to the spirit and intent of the treaties and, in so doing, protecting their own futures. Economic reports have already shown that the costs of maintaining Indigenous peoples in poverty is higher than the solutions. Those same studies show that the costs of delaying the resolution of land claims and treaty implemention for example, are higher than if those claims were resolved equitably. Even the most basic math shows that it costs more to keep an Indigenous person in a federal prison for one year ($100,000) than it does to pay for a 4-year university degree ($60,000). If you think for a minute that once Harper is done erasing Indigenous peoples, that he won’t come after women, children, the impoverished, the remaining pristine environmental areas, water basins and sanctuaries all in the name of wealth and power, think again. There is no room for justice, diversity or freedom in a dictator’s view of the world. We are all compelled to act. Our reasons do not have to be the same. I can be a Mi’kmaw citizen and someone else can be a Canadian citizen, but still have a mutual interest in protecting the environment. Whether someone votes in federal and provincial elections, or like me, does not vote in elections – we all still share the desire to protect our waterways. One can be Maliseet and someone else French, but still feel it important protect our cultures for future generations. I have no intention of letting Harper erase me, my family, my home community or Mi’kmaw Nation. Let’s put our heads together about a plan of action. Extra sources: http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/crsp/article/viewFile/35220/32057 http://www.oba.org/en/pdf/sec_news_sept11_c3_palm.pdf http://lawandstyle.ca/opinion_first_nations_fiasco/ http://fusemagazine.org/2012/07/35-3_palmate

  • When Advocating for First Nations is Considered a National Security Risk

    When the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network (APTN) reported that Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) dedicated countless INAC staff and thousands of dollars to spying on Cindy Blackstock – I think most of us in Turtle Island gave our heads a shake. While it has been known for sometime that Canada spies on our our Indigenous leaders and community members who defend our lands, I don’t think most of us were aware that any First Nation advocate was a target. This is what shocked me the most – that Canada’s “national security” laws are so broad as to make someone like Cindy Blackstock an enemy of the state. http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2011/11/14/federal-aboriginal-affairs-department-spying-on-advocate-for-first-nations-children/ If someone were to ask me who was the LEAST likely to be spied on by Canada, I would have said Cindy Blackstock because for anyone who knows Cindy or her work, they know she is a peaceful, law-abiding citizen with a big heart. Her only alleged “subversive” or “hostile” act against Canada is that peacefully advocates on behalf of the most vulnerable in our society: First Nations children. Cindy does not do her advocacy by riding in on combat helicopters or tanks – but instead runs the First Nation Child and Family Caring Society, donates her free time to spreading information and speak publicly about the realities faced by First Nations children, and is now running the HAVE A HEART campaign to raise money for First Nations children. http://www.fncfcs.com/have-a-heart (I know I include alot of links in my blogs, but please click on the above link and read about the HAVE A HEART campaign and do what you can to support her efforts.) The level to which Cindy was spied on by INAC is also quite surprising. For a department whose mandate it is to improve the lives of First Nations peoples, but claims to have no money for housing, water and basic necessities for First Nations – they sure spent a great deal of time attending Cindy’s events, spying on her personal Facebook page (not her public one), and reporting to both INAC and Justice Canada about her activities. They even violated her most private information by accessing her registration records and that of her family. Incredibly, INAC has been doing this for some time, so the costs must be astronomical. So, what was INAC’s response to all of this? Minister Duncan said there would be a probe into whether or not government officials broke privacy rules. http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2011/11/17/aboriginal-affairs-minister-launches-probe-into-blackstock-spying-affair/ However, it is important to note that the “probe” will be headed by Duncan’s Deputy Minister. Once the public knew that the DM was one of the many INAC employees who were copied on the surveillance reports on Cindy, we knew any “probe” would be a complete sham. For a government that complains about lack of transparency and accountability by First Nations – here INAC is having one of their spies investigate whether they were improperly spying – can anyone guess what the outcome will be? This whole situation made me wonder about my own situation and whether my work qualifies me as “hostile” or “subversive”. My advocacy activities have always been peaceful and mostly consist of volunteer activities like sharing information through social media, speaking engagements, working with individuals and community members on a wide range of Indigenous legal, cultural, social and political issues, training sessions, publications, appearing before the House and Senate on legislation impacting our people and organizing pow wows. I still wondered whether this would garner the attention of the multi-layered, well-funded, spy industry within Canada. So, I made an Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) request to CSIS, INAC, RCMP and DND for any and all records, reports, security assessments, surveillance reports, etc that  they might have in relation to me and my work. To date, only CSIS has responded. In the CSIS letter of Dec.8, 2011, they refer to three different types of information: (1) Security Assessments/Advice; (2) CSIS Service Records; and (3) CSIS Investigational records. On the first set of information they provided me with some records of assessments done when I worked at INAC and Justice Canada, but refused to disclose other material, stating: “Portions of the material have been exempted from disclosure by virtue of section 15(1) (as it relates to the efforts of Canada towards detecting, preventing or suppressing subversive or hostile activities) of the Act.” For the second part, they confirmed they have no service records in relation to me (no surprise there) and for the third type of information they stated that they would “neither confirm nor deny that the records you requested exist.” However they did say that even if such records do exist, they would not release them to me anyway as part of their efforts in “detecting, preventing or suppressing subversive or hostile activities”. So, the moral of the story is that they have at least one type of file on me, and that they would not release the whole file so as to protect Canada from my alleged “subversive or hostile” activities. This to me is like being judged without knowing what I am accused of, and then being sentenced to ongoing spying on undisclosed activities for an undetermined amount of time so as to reduce the security risk to Canada in relation to my peaceful Indigenous advocacy activities. http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2012/01/03/indigenous-prof-puzzled-by-csis-answer-to-information-request/ If Canada’s national security laws permit such broad surveillance of our activities – then my question is what First Nation activities are NOT considered a potential threat to Canada? I would like to know how much money across all federal departments are allocated to spying on First Nations people? I would also like to compare that to the costs to provide housing, water and basic necessities of life to First Nations in need. I am guessing that I would not be entitled to this information either. In my previous blogs, I wrote about INAC issuing contracts to people to spy on First Nation elections and Facebook users. More Than Empty Promises https://pampalmater.com/2011/10/more-than-empty-promises-canadas.html Secret Agent Harper https://pampalmater.com/2011/06/secret-agent-harper-conservative-spy.html From Savages to Terrorists https://pampalmater.com/2011_05_01_archive.html Then, The First Nations Strategic Bulletin (FNSB) which came out in December 2011 explained how after the Conservatives came to power, the RCMP created the Aboriginal Joint Intelligence Group (JIG)partnering with the ENERGY and PRIVATE SECTOR to spy on First Nations. First Nations like Six Nations, Tyendinaga and others were all targeted. The JIG was run by RCMP Criminal Intelligence Branch and the RCMP National Security Criminal Investigations (NSCI) which deal with: “threats to national security and criminal extremism or terrorism”. Most shockingly was that FNSB also reported that the RCMP shared their surveillance reports with private businesses and that private businesses shared information with the RCMP about First Nations. The irony of the situation is so outrageous. It was Canada and its Indian agents that were hostile and subversive to our peoples – not the other way around. It is we who have pre-mature deaths, worse health, less education, less employment and less access to land and resources. It is we who continue to suffer the inter-generational effects of their colonial laws and policies which STILL exist today. Can you get any more hostile that the over-apprehension of our children from our communities at 3 times the rate of residential schools? Or that some of federal prisons have 100% Indigenous inmates or that the Indian Act still provides for our legislative extinction dates? Yet, we are supposed to be appeased when representatives of Canada speak about moving forward, looking ahead,  and reconciliation. How can First Nations be expected to come to the table with any hope of making real progress when their treaty “partner” comes to the table alleging good faith but with no less than 4 federal departments spying on our people and treating us like we are terrorists on our own lands? But will any of these important issues make it to the agenda for the First Nations-Crown Summit in January? Of course not. In case you haven’t noticed, very little of the core issues are on the table for discussion and resolution. Instead the agenda consists of program areas like economic development, education and accountability – important issues, but all ones which could easily be addressed by directors and a commitment to equitable funding. Issues like self-determination, First Nation jurisdiction, equitable funding, fair share of the land and resources, recognition of our treaties and Indigenous rights are all OFF the agenda. So, I will wait to see what information about my files I get from the RCMP, DND and INAC, and will also wait and see if NC Atleo addresses any of these fundamental relationship issues with Canada. But in the meantime, my bet is on our grass roots people and the youth in turning this situation around and taking back control over our own lives.

  • Authoring Our Own Demise? NAOs Must Stop Propping up Conservatives

    I keep wondering, why is it that some of the national Aboriginal organizations (NAO’s) continue to look the other way when the Conservatives show their true colours? There is a saying that goes: when someone tells you who they really are, you should listen. So, if a guy tells you on a date he doesn’t want to settle down, you should not be surprised if after dating him for several months that he does not want to get married. Why then do our leaders pose for photo-ops shaking hands and smiling with the government that wants our assimilation? In Canada, the Crown has not only shown its true policy objectives through its legal and political actions, but it has made them very explicit in speeches, cabinet papers and written documents. Canada’s underlying objective in Indian policy is to “rid Canada of the Indian problem” and to free up land for settlement and development. Even the joint action plan between Canada and the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) focuses on freeing up land to “benefit Canadians”. If anyone thinks that federal Indian policy has changed – one need only look at the second generation cut-off in the Indian Act’s registration provisions to realize time is ticking. To date, ndian law and policy has been based on the fact that Canada still sees the “Indian problem” as temporary and that, despite apologies to the contrary, it views First Nations as inferior and incapable of handling their own affairs. This is why Canada controls access to our own lands & resources, why it still has the Indian Act and why they control nation-building tools like education. The age-old solution to the Indian problem has always been assimilation – by whatever means. Historically that meant scalping laws, small pox-infected blankets, starvation, preventing hunting and fishing or leaving reserves, outlawing culture, residential schools, and today it means legislated extinction in the Indian Act registration provisions, trying to change reserve lands to fee simple to be sold to non-Indians and imprisoning our men and women at alarming rates. We often criticize PM Harper for visiting countries that violate human rights or for shaking the hands of war criminals. Yet, how many times in the last 5-10 years have we seen our national “Aboriginal” leaders pose for photos while smiling and shaking the hands of federal officials while our people starve to death, freeze to death, go murdered and missing, or be taken on Starlight tours and are over-incarcerated at rates as high as 100% of the inmate population. Seriously, our ancestors would be disgusted that we would shake the hands of the enemy that plots our demise. Not a single “Aboriginal” leader should ever shake the hand of Minister Duncan or PM Harper again until the suffering of our people at their hands is eliminated. Indian policy has not changed over time, although we may have seen some political dancing around the individual issues. Yet, none of us should be fooled or distracted by the dance. Canada’s progress on relations with First Nations has taken a draconian step backwards with the Conservatives (Cons) in power. Some might say I am biased, but seeing as I don’t belong to any political party in Canada, nor do I make a habit of voting, I think my views are less biased than most. I call it as I see it based on the Cons’ individual and collective actions, decisions, positions and submissions. The Conservatives have all but spelled it out – yet we refuse to see the writing on the wall. Why? Because it means we have to make hard decisions – take some significant risks and substantially turn the relationship on its head. When I talk about the signs, I start with the Cons’s appointment of John Duncan as Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC now AANDC). Duncan had a history of being vigorously opposed to what he called “race-based” fishing. He saw First Nations as a races that did not deserve to have their Aboriginal and treaty rights respected, despite their constitutional protection. So, the Cons made sure that they appointed someone who dislikes First Nations and denies their constitutionally protected rights. Should anyone be surprised that the Cons have as their “sessional” plan to finally eliminate all, what they call “special rights” for First Nations? Then of course there is the fact that Tom Flanagan, the guy famous for advocating for the assimilation of Aboriginal peoples, was Harper’s campaign manager and then his Chief of Staff. For anyone who has not read First Nations? Second Thoughts, Flanagan sees Aboriginal peoples as “primitive” and that “assimilation” has to happen. Imagine the influence he would have had over the PM or his staff regarding Aboriginal peoples. That might explain Harper’s comment on the international stage that there was “no history of colonization in Canada”. It might also explain why the Cons have funded research and activities into singling out individual First Nations to support their plan under the guise of economic development. Flanagan’s latest book: Beyond the Indian Act looking to turn reserves into individual plots of land to sell to non-Indians was supported by the First Nation Tax Commission. The information I received through ATIP provided hundreds of documents showing how much time and effort has gone into promoting the privatization and taxation of reserve lands. We would never have stood for that 100 years ago, but now they use “Aboriginal” faces to do the promoting. Then, there was MP Pierre Poilievre who, on the day of the residential schools apology, questioned whether the settlement was “value for money”. One might think he is just a lone radical, right-wing voice in the Conservative government were it not for Minister Duncan’s statement yesterday where he said that residential schools were NOT a form of cultural genocide – it was just negative to culture, not lethal. If that was not bad enough, the RCMP release their report wherein they investigated their role in residential schools and no surprise – relived themselves of any wrong-doing. Yet, somewhere this week or next – our national leaders will pose for another photo shaking the hands of those who advocate our assimilation. Wow. Really? Do the Conservatives think we are all stupid? Upwards of 40% of the children who entered residential schools never made it out alive. The express purpose of residential schools was expressed by superintendent of Indian Affairs, Duncan Campbell Scott: “I want to get rid of the Indian problem… Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada.” Even when residential schools became too controversial, they switched over to what is now known as the 60’s scoop where children were taken from their parents, and instead of being put in residential schools, they were adopted out permanently in non-Indian families. Today there are more children in care than totaled residential schools and the 60″s scoop put together. To believe that Indian policy and assimilation is a thing of the past is to be blind to the current reality. To believe that it is not genocide ignores our own Criminal Code and the United Nations own definition of genocide. The Criminal code defines genocide as not just the murder of an identifiable group, but also includes the creating of conditions that lead to their physical destruction. The purposeful, chronic, well-known under-funding of First Nations has created the extreme conditions of poverty and, as the medical evidence has shown – the pre-mature deaths of our people. The United Nations includes the theft of children from an identifable group as also being genocide. Canada’s habit of defering issues to study, deflecting issues by blaming First Nations or denying issues like genocide are all strategic ways of allowing assimilation to continue. This brings me back to my point. Some of our NAOs are working with the Conservatives under the hopes of changing their minds. This reminds me of that saying again – if someone tells who they are, you should listen. If a man continually beats his wife, the wife can expect, with some certainty, that the man will beat her in the future, that the violence will likely get worse, and may even result in her death. Why should we expect anything other than what the Conservatives have promised? We are in an abusive relationship with Canada. If we don’t get out of this relationship now – it may be too late. Look at the Conservatives election platform – what was offered for Indigenous people except adult training in the north, the chance to sit on a hunting advisory panel (of mostly non-Indians) and to have input on a park in Rouge Hill. Who the heck asked for any of that stuff? The core issues of sovereignty and jursidiction, treaties, land claims and equitable funding were all off the list. What they were saying is really: “We, the Conservatives, are promising you nothing – absolutely nothing, but you better be our willing partners or maybe things will get worse”. Thus, some of the NAOs have stopped representing our interests, and have made decisions based on fear and organizational self-interest. This is really frustrating for me as a grass roots person. These organizations were all created to represent our interests politically and some of them have failed to do so by being co-opted by the endless funding dance where the Conservatives essentially say “play nice with us and we give you minor funding to keep your organization alive, but play against and lose your funding.” Ok, that is a reality that sucks as we could really use some coordination, research and representation at all levels. However, acquiescing to our own extinction – legal or otherwise, is hardly a viable alternative. No funding for any national organization is worth the continue deaths of our children from starvation or our legalized assimilation or loss of our treaties. If forced to choose, I’d choose our lands and people any day. We are all too mesmorized by the Canadian ideal – work, debt, mortgage, cars, more debt and prestige. I am not against someone working hard and providing for their family but not the outright ext=change of our future for a temporary job as a miner or a oil worker. Things like ec dev projects, consulting contracts & project funding are all short term gains that will result in long-term pains like the destruction or loss of lands, legislated assimilation, and provincial education and that is not in anyone’s best interest. Playing nice may win individuals Senate seats, Porsches or media fame, but it does little to protect our people – those who are suffering the most. Just because the Conservatives think it is ok for our PM to live in luxury and travel the world, while poverty and homelessness is rising in Canada, that does not mean that we as Indigenous governments should emulate that form of society. We cannot put the interests of NAOs over the future of our Nations. I think our NAOs need to watch the constitutional talks again. Watch some real leader in action – those who refused to settle for anything. How many times I have heard NAOs say – well something is better than nothing – no it’s not. Yet, time and again, some of us are shocked when we hear unbelievably racist comments come from the Minister of Indian Affairs or PM Harper. Why the shock? They have told us many, many times who they really are and how they really feel about our issues. Our wishing it wasn’t so won’t change that. What we can change is whether or not we continue to prop up the Conservatives and their ludicrous ideas, or whether we stand together against it. There are other Canadians out there who see the benefit of a more equitable and just society that lives in harmony with nature – we have allies both home and abroad. We have to stand up against our continued oppression and assimilation before the Cons have empowered every right-wing radical in their Cabinet and legislate away our rights – without any fear of retaliation from us. Our power has always been in our unity and our unity is what defeated the White Paper, what defeated the the First Nations Governance Act and many other assimilatory plans and policies. Nothing has changed in the Conservative government except how they are going about our assimilation. Instead of proposing massive and immediate assimilation, they now have a more insidious plan which accomplishes assimilation over a longer term through many different measures which appear neutral, but spell our demise. They also use our people as their spokespeople for assimilation under the guise of “progress” and they distract us with red herrings so we don’t see what is really happening. Stop wasting time and money posting news releases congratulating this federal bureaucrat or another and start highlighting the facts – put our situation front and centre. Perhaps one bill won’t result in our extinction, but if you look at the entirety of their plan – disappearing Indian status, non-natives occupying reserve lands, turning reserves into fee simple for sale, provincially controlled education, loss of funding for languages, non-existent land claim resolution and delayed self-government, you see a very clear pattern – one that has not changed since Duncan Campbell Scott, the White Paper or Flanagan. Their new goal, supported by their arrogant view that they’ll be in power for at least 8 years – is to eliminate special entitlements for First Nations. What are you going to do about it NAOs? If they wait long enough, there will be no Indians left to negotiate self-government, exercise treaty rights or live on reserves. Reserves will all be used for mineral development, Walmarts, or residences for non-Indians. When our children look back at how this all happened, we will see the smiling faces of our national leaders shaking hands with Canada, promoting these things as “good for us”. What our children will also see are organizations that used to exist until Canada accomplished what it intended to do and then finally cut off funding for those national organizations. In the words of Canada’s own demographic expert, we will “author our own demise”. So, instead of relying on the naive hope that the Conservatives will do something good for us if we play nice and act as “willing partners”, it’s time our national leaders grew a backbone and started representing us like our ancestors did – with a sense of realism, foresight, and self-sacrifice. Otherwise, every time one of us, like Sharon McIvor, wins a small victory in the ongoing battle against our assimilation, we will all lose when our national leaders make deals on her behalf and let the world know our rights are for sale. I see a great future for our children if we take action today to protect them. I know it is possible to save our languages and cultures if we refuse to submit to federal control. I see larger, stronger Nations if we make some short-term sacrifice. I also see more empowered leaders if they would start relying on their people – the grass roots citizens who have a great deal to offer. Leaders were never meant to go this alone, nor were our women, our children or our men. We can turn around the number of Indigenous kids in care, murdered and missing Indigenous women, over-incarcerated Indigenous men and grass roots Indigenous people who are disconnected from their communities and Nations. Canada through the Indian Act and its various Indian policies divided our Nations into small communities; divided our communities between on and off reserve, member and non-member; and divided our families into Indians and non-Indians. This is called divide and conquer and it is designed to make us think we are all alone in this struggle against oppression – when in fact we are all in this together. There is nothing wrong with us as Indigenous people. We are not genetically inferior. This is not about a great system that once used to work and is now broken. The system is working exactly how the colonizers designed it – to facilitate our assimilation. While the worst culprit is the Conservative Party today, all Canadian governments have had their hand in Indian policy at one time or another. We are strong as peoples and we are even stronger when we all work together. Every single one of us has a responsibility to stop the destruction of our people and our way of life.  Our future is not for sale. Write to your NAO and let them know how you feel. It’s time they started taking their mandates from the people again. For rabble fans, please see my blog post at rabble.ca

  • First Nations Sign Agreement with Federal and Provincial Governments in NB to Negotiate Self-Government

    It was reported earlier this week that 10 out of 15 First Nations in NB signed an agreement with the federal and provincial governments to negotiate self-government. It was then subsequently reported that all 15 First Nations in NB have signed on. However, after speaking with several First Nations, I understand that only 10 First Nations signed, and only one was Maliseet. I don’t have an original signed copy, but I have been provided with the text by one of the First Nations. Many people have been emailing me and asking for a copy of the agreement which I have copied below. Please always refer to the original as the official document: MI’GMAG, WOLASTOQIYIK, NEW BRUNSWICK and CANADA UMBRELLA AGREEMENT  -among-  THE MI’GMAG AND WOLASTOQIYIK PEOPLES IN NEW BRUNSWICK, as represented by the Chiefs of the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik First Nations in New Brunswick (“the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick”)  -and-  THE PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK, as represented by the Minister Responsible for the Aboriginal Affairs Secretariat of New Brunswick (“New Brunswick”)  -and-  THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (“Canada”)  Collectively referred to as “the Parties”:  RECITALS:  WHEREAS  The Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik Peoples assert that they have used and occupied their Traditional Lands since time immemorial in accordance with principles of stewardship and responsibility given to them by the Creator; and  The Parties wish to renew and strengthen their government-to-government-togovernment relationship; and  The Parties are dedicated to the principles of good faith, openness, mutual honour and respect; and  The Parties are committed to formal tripartite discussions in order to address outstanding issues among the Parties; and  The Parties recognize that the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick have not enjoyed the same standard of living as other New Brunswickers; and  The Parties have a shared desire to work in partnership with the shared goal of improving the quality of life outcomes of the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick; and  Page 2 of 7  The Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik Peoples and the British Crown entered into sacred Treaties. Those Treaties established a relationship based on peace and friendship; and The Parties intend to negotiate and implement agreements on Aboriginal and Treaty rights, including the right to self-government.  THEREFORE THE PARTIES HAVE REACHED THE FOLLOWING UNDERSTANDINGS:  OBJECTIVE OF THE UMBRELLA AGREEMENT  1) This Umbrella Agreement is designed to guide tripartite discussions with the aim of concluding a Framework Agreement on inter-governmental relationships and Aboriginal and Treaty rights and the self-government of the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick.  2) The Parties have targeted December 31, 2012 as the date by which they wish to have negotiated a Framework Agreement.  PROCESS  3) The Parties shall establish a Coordinating Committee comprised of representatives appointed by each of the Parties to oversee the work undertaken under this Umbrella Agreement. In particular, the Coordinating Committee shall:  a) Identify the subject-matters that are to be addressed under a Framework Agreement, such as, but not limited to:  i. Lands and Resources; ii. Governance and Jurisdiction; iii. Economy Development and Sustainability; iv. Health; v. Education; and vi. Social and Cultural Development;  b) Negotiate a tripartite agreement on consultation;  c) Identify whether a sub-committee for any agreed to subject-matter should be established;  d) Develop terms of reference and strategic work plans for itself and any proposed sub-committee;  e) Propose interim agreements on issues of concern to the Parties and develop methods for their implementation;  f) Coordinate, monitor and evaluate progress made on the work undertaken under this Umbrella Agreement;  g) Ensure that its representatives report on an ongoing basis, and at least quarterly, to their respective principals on work progress; and  Page 3 of 7  h) Ensure that annual budgets, work plans and any reporting requirements related to funding agreements are completed and processed in a timely manner.  4) Upon consideration of an annual work plan and the funding resources available, Canada and New Brunswick will cost-share funding under this Umbrella Agreement.  STATUS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE UMBRELLA AGREEMENT  5) Except for sections 5 to 14, this Umbrella Agreement and the work undertaken pursuant to this Umbrella Agreement do not create any legal obligations which are binding on the Parties unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Parties.  6) This Umbrella Agreement and the work undertaken pursuant to this Umbrella Agreement shall:  a) be on a “without prejudice” basis with respect to the legal rights or positions of the Parties, including the Aboriginal and Treaty rights of the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick;  b) be deemed not to create, define, alter or affect the legal rights or positions of the Parties, including the Aboriginal and Treaty rights of the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick;  c) not be construed to be, or deemed to be, consultation for the purpose of justification by Canada or New Brunswick for the infringement of any Aboriginal or Treaty rights of the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick; and  d) not preclude any other discussion or initiative between:  i. the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick, or individual Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik First Nations and New Brunswick, or  ii. the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick, or individual Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik First Nations and Canada on matters of mutual concern.  7) Except for the purpose of enforcing sections 5 to 14 or unless otherwise agreed in writing the Parties undertake not to tender or seek admission of this Umbrella Agreement or the content of meetings, discussions, negotiations, documents generated or positions taken in or during the process contemplated hereunder as evidence in a court of law or before any administrative or regulatory tribunal or board. This undertaking shall survive the termination of this Umbrella Agreement unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Parties.  8)8) Notwithstanding any other provision of the Umbrella Agreement, any Party may refer to publicly and may lead evidence regarding the Parties, date of operation, existence and purpose of this Umbrella Agreement and the frequency of and participants in meetings held pursuant to its operation before a court, regulatory tribunal, board or similar body.  Page 4 of 7  9) This Umbrella Agreement shall come into force and effect on the date of its signatures by Canada, New Brunswick, and the First Nations’ Chiefs in New Brunswick provided:  a) A majority of the First Nation Chiefs in New Brunswick execute this Umbrella Agreement; and  b) The Chiefs who execute this Umbrella Agreement are leaders of those First Nations whose members constitute at least fifty per cent plus one person (50% + 1) of the federally registered Indian population in New Brunswick.  10) Any New Brunswick Mi’gmag or Wolastoqiyik First Nation, as represented by its respective Chief, may upon three months written notice to all the Parties, hereto join, withdraw, or rejoin this Umbrella Agreement.  11) If one or more of the Mi’gmag or Wolastoqiyik First Nation(s), as represented by the respective Chief(s), decides to withdraw from this Umbrella Agreement pursuant to section 10, this Umbrella Agreement shall not automatically terminate.  12) If, at any time, the First Nation Parties to this Umbrella Agreement fall below the majority of Chiefs or the majority consists of Chiefs representing less than fifty per cent plus one person (50% + 1) of the federally registered Indian population in New Brunswick, the Parties will consider whether to terminate this Umbrella Agreement.  13) Notwithstanding section 12, Canada or New Brunswick may withdraw or rejoin this Umbrella Agreement upon three months written notice to all the Parties.  14) Notwithstanding sections 10 to 13, the agreements, understandings, undertakings and commitments set out in sections 5 to 9 all continue in effect unless the Parties otherwise agree in writing.  Page 5 of 7  Signed at _______________, New Brunswick, the _______day of ___________, 2011. Representing the Mi’gmag and Wolastoqiyik in New Brunswick I am told that the last two pages are just the signature pages. A special thank you to my friends, family and colleagues in NB First Nation who help keep me informed on what is happening back home. It is hard being so far from home, but you all make it easier. Hope this helps. Please e-mail if you have any more questions.

  • Bill C-575 – First Nations Financial Transparency Act – or is it the – All Chiefs Are Crooked Act? (updated)

    Well, the witch hunt has officially begun. If conservatives scream loud enough and persistently enough that all First Nations Chiefs are corrupt, then eventually people will start to believe that. Add to this the right-wing voices of academics like Flanagan, Gibson, Widdowson, and Helin; organizations like the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and Canadian Taxpayers Federation; and the strategic media use of isolated examples, and the anti-First Nation movement is reborn complete with its own Aboriginal spokesperson – Senator Brazeau. Now, the focus on alleged corruption and lack of accountability of First Nations which Bill C-575 is meant to combat, helps to deflect the real issue – Canada’s shameful neglect and inequitable funding of basic social programs for First Nations like child and family services, post-secondary education, housing, and water. It also helps focus attention away from the other paternalistic legislative reforms which are being advanced against the will of First Nations on the basis that Canada knows what is best for them. Perhaps more importantly, this proposed bill turns the attention away from our federal politicians and away from the issue of MPs not wanting to divulge THEIR OWN expenses to the Auditor General. If that is not the ultimate in hypocrisy, I don’t what is! You will recall that the Auditor General Sheila Fraser (AG) informed Parliament that she wanted to review the detailed expenses of federal MPs. After taking nearly 10 months to consider the matter, their answer was categorically “NO!” The only option left to the AG was to take them to court which she indicated she was not willing to do. If you search the Internet and read through back issues of various newspapers you will hear endless excuses from these MPs about why they should not divulge their expenses – including that their expenses are audited by an outside firm. If you take this issue and apply it to a First Nations context, First Nations ALSO have their federal funding audited by firms and report all of this information to INAC in great detail. The issue is not whether or not MPs and First Nations “account” for their money, it is whether the details of this information should be made “public”. Despite the fact that a deal was subsequently reached between the AG and MPs which would allow the AG to do “spot checks” on MP expenses, the National Post reported that her audit would NOT look at the spending of individual MP offices, nor would any report name the names of MPs who had problematic expenses. This is a far cry from an audit of each and every MP’s set of expenses being made public. How then could any MP, liberal, conservative or otherwise, demand that the expenses of each and every Chief and band councillor be made public? Thanks to the questionable conduct of conservative senator Brazeau, even some First Nations community members are starting to believe the conservative hype about unaccountable First Nations, absent any hard facts. On what other issue would we ever ask Canadians and politicians to support legislation to address a stereotype? What is next? If I allege that all Indians are drunks, will Senator Brazeau create a YouTube video from the Senate asking that First Nations be banned from liquor stores? While conservatives can easily sell a bill with the unassailable message of accountability, the real message is much more insidious: it asks Canadians to conclude, without any proof, that First Nations are not accountable for funding they receive from the federal government and that the ONLY way to address this is for the conservative government to ride in on its “white” horse and save the Indians. Meanwhile, the government can preach about values that it does not respect itself. Of the times that former Minister of INAC intimated that First Nation elections were fraught with corruption, we never saw any reports or research to back that up. Senator Brazeau’s YouTube video implies that First Nations are not financially accountable, but he does not offer any credible proof of this. Even the Frontier Centre for Public Policy made incredible claims this week about the depth of First Nations corruption without referring to a single study, report, or statistical analysis. What evidence is out there? You could try reading the reports of the AG where she explained that First Nations experience the extreme version of accountability with regards to federal funds and in fact account so much and so often that they submit reports on their funds no less than once every three days. If there are any problems with these reports, First Nations run the risk of being subjected to co-management or third party regimes imposed on their communities to manage their funds. The conservative government has incurred billions of dollars of debt – where is its third party manager? If you read those AG reports and watch some of the AG’s presentations to the House or Senate, you will hear her describe how she has attempted to have INAC address its own problems and lack of progress on social programs and services. She has asked repeatedly that INAC make improvements and commented that INAC has made little or no improvement. She even cited the cap on the funding of First Nation programs and the outdated, problematic funding formulas for funding such programs as child and family services. As we all know, the latter issue is now before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. It is Canada that has dropped the ball here on its own obligations. Trying to deflect attention onto First Nations represents both a promotion of a negative stereotype against First Nations and a hypocritical position given MPs’ refusal to do what they are asking of First Nations. Furthermore, the proposed Bill C-575 asks that First Nations NOT receive the benefit of various information and privacy protections under ATIP legislation to which other governments are entitled. Another inequity advanced under an apparently closely held democratic value. I challenge all Canadians to look behind the hype and get the facts; to look beyond the headlines and see the real message; and to think twice before they impose legislation on First Nations which represent values they don’t require of their own governments.

  • Now First Nations are Soviets and Primitive Communists?

    I am writing this blog today because I have had enough of the right wing misinformation campaign against First Nations in Canada. It isn’t enough that First Nations had to endure colonial control, theft of their lands and resources, broken treaty promises, loss of their languages and spirits in residential schools, and the ongoing impact of the Indian Act for the last few hundred or so years, but now they are being shamed, harassed and bullied into abandoning what First Nations have managed to save for their future generations. First Nations identities, cultures, and lands are under attack once again from the newly revitalized right wingers (thanks to PM Harper and his conservative party) who think that the only “true” Canadians are those that look, walk, talk, and think alike. This is despite the fact that First Nations have never imposed such rules on Canadians. First Nations are not asking for anything other than for Canadians to live up to their constitutional promises. http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/const/const1982.html Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 is the Supreme law of the land. No federal or provincial government has the authority to enact laws and policies outside those legal boundaries by which Canadians have agreed to live. Section 35 recognizes and affirms the Aboriginal and treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada. In case there was any doubt, in 1996 Canada publicly recognized that Aboriginal peoples have the “inherent right” to self-government and that this right was protected in s.35. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/al/ldc/ccl/pubs/sg/sg-eng.asp The inherent right to be self-governing does not mean that First Nations MUST govern themselves according to western laws, ideologies, and governance structures. That would defeat the whole purpose of being self-governing according to one’s OWN laws, customs, and practices. Even the Supreme Court of Canada in Van der Peet recognized that: In my view, the doctrine of aboriginal rights exists, and is recognized and affirmed by s. 35(1), because of one simple fact: when Europeans arrived in North America, aboriginal peoples were already here, living in communities on the land, and participating in distinctive cultures, as they had done for centuries. It is this fact, and this fact above all others, which separates aboriginal peoples from all other minority groups in Canadian society and which mandates their special legal, and now constitutional, status. http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1996/1996canlii216/1996canlii216.html Additionally, PM Harper stood before and on behalf of ALL Canadians and apologized to First Nations for the assimilatory attitudes upon which policies like residential schools were based. Specifically, PM Harper explained that: Two primary objectives of the Residential Schools system were to remove and isolate children from the influence of their homes, families, traditions, and cultures and to assimilate them into the dominant culture. These objectives were based on the assumption Aboriginal cultures and spiritual beliefs were inferior and unequal. Indeed some sought, as was infamously said, “to kill the Indian in the child”. Today, we recognize that this policy of assimilation was wrong, has caused great harm, and has no place in our country. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/rqpi/apo/index-eng.asp This apology is in line with other pronouncements from the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC)regarding the purpose of protecting the rights of Aboriginal peoples in the Constitution Act, 1982. Specifically, the SCC held in Powley that the purpose of section 35 was to protect to recognize and enhance Aboriginal peoples “survival as distinctive communities.” Distinctive refers to the unique laws, cultures, traditions, practices and beliefs of Aboriginal Nations. The SCC explained that the “purpose and the promise of s. 35 is to protect practices that were historically important features of these distinctive communities” so that they can preserve their cultures for future generations. http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2003/2003scc43/2003scc43.html So, if the supreme law of the land, our country’s highest court, and even the Prime Minister recognizes the need to protect Aboriginal laws, customs, practices, beliefs, traditions, and cultures, how is it that the right wingers in society cannot wrap their minds around that concept? Today, I read a comment in the National Post which referred to First Nations concepts of communal property as “Soviet-style native property rules”. Never mind that the “Soviet Union” doesn’t even exist anymore, but the comparison shows the ignorance of the commentator. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/03/national-post-editorial-board-enough-soviet-style-native-property-rules/ The commentator alleges that Canadians who live on reserve are “denied the ability to own real property”. In fact, any Aboriginal person may own property off-reserve in fee simple. On reserve, they can hold property in a Certificate of Possession (CPs) which is similar to fee simple, except that it can’t be sold to non-Indians. This form of property ownership respects the communal nature of land ownership in First Nations. The communal nature of land holding in First Nations has long been recognized by laws, courts, and our constitution as an integral part of First Nations laws, rules and practices related to their lands. The commentator also alleges that Aboriginal people “cannot hold true title to their homes” nor can they “mortgage a property to raise capital”. In fact, Aboriginal people can hold CPs to their homes and even obtain a mortgage through various programs at CMHC and INAC. The link below provides details about how the process works: http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/ab/onre/onre_008.cfm The commentator also claims that Aboriginal peoples cannot develop their “land as they see fit”. This may or may not be true, depending on the zoning and other land use codes that may or may not in place in any particular First Nation. It is interesting to note however, that most Canadians cannot develop their land as they see fit due to zoning and other municipal land use by-laws. This comment reflects an obvious lack of knowledge around the subject. More troubling is the allegation that Aboriginal peoples “can lose their homes without recourse, whenever it happens to be convenient for band council to give their property to a new occupant”. This is categorically false. Various provisions of the Indian Act lay out how land is to be allotted, how CPs can be issued, and the process under which land can be expropriated. Canadian and provincial laws allow lands of Canadians to be expropriated in special circumstances, but never without compensation. The rules are similar on a reserve. Of course, the rules may well be different for self-governing First Nations and/or those under the First Nations Land Management Act. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/PDF/Statute/I/I-5.pdf The commentator uses the example of Kahnawake where the band council enacted residency by-laws prohibiting non-members from residing on their reserve. When asked about the legality of such a by-law, the former Minister of Indian Affairs, Chuck Strahl claimed it was “legal” and even “constitutional” despite the fact that in order for a by-law to be legal it must be submitted to INAC for approval – which according to INAC was never done. http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2542877 I agree completely with the commentator that such a law, which evicts non-Indian spouses of legitimate band members from their homes, is racist. It divides children from their parents, and families from their communities. Instead of protecting their Nation, they are actually speeding up their own assimilation. I myself, have written a blog about the injustice of this situation. http://nonstatusindian.blogspot.com/2010/02/mohawks-or-canadas-disappearing-indians.html That being said, Kahnawake does not represent all 633 First Nations in Canada. Just as the serial killer Robert Pickton does not represent the values of all Canadians, nor does Kahnawake represent the majority of First Nations values. Finally, the commentator praises Tom Flanagan’s new book: Restoring Aboriginal Property Rights” as the answer to the situation of communal property rights. As Tom Flanagan describes First Nations as “primitive communists”, it is easy to see where this commentator divined his inspiration to write about “Soviet” First Nations. Flanagan’s plan is to turn reserves into fee simple, maximize land values, and open up reserves to be sold to non-Indians. In my opinion, this does not recognize constitutionally protected land rights and simply represents a right wing desire to see Aboriginal peoples assimilated once and for all. I have written a book review which summarizes the plan and highlights significant issues with it. It is called “Opportunity or Temptation” and you can find it on the Literary Review of Canada website under back issues in April 2010. Such a plan far from recognizes the “distinct” First Nations’ traditions, practices, laws, and customs in relation to Aboriginal lands, but in fact represents an intolerance for such difference. It demands that Aboriginal people be more like “westerners” and embrace capitalism and concepts of individual wealth over the welfare of family, community and Nation. Aboriginal peoples are not asking Canadians to adopt First Nations laws and concepts, just to respect their right to have their own ideals. A basic tennet of liberal democracies like Canada, is that of tolerance and respect for difference. Forcing First Nations to adopt Canadian ideals is actually very undemocratic. It is quite hypocritical for Canadians to defend their Charter and Constitutional rights so vehemently, except when it comes to the constitutional rights of Aboriginal peoples. It is time these right wingers thought more about what a true democracy means and start walking the walk before they go around telling other people to be more Canadian.