Warrior Life Studios

Pam Palmater

Tag: Pam Palmater

  • #StayUnited against #FNCFNEA

    Since the time I was small, I have always been told by Chiefs, politicians and elders about the importance of our unity – unity within our Mi’kmaw families, our communities and Nation. Leaders even spoke about the importance of inter-tribal or inter-nation unity. I come from a territory where the Wabanaki Confederacy, a political allegiance of multiple Nations, built upon our Nations’ diverse backgrounds for common purposes. The relationships which came from this confederacy have lasted until present day.

    At the same time, my elders were careful to explain that unity is not about sameness. Unity is a type of bond or treaty amongst Indigenous Nations which celebrates the different strengths, histories, cultures, insights and skills of each Nation and brings them together to make the whole stronger. Unity is a celebration or embracing of those differences to make the treaty group stronger in defending its sovereignty, territories or peoples. It is not an agreement on all issues at all times. Nor is unity about each Nation conforming to one way of thinking or acting. Diverse Nations inherently have different needs, outlooks, priorities and ways of accomplishing their goals.

    Several long-time leaders also told me that unity for the sake of unity can cause more harm than good. Unity for the sake of unity denies the very differences we celebrate as Nations and shuts out the voices of caution, overlooked facts, multiple perspectives and potential outcomes. Sometimes these lone voices are mischaracterized as oppositional, trouble-making, politicking or disloyal. Consensus building takes a great deal of effort and time; so when these brave voices speak out against the consensus, sometimes its hard not to lose patience or be frustrated.

    Yet, elders have told me that those voices which delay consensus for a time are sometimes the most loyal citizens – citizens who care so deeply about their community or Nation that they risk ridicule and exclusion to raise potential threats to the collective. They may not always deliver the message as we’d like or even have all the facts, but that is what consensus building is about – providing everyone with all the facts, potential outcomes and perspectives so that when a decision is made, everyone understands and accepts its – even if not in total agreement. I believe the future of our Nations depends on the consideration and inclusion of all voices.

    The biggest impact on our ability as Indigenous Nations to maintain our unity in times of need is the impact of colonization. Generations of colonial ideologies, residential schools, Indian Act restrictions, federal divide-and-conquer tactics, and systems of government-imposed rewards and punishments have impaired our ability to see unity as we once did. Canada has divided us into good Indians and bad Indians – those who comply versus those who resist. In so doing, the hard work of unity-building within Nations is impaired because the focus is on one-size-fits-all Indians. In fact, pan-Indianness is so ingrained that we often criticize ourselves for not being unified as “Indians” when we should be unified in resisting pan-Indianness.

    Our unity as Nations is like a treaty – a coming together of certain Nations at certain times to assert or defend certain causes. We can be united to defend our right to control education but different in how we want to assert that control (depending on each Nation’s priorities and needs). Sometimes our unity is based on historical relations, regional similarities or broad national interests. Our unity is no less powerful because the Mohawks educate one way and the Cree another. The similarity is in the assertion of sovereignty and jurisdiction over our right to control our own education systems, methods, content and outcomes.

    With regards to Prime Minister Harper and National Chief Shawn Atleo’s education “deal”, this was not made in a good way, nor in the spirit of unity. In fact, the countless secret meetings, lack of information, and surprise announcements are counter to our traditional ways of building consensus and capitalizing on our strengths and differences in unity. The biggest problem is that no space was ever made for the possibility that there would be no unity on this deal – the deal was made for us without us at the table. The result is wide-spread distrust, anger and reaction – all justified. Now, our leaders are forced to account to their citizens for decisions of which they had no part, causing even further disharmony amongst our Nations. Yet, none of this had to happen.

    For many decades, First Nations have been tightly unified on their views about First Nation education. While we may have taken very different approaches to other issues, on First Nation education we all agreed. First Nations are united in their views that we have jurisdiction over every aspect of our education systems (however we choose as individual Nations to define them) and that we should be the ones in control. We have always held the position that Canada must live up to its legal obligations to recognize and implement our treaty, Aboriginal and other rights to education with adequate funding. We have always asserted that Canada needs to make amends for the damages caused to our languages and cultures from residential schools by providing the supports needed to advance and protect them in current education systems – First Nations or provincial.

    How we choose to get there is up to us. Some of us may want to negotiate sectoral self-government agreements in education; some may wish to use the current systems with modified funding, some may want a treaty-based system, and others may want to design and implement their own systems independently with completely different funding agreements. We may have different methods, but we are united in defense of our right to choose how we will implement our right to control our own education systems. We are not all one mythical race of Indians after all.

    Our current initiatives in resisting the Atleo-Harper deal on education are not about sour grapes, jealousy, politics, the next federal election, the next AFN National Chief election, or who’s “right”. Those are all red-herrings critics throw in the mix to keep people from focusing on the real issue – control over our own education systems. The reason why so many Chiefs, grassroots citizens, academics, lawyers and Canadian allies are against this deal is because it violates our fundamental right to control our own education systems. We are not fighting against unity – we are fighting desperately to maintain our long-held unity in education.

    The Harper government has become very adept at its divide-and-conquer techniques. It also uses funding as a reward-punishment tool to further control and divide us. It’s most effective tool so far has been using First Nations individuals and organizations to promote its assimilatory agenda. Trojan horses filled with assimilatory Aboriginal warriors march forward to implement Harper’s plan under the guise of what’s good for us. The numerous bills being imposed on us all have wonderful titles and great media sound bites that distract us from what’s inside the bills. Calling a bill “First Nations Control” is a lie if what’s inside is increased Ministerial control.

    I think most of us expect this from Harper, but the most hurtful and offensive part is that we don’t expect our own leaders to do this to us. National Chief Shawn Atleo has hurt us all by acting as if he had the right to make this deal in the first place; by acting so secretively and outside our traditional ways of building consensus; and then standing in defense of this destructive bill – no matter what First Nations say. Part of being a leader is being humble and admitting when you have made mistakes. Atleo could still stand with First Nations against this bill, but he refuses to do so. Atleo destroyed our negotiating leverage in Ottawa and now he has broken our unity on education. He refuses to listen to us.

    Unfortunately, we don’t have time to commiserate about it – we have to act. We cannot give Harper any ammunition to use against us as he tries to ram this bill through the House and Senate. We have to show that Atleo does not speak for us, as the Minister is already relying on Atleo’s endorsement of the bill as his “proof” of consultation and consent. We cannot let Harper hide behind any First Nation individual or organization to roll out his assimilation plan.

    Most of all, we have to stay united against this bill to protect control over our education and save our cultures and languages for future generations. If we voluntarily allow Canada to legislate our treaty rights, there is no undoing it later. Harper is desperate to turn the treaty right to education into a discretionary program and service that is subject to Parliament’s budgetary whims. We can’t let Harper do that.

    Harper is scared of our voices. AANDC is running scared and is tweeting in defense of itself. Harper can see the growing opposition from First Nations and is speeding up the review of the bill. We have the power to stop this. When First Nations stand in unity, there is no piece of paper, no legislation, or crooked politician that can stop us. The “winter we danced” as Idle No More showed the world how powerful in peace our people are when we stand together. I’ve always believed in the power of our people to make change – let’s stay united on education and give our children some hope.

     

    #StayUnited against #FNCFNEA

  • First Nations Controlled, First Nations Education Act: Standardizing “the Indian in the child”

    On February 7, 2014, Assembly of First Nations (AFN) National Chief Shawn Atleo stood with Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) Bernard Valcourt and announced a “historic deal” on First Nations education. They announced that the federal government would change the name of education legislation to First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act, together with $1.9 billion in future monies.

    Since then, First Nations have been trying to figure out on what authority AFN made this deal on our behalf, and what exactly this deal entails. Every time that NC Atleo or Harper speaks, it becomes more and more apparent that Atleo and Harper are NOT of the same mind in terms of what this “deal” entails. In case anyone had any doubt about the fragile, if non-existent agreement between AFN and Harper, one need only refer to the letter from AFN dated Feb.28, 2014 requesting clarifications from the Harper government about what the deal means.

    You don’t have to hire a lawyer to know that you never ever commit to a deal without knowing what the deal is – i.e., get the details in writing. Atleo’s letter asks critical questions like:

    –        Is Canada committed to working with First Nations?;

    –        Will Canada “engage” or “collaborate” with First Nations on legislative drafting?;

    –        Will existing agreements and MOUs be honoured by Canada?;

    –        Is the funding new funding?; and

    –        Is the funding secure?

    It is almost unbelievable that the AFN would be asking these critical questions AFTER the deal has already been made and announced. What’s worse is that the AFN is asking these questions AFTER Atleo’s many media appearances and their FAQ Sheet which purports to answer these questions. How can the AFN assure First Nations that they will get to “inform” the legislative drafting process and then a few weeks later, ask the federal government if they will work with First Nations on the legislation?

    The joint Atleo-Harper announcement on February 7, 2014 and all the media statements by both parties in the days and weeks that followed is a clear indication that there is no common understanding. Here is a summary of how each side interpreted the “historic deal” (that has no written commitments):

     

    What AFN/Atleo Said

    What Harper/Valcourt Said

     

     

    Respects & recognizes rights, title & treaties

    Not about rights, it’s about social development

    Incorporates reciprocal accountability

    Ensures transparent & accountable

    First Nations

    No federal oversight

    Feds will provide the standards, reporting and other oversight mechanisms to “ensure” First Nations meet “new” standards

    Statutory guarantee of funding to address “real costs” of education

    4.5% cap on funding

    (versus 6% pop growth)

    Funding is guaranteed

    Funding will be for “willing partners”

    AFN will “inform” legislative process

    Feds will draft legislation and regulations

    Limited “enabling” legislation

    Full “comprehensive” education legislation

    New deal for First Nations

    What’s best for Canada

    Allows for diversity

    Same standards for all First Nations

    If this is THE deal (historic, but unwritten); which promises First Nation control (federal control of First Nations); and capped funding (future monies less than what is needed to take on new responsibilities); and a new relationship (where we voluntarily give up our treaty right to education) – then NO DEAL.

     

    But we already told Atleo NO DEAL. We told him during Idle No More, we told him when the Chiefs marched on Parliament against legislation, and we told him when Ontario, Quebec and Saskatchewan pulled out of National Panel on Education. Atleo needs to start listening.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qnt7HsXLFL8

     

    It’s not hard – the problem has been identified in 100 studies: lack of real First Nation control, lack of funding and lack of culture and language in schools. The solutions have already been identified as well: First Nation control, adequate funding and culture and language. Legislation has never been required to do the right thing. It’s an Aboriginal, inherent and treaty right that is protected in Canadian and international law. The government doesn’t need legislation to respect the rule of law.

    http://www.chiefs-of-ontario.org/sites/default/files/files/OCOFOV%20Education%20Report%202012.pdf

     

    No amount of political spin can hide the swindle of the century  – legislating the future of our Nations out of existence by standardizing “the Indian in the child” to be like every other Canadian.

    #NoFNEA

    #NoFNCFNEA

    #ImpeachAtleo

     

     

     

     

  • Feathers verus Guns: The Throne Speech and Canada’s War with the Mi’kmaw Nation at Elsipogtog

    *As I write this blog, Canada is at war with the Mi’kmaw Nation – again – this time in Elsipogtog (Big Cove First Nation) in New Brunswick. The Mi’kmaw have spoken out against hydro-fracking on their territory for many months now. They have tried to get the attention of governments to no avail. Now the Mi’kmaw are in a battle of drums and feathers versus tanks and assault rifles – not the rosy picture painted by Canada to the international community.

    The failure by the federal and provincial governments, as well as the Houston-based fracking company, Southwestern Energy, to consult with the Mi’kmaw and obtain their consent is what led to the protests all summer. According to their web page: “In March 2010, the company announced that the Department of Energy and Mines of the Province of New Brunswick, Canada accepted its bids for exclusive licenses to search and conduct an exploration program covering 2,518,518 net acres in the province in order to test new hydrocarbon basins.”

    http://www.swn.com/operations/Pages/nb.aspx

    In response, the Mi’kmaw have led peaceful protests at hydro-fracking sites to demonstrate their opposition and protect their lands and resources. They have always asserted their sovereignty, ownership and jurisdiction over their territory. There has been relatively little coverage of their actions, but they have been active for months now. More recently, the company obtained an injunction to stop the protest and it was served on protesters today.

    http://halifax.mediacoop.ca/author/miles-howe

    It is more than coincidental timing – it was obviously strategically calculated with the completion of the Governor General’s Speech from the Throne and the end of the United Nations Special Rapporteur James Anaya’s visit to Canada. This morning, we awoke to reports from the Mi’kmaw of swarms of RCMP dispatched to Elsipogtog to enforce Harper’s aggressive natural resource agenda. He has effectively declared war on the Mi’kmaw.

    http://www.speech.gc.ca/sites/sft/files/SFT-EN_2013_c.pdf

    This is not the first time Canada has declared war on the Mi’kmaw. In 1981, law enforcement led an attack on the Mi’kmaw at Restigouche to stop them from controlling their own Aboriginal fishery. During this attack, Mi’kmaw suffered multiple injuries, some severe and numerous arrests.

    In 1998, the government intervened in Listuguj because the traditional Mi’kmaw government shut down the logging company that was stealing timber from Mi’kmaw lands and because the Mi’kmaw started to harvest their own timber.

    Between 1999 and 2001, Canada once again declared war on the Mi’kmaw Nation at Esgenoopitij (Burnt Church First Nation) in NB to stop them from fishing lobster. This was despite the fact the Mi’kmaw had proven their treaty right to fish lobster at the Supreme Court of Canada. Law enforcement rammed Mi’kmaw fishing boats, injured fisherman and issued numerous arrests.

    All of these actions were done in violation of the numerous treaties between the Mi’kmaw and the Crown which were peace and friendship treaties intended to once and for all end hostilities and work together as Nation to Nation partners. Given that our treaties are constitutionally protected, Canada’s actions are not only tyrannical and oppressive, but also illegal.

    Today, in 2013, the government has once again decided that brute force is the way to handle The Mi’kmaw women, elders, and children drumming and singing in peaceful protest against hydro-fracking at Elsipogtog. Media reports 200 RCMP officers were dispatched, some of them from the riot squad, armed with shields, assault rifles, batons, tear gas, rubber bullets, pepper spray and snipers. Some of the RCMP, in full camo, hid in the woods, while the others formed a large barricade on the highway blocking any movement by protesters.

    The Chief and Council were arrested, as well as numerous other protesters all while scrambling cell phone signals, cutting live video feeds and blocking media access to the site. Reports of RCMP pointing their assault rifles at elders and snipers aiming their scopes at children led to the burning of several RCMP cruisers. Yet, so far, the mainstream media has focused on the burning cars and not the acts of violation and intimidation by RCMP on the Mi’kmaw.

    This heavy-handed deployment of heavily armed RCMP cops against women and children shows Canada’s complete disregard for our fundamental human rights and freedoms, and their ongoing disdain for Indigenous peoples. One RCMP officer’s comments summarized government position perfectly: “Crown land belongs to government, not to fucking natives”. The RCMP have it wrong – Mi’kmaw treaties never surrendered our lands and we are still the rightful owners.

    http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2013/10/17/crown-land-belongs-to-the-government-not-to-fcking-natives/

    Of course, this sounds eerily similar to the words of former Ontario Premier Mike Harris who was reported to have said of the protest at Ipperwash “I want the fucking Indians out of the park”.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ipperwash-inquiry-spreads-blame-for-george-s-death-1.666937

    And we all know what happened there – law enforcement killed a peaceful unarmed protester named Dudley George. One might wonder if history is going to repeat itself. If we look to the Speech from the Throne as any indication, Harper has sent Canada on a direct collision course with First Nations – all in the name of resource development.

    Contrary to the Governor General’s introductory comments about Canada using its military force sparingly and that Canada responds “swiftly and resiliently to aid those in need”, the strategic wording indicates a much more ominous plan. Canada’s position vis-à-vis First Nations and natural resources is laid out as follows:

    –        First Nations are incapable of managing their own affairs and Canada will control them and make them accountable via legislation;

    –        Canada owns the natural resources  and will sell them;

    –        Canada will make major investments in infrastructure to protect these natural resources;

    –        Canada will increase military strength to protect Canadian sovereignty; and

    –        Increased military will protect Canada’s economy from terrorism.

    In other words, Canada does not recognize the ownership or rights of First Nations to their lands, waters and natural resources and will expend billions to ensure that no First Nations prevent the extraction of those resources. Canada and its military have referred to First Nations as terrorists before, and will no doubt be labeled as such when they defend their right to say no to mines or hydro-fracking, like in Elsipogtog for example.

    This aggressive display of power and intimidation in Elsipogtog was not met with an equal display of violence. Instead, the women, elders and children continued to drum and chant and pray for the health and safety of their peoples, their Nation and the lands and waters for all Canadians. Instead of scaring people away, this unconstitutional show of force is being met with solidarity blockades all over Canada and the United States.

    Listuguj in Quebec has blocked a bridge; Six Nations in Ontario has shut down a highway, there are protests outside Canadian embassies in New York City and Washington; and hundreds of rallies, marches, protests and blockades planned for later today and tomorrow. The horrific images of police violence at Elsipogtog inspired First Nations peoples all over Canada to collect supplies, send warriors and advocate for justice. Harper has inspired Indigenous resistance and action on the ground. There will be more First Nation protests and blockades in the coming days as well.

    The Idle No More flame that he lit last year has never faded – it was just waiting to be fanned once again. The solution has always been there:

    (1)  Respect the Nation to Nation relationship (our sovereignty and jurisdiction over our governments, lands and peoples);

    (2)  Address the current injustices (crises in housing, education, food, water, child and family services, murdered and missing Indigenous women); and

    (3)  Share the benefits and responsibility to protect the lands, water and natural resources like the treaties envisioned.

    It’s Harper’s move now – more tanks and RCMP violence or a negotiating table? http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Canada/ID/2412799896/ *Picture taken from Google images.

  • Defer, Deflect, Deny, Destroy: Harper’s First Nation Education Act

    *(My apologies for the length of this blog – it’s too critical of an issue to cover lightly)

     

    Since the federal government first assumed control over First Nation education, First Nations have suffered poor educational outcomes. During the residential school era, federal control over First Nation education meant a very real chance of starvation, torture, abuse, medical experimentation, beatings and death for the students. Upwards of 40% of the children who entered residential schools never made it out alive and others were permanently scarred.

    Prime Minister Harper apologized for the residential school policy, but has not taken a single step to address the disastrous results which stemmed from it like lost culture, language, identity, traditional Indigenous knowledges, belief systems, values, customs and practices. No sooner was the weak apology offered when Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre condemned it as a waste of money. The Harper government soon followed the apology by cutting funding to Indigenous languages which confirmed the lack of sincerity in the apology.

    Even a child knows that an apology is more than words; it requires an acknowledgement of the harm done, acceptance of responsibility for that harm, a promise not to do it again and actions to try to make amends for the harm done. Harper has not offered a true apology nor taken real actions to address the significant harms done. A litigation settlement for personal injuries, rapes and molestations that happened in those schools does not address the assimilatory harms.

    If Harper was sincere about the wrongfulness of Canada’s long-standing assimilation policy, it would not continue to have assimilation as its number one policy objective with regards to First Nations. If there was a true interest in righting wrongs in First Nation education, Harper need only read the many reports, publications, studies and statistics in relation to First Nation education which have clearly outlined the problems and the solutions. Yet, Harper has implemented his standard modus operandi in relation to First Nations issues: deny, deflect, defer and destroy.

    http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/crsp/article/viewFile/35220/32057

    Even when faced with contrary evidence, Harper’s government has consistently denied that there is a problem with funding or federal control over First Nation education. Instead they issue press releases and make public statements about how much they fund First Nation education and focus on isolated First Nations which have recently built schools. The Office of the Correctional Investigator, The Auditor General, Special Ministerial Representatives, United Nations investigators and numerous experts have raised the alarm on the serious nature of federal control over First Nation education. Some of the conclusions include the following:

    –        Indian Affairs has failed to implement recommendations “most important to lives and well-being of First Nations” (Auditor General 2011);

    –        73% of all water, 65% waste water systems in FNs are high risk – INAC so behind in infrastructure funding, will take $4.7 billion just to fix current systems (Neegan 2011);

    –        The “inequitable and differential outcomes for Aboriginal offenders” are the direct result of “federal correctional policies and practices” (Correctional Investigator 2010);

    –        “current funding practices do not lead to equitable funding among Aboriginal and First Nation communities” (OAG 2008);

    –        funding inequities results in inability for First Nations to provide adequate child welfare services (Auditor General 2008);

     

    –        “inequitable access to services for First Nations…contributing factors to the over-representation of Aboriginal children in child welfare system” (INAC 2004);

     

    –        Funding formula created by INAC does not ensure equitable access to education & gap widening (Auditor General 2004);

    –        INAC failed to give Parliament real picture on FN housing – said increased housing stock overall, but found an actual decline of 30% (Auditor General 2003).

    When the evidence is too overwhelming and the media will not let the issue drop, then the Harper Conservatives deflect responsibility and try to either change the subject or shift the blame to First Nations themselves by making allegations against First Nation leaders as corrupt or mismanaging funds. This pattern has been too consistent and one need only look at the housing crisis in Attawapiskat, the corresponding allegation of mismanagement and the court case which cleared Chief Spence’s name to see this m.o. in action.

    Sometimes, like in the case of First Nation education, the public criticism is so intense that deflection will not work and then Harper usually defers the issue to be studied. In the case of First Nation education, many successive federal governments have followed the same pattern of deferring the issue to study and the result is numerous studies. The problem for Harper is that all these studies continue to say the exact same thing: the problem is federal control and chronic underfunding of First Nation education. It should be no surprise that the studies were nearly unanimous in their solutions for poor First Nation education outcomes: First Nation control and appropriate funding. It’s not rocket science Harper.

    http://www.chiefs-of-ontario.org/sites/default/files/files/OCOFOV%20Education%20Report%202012.pdf

    When faced with an issue that simply won’t go away, and the usual deny, deflect and defer tactics won’t work; Harper usually reverts back to federal policy objective of assimilating Indians: destroying the “problem” all together. In an aggressive full blitz attack, Harper has introduced a complex legislative agenda which will have essentially the same effect as the White Paper 1969 would have: destroy Indians, reserves, treaties and any programs and services associated with them. With regards to education, Harper will introduce the First Nation Education Act, national legislation designed to trick First Nations into voluntarily giving up their treaty right to education in exchange for a federally-controlled legislative program.

    What are the implications of this legislation? The draft legislation has not yet been shared with the public, so I can’t comment on the specifics, but based on INAC’s Blueprint for Legislation document shared with First Nations, one can clearly see that First Nation concerns were valid:

    (1)  Indian agent-type federal controls, inspections and approvals will be tight;  

    (2)  The potential option of local First Nation control is limited and conditional;

    (3)  There will be no guaranteed funding as funding will still be policy-based; and

    (4)  Although promoted as optional legislation, the legislation proposes to set out a process for legal recognition and authorization to run schools.

     http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/DAM/DAM-INTER-HQ-EDU/STAGING/texte-text/fN-Education_blueprint-ebauche_1373053903701_eng.pdf

    One need only look at the current suite of legislation to see where this legislation is headed.

    Other serious concerns related to this legislation include the fact that there were no consultations which respect Canada’s legal obligation to obtain the free, informed and prior consent of First Nations required under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Instead, engagement sessions were held in urban areas across the country and largely skipped the 615+ First Nation communities. This legislation is paternalistic, unilaterally drafted and meant to be a one-size fits all approach to deflecting the real issue: federal control and chronic under-funding. The majority of First Nations did NOT ask for legislation and in fact passed numerous resolutions at the national, regional and provincial levels specifically opposing this legislation.

    One cannot forget that for many First Nations, First Nation education is a treaty right and those treaties are protected in both domestic and international law. Treaties are forever and are now protected in section 35 and cannot be unilaterally amended. This, together with the fact that this legislation also proposes to off-load (at least in part) First Nation education to the provinces makes this legislation unconstitutional. Canada is forgetting that when it supported UNDRIP, that article 14 states that First Nations have a right to establish and control their own education systems and Canada has an obligation to ensure that First Nation children have access.

    The failure to address First Nation education outcomes doesn’t even make economic sense. The 2% cap placed on funding has only made a bad situation worse. Yet, the studies show that were Canada to eliminate the gap between Canadian and First Nation education outcomes, this would yield $179 billion on GDP back to Canada. Why then would Canada continue to pay $100,000 a year to wrongfully imprison First Nations peoples, when a 4 year university education only costs $60,000 and we know the social and economic benefits of a good education? Canadians enjoy good education systems funded in large part from the wealth obtained from Indigenous lands and resources. It’s time to share the wealth as envisioned in the treaties.

    Every time Canada comes up with an idea on how to “fix” the “Indian problem” our people are oppressed, assimilated or lose our lives. Canada has failed miserably in their First Nation education policies. It’s long past time to step aside and allow First Nations peoples to heal from the inter-generational devastation caused by federal controls and fully support First Nation-controlled education systems. The treaties promised to fund these systems so that First Nations would prosper equally with our treaty partners. It’s time the treaties were honoured and all parties to the treaties enjoyed the benefits.

    Forget more paternalistic federal legislation and honour the treaties.

  • October 7th Day of Action, The Royal Proclamation and Idle No More: Wading Through the Hype

    Today is a day which will challenge Indigenous peoples and Canadians in the ongoing and very uncomfortable decolonization process. Will people celebrate Oct.7, 2013 as the 250th year since the issuance of The Royal Proclamation of 1763? Or will Canadians and Indigenous peoples see beyond the government hype and propaganda that comes with celebrating the War of 1812 or the Royal Proclamation? Will most Canadians even know what the Royal Proclamation is or that it is a constitutionally-protected document? What is it that Idle No More activists all over the country are calling for – a celebration of the Royal Proclamation or something else? http://www.idlenomore.ca/idlenomore_global_day_of_action_oct7proclaim In summary, the Royal Proclamation was issued in 1763 by King George III after the British Crown acquired lands claimed by the French in North America. It was intended to encourage settlement of North America by the British, even over lands formerly claimed as French. It was also intended to transition Indigenous peoples from French allegiances to British sovereignty. It further purported to establish reserved lands for Indigenous peoples in which they could  to hunt and fish. Yet, these “protected” lands were still to be made available for settlement, so long as it was done according to the rules set out in the Proclamation. While some argue that the Proclamation recognized Nationhood status of Indigenous peoples; partially protected Indigenous lands; and partially recognized Indigenous land rights; there are others who point out that Indigenous peoples were already living as strong, independent sovereign Nations prior to contact and did not need a British edict to declare partial recognition of land rights. The very essence of sovereignty is that it is lived, asserted, protected and defended every day – it cannot be granted or gifted by another sovereign. If there was any question about whether we should be celebrating the Royal Proclamation, one need only refer to how the federal Minister of Indian Affairs Bernard Valcourt has been re-writing history. http://news.morningstar.com/all/canada-news-wire/20131007C7734/statement-by-the-honourable-bernard-valcourt-on-the-250th-anniversary-of-the-royal-proclamation-of-1763.aspx Valcourt’s statement suggests that the Royal Proclamation was the beginning of the treaty process in Canada – which is false. The Mi’kmaw, Maliseet and Passmaquoddy were negotiating treaties in 1726, 1752,  and 1760 etc. There is nothing about the Royal Proclamation that indicates that it is a mutually-agreed upon document signed by Indigenous Nations and Britain. Even Valcourt acknowledges that it was a unilaterally-imposed document where Britain purported to set out how the relationship would work with Indigenous Nations – with no input from Indigenous Nations. It is in fact, just a pronouncement that Britain violated more times than it followed. Valcourt is also wrong when he states that it was the Royal Proclamation that led to the inclusion of section 35 in the Constitution Act, 1982. To the contrary, it was the efforts of Indigenous activists to try to find ways to protect our inherent rights. Sadly, section 35 turned out to be as much protection as the Royal Proclamation where Canada breaches it more than honours it. Section 35 has turned out to be a an empty shell of a constitutional promise which is used by Canada to deny First Nation rights under the guise of “consultation”. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is clear that the legal standard is “free, informed and prior consent”  – not just a watered-down duty to talk and impose whatever laws or policies that suits government agendas. So why then would we either celebrate the Royal Proclamation or base any of our resistance activities around it? Our resistance comes from our responsibility as Indigenous peoples to live, assert and defend our sovereignty and to protect the lands and waters we rely on to sustain our Nations and future generations. We should focus our symbols, inspiration, actions and rallying cries around our brave ancestors, their heroic efforts to protect our rights and the incredible inner strength of our peoples to resist and survive – despite everything that was done to us by the colonizers. There are no more powerful people than ours. To have survived scalpings, biological warfare (smallpox blankets), forced sterilizations of our women, deaths and torture in residential schools, the theft of tens of thousands of our babies from our families, the over-imprisonment of our men and women, the hundreds of murdered, missing and traded Indigenous women, and the pre-mature deaths of our peoples from contaminated water, lack of food, over-crowded housing and poor health – is a testament to our strength. Our culture and identity has the power to sustain us in difficult times and in my opinion, this is the core around which we should rise up and defend our lands, waters and peoples. The sooner we stop orienting ourselves around the laws, policies and media releases of the Canadian government, the stronger we will be in our resistance. Canada requires our participation in their processes to validate their ongoing oppression of our people – we can choose to withdraw and demand better. Harper should not assume that because there are no flashy media events happening every day that First Nations are not acting. Every social movement goes through phases and whether you call it Idle No More, Indigenous Nationhood Movement, or general resistance, Indigenous peoples are making plans, strategizing, asserting and defending their sovereignty. Those actions are sometimes hard to see amongst the sea of political media releases, government propaganda, commentator rhetoric and co-opted organizations. That being said, we still have true leaders, wise elders, strong grassroots peoples and our ancestors who are walking with us. Despite all the challenges, this movement will just continue to grow, expose the uncomfortable truths and force the fundamental change that is needed to keep the status quo from killing our people. http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/crsp/article/viewFile/35220/32057 Canadians will benefit from this process of decolonization too because the most valuable resources in the future will be farmable land and drinkable water and First Nations are on the front lines protecting them. Canadians have the power to help First Nations make life better for all of us – it’s as easy and making the choice.

  • Manitoba’s Epic Failure: Manitoba and Mining Companies Work Together to Deny First Nation Rights

    Dr. Pamela Palmater, Chair in Indigenous Governance

    And

    Chief Arlen Dumas, Mathias Colomb Cree Nation

    In Bruce Owen’s article in the Winnipeg Free Press “Chiefs agree to work on revenue sharing” dated Aug. 23, 2013, Manitoba’s Energy and Mines Minister Dave Chomiak announced that seven First Nation Chiefs had agreed to work with the province and mining companies on revenue sharing in the form of jobs and economic opportunities related to mining. Chomiak was also quoted as saying that the mining companies are onside with sharing revenue from mines with First Nations. However, in dismissing Red Sucker Lake First Nation’s actions to evict Mega Precious Metals from their territories, he failed to present the whole picture to Manitobans.

    Manitoba is one of the only provinces that does not have a First Nation consultation policy, despite the Supreme Court of Canada saying since the 1990’s that the provinces have a legal duty to consult, accommodate and obtain the consent of First Nations for activities on their reserve, treaty and traditional lands. Despite their reference to a “draft” policy, First Nations have been left out of decisions in relation to natural resources on their lands. This has been a long-standing grievance with First Nations whose inherent, Aboriginal and treaty rights are constitutionally-protected. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which Canada supported, also guarantees protections for First Nations lands and resources and reaffirms that states require First Nation consent.

    While Chomiak’s quotes make it seem like Red Sucker Lake is the only First Nation opposed to illegal mining in their territory; that could not be further from the truth. Mathias Colomb Cree Nation has also taken steps to protect their traditional, treaty and reserve lands from Hudbay Minerals – a Canadian mining giant currently in court for alleged abuses of Indigenous peoples against mining in Guatemala. Hudbay was issued Stop Work Orders and eviction notices after failing to talk to Mathias Colomb Cree Nation.

    These two communities are not alone in their efforts. On April 26, 2013, a protest was held outside of the Mines Branch in Winnipeg where approximately fifteen to twenty Chiefs, supported by Idle No More and other grassroots community members, were in attendance. Nine Chiefs, including Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Grand Chief Derek Nepinak, Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak Grand Chief David Harper and Southern Chiefs Organization Grand Chief Murray Clearsky, as well as Chiefs from Manto Sipi, Red Sucker Lake, Mathias Colomb Cree Nation, Wasagamack, Buffalo Point, and Garden Hill First Nations, issued a press release expressing very specific concerns against Manitoba’s illegal licenses and permits.

    The Minister also failed to share that the mining companies are not onside with sharing the wealth from First Nations lands and resources. Hudbay Minerals has never provided any of the wealth to Mathias Colomb Cree Nation and its mining operations have negatively impacted the health of the plants, animals and waters in their territory. Similarly, Mega Precious Metals has not indicated a willingness to share the wealth from its mine on Red Sucker Lake territory. It is due to this consistent refusal by the province of Manitoba to comply with constitutionally-imposed legal obligations to First Nations, and the mining companies reliance on illegal licenses and permits, that First Nations in Manitoba are rising up to defend their rights. Even the United Nations report on mining on Indigenous lands deems licenses issued this way as “tainted” and not legal.

    For Minister Chomiak to say that the mining companies are onside is perhaps the most outrageous claim in the article. In actual fact, both Hudbay and Mega Precious instituted heavy-handed measures against Mathias Colomb Cree Nation and Red Sucker Lake First Nations when they went out on their traditional lands and engaged in their peaceful traditional activities. The RCMP were called in, litigation was filed against the Chiefs and community members and injunctions were obtained to keep these First Nations off their own lands (and in the case of MCCN, an injunction was also obtained against Pam Palmater, an activist with Idle No More).

    Just because seven Chiefs out of 63 want to meet with the province and mining companies, does not mean the majority of First Nations are onside with either Manitoba’s illegal licenses or mining companies who knowingly profiting from illegally-issued licenses and permits. To make this assumption would also ignore all the resolutions and motions passed from First Nations and First Nation organizations. For example, Swampy Cree Tribal Council passed a motion this year stating:

    “Swampy Cree Tribal Council will not recognize any mining table, committee or working group or panel of experts set up by the Province of Manitoba or any decisions or recommendation they may make in relation to our lands and resources.”

    Similarly, the Treaty Land Entitlement Committee resolved this year that:

    “We hereby direct the federal and provincial government to honour and abide by our Moratorium not to use permits, licenses and any other dispositions or actions that may impact our Respective Treaty, Traditional territories and Ancestral lands”

    The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs and other First Nation organizations have passed similar resolutions supporting First Nations in their efforts to protect their sovereignty, land and resources. But this issue just isn’t about First Nations – First Nations are trying to protect all Manitobans from the province’s illegal activities, like allowing Hudbay to develop a mine in a provincial park.

     

    It’s time Manitoba recognized the sovereignty and ownership of First Nations over their own lands and resources and started finding ways to work together to share the wealth and protect the lands as envisioned by the treaties.