I have been watching and listening with interest over the last few weeks about what issues the media outlets have been featuring, as well as what federal, provincial and First Nation politicians have been speaking about. Despite the fact that some very important court rulings have come out which were in favour of First Nations peoples, they seem to have gone largely unnoticed. Similarly, there have been some pretty significant funding cuts to First Nations communities as well as various First Nations organizations, yet the political world has been all but silent on the issue. This makes me wonder how far gone our current political system must be if we can’t celebrate minor victories or use those victories to start pushing back against the Harper Conservatives’ (Cons) assimilatory agenda. The so-called Crown-First Nation Gathering (CFNG) was supposed to result in what the National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Shawn Atleo called “re-setting the relationship”. In his words, this meeting, together with the most recent federal budget, amounted to the kind of “momentum” that indicated Harper was hearing the voices of our people. That is a delusion of epic porportions. CFNG: The CFNG was nothing more than Harper confirming the Con’s position vis-a-vis First Nations: control and assimilation. Harper confirmed that the Indian Act would stay and even confirmed that new legislation would be imposed on our First Nations which would exact even more federal and soon-to-be provincial control over our communities. This legislation will also dump more liability on our communities and no funding. There are no less than 6 pieces of legislation speeding through the House and Senate or will soon be introduced. The only re-setting of the relationship that happened at the CFNG was that the feds took back their paternalistic control of “Indian Affairs” with little resistance from Atleo. Federal Budget: The federal budget was no surprise at all for us grassroots community members. A long term conservative told me that Harper’s Cons would never give any additional funds to First Nations communities or organizations and that the best they could “hope” for were minor increases in one area off-set by decreases in another – as the ultimate goal was “integration”. This is a fancy new word for assimilation, but since Tom Flanagan wore that word out, no one wants to call it what it is anymore. The prediction given my that conservative MIB has proven to be true as the federal budget offered ZERO for housing, ZERO for post-secondary education and ZERO for child and family services. What little was offered is countered by First Nation population growth, inflation, the cumulative effect of years of chronic underfunding, and increases in federal bureaucrat salaries and training costs. The pittance given for education amounted to 4% of what was actually needed – this is hardly a “re-setting” the relationship, except but backwards. AFN Election: Now we have the AFN election to look forward to in July. Campaigning started at the CFNG and Atleo has been on a whirlwind speaking tour all across the country ever since. He has been downplaying the effect of the disastrous federal budget; ignoring the fact that nothing came out of the National Panel on Education; is being silent on the issue of so many pieces of legislation being rushed through the House and Senate; and opting instead, to speak about reconciliation. All the attention now seems to be on the upcoming election as opposed to what is happening all around the AFN. The Reality: If we relied exclusively on sound bites from Atleo, we would never know that the First Nation Statistical Institute, National Aboriginal Health Organization, or the National Centre for First Nations Governance were having all their funding cut and must close their doors. I am not saying that these cuts are good or bad, but how are we as grassroots supposed to know? What did these organizations do or not do for First Nations? Why is the AFN and others silent? How come no one is even talking about it? We also wouldn’t know that the Native Women’s Association of Canada and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami had 40% of their health funds cut. There was a small press release about AFN’s health funding being cut by 40%, but little more than that. What about the individual First Nations who are reporting that their band funding agreements (BFAs) with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) have been reduced by millions of dollars? Or the fact that INAC has been indicating to First Nations that cuts of 5% and 10% will occur over the next two years to their BFAs? Why is no one explaining this to community members? Forced “Integration”: The Cons are making good on their promise to not increase funding for essential services and to force our integration into “Canadian society” under the guise of equality, reconciliation, jobs and mortgages. We know they are bullies, we know they have no intention of addressing chronic underfunding let alone recognizing and respecting our treaties, Aboriginal title to our traditional territories, or our inherent right to be self-determining. We also know their plan – (1) increase controls over us through legislation, prisons and child welfare; (2) increase access to our lands and resources through legislation and minimizing our rights and (3) speed up our assimilation through legislation and funding incentives for “willing partners”. When will the AFN adjust their strategy and share that with communities? We don’t all have to agree, but we should at least be able to discuss our concerns. The Cons are very good at using financial incentives and disincentives to get the “Indians” to do what they want. Play ball and you might get a Senate seat, a Queen’s Jubilee Award, a plush job on some panel, board, commission, port authority, or tribunal. Keeping quiet might mean that only part of your organizational funding will be cut – but make no doubt, it will still be cut. Don’t play ball and you could lose all your organizational funding, be vilified in the House of Commons and the media, or be monitored not only by CSIS, but also by INAC’s new not-so-covert spy group who spend our money spying on Indigenous women advocates. If you don’t act as a “willing partner” there will be no photo-ops, dinners at the PM’s house, or lucrative corporate gigs. You will not get special mention in PM speeches or have him attend your events. But none of those carrots have any meaning, none are lasting and they only accrue to individuals. None of those tokens are helpful for our Nation-building priorities. So, while I have said time and again Canada needs to make a policy choice of getting out of the business of trying to assimilate us, similarly our leaders need to decide whether they stand on their sovereignty and protect our lands nad peoples or whether they will take their chances on INAC’s integration policies and the few trinkets offered in return. In all of this political mess, when do the children become a priority? What about the blatant discrimination against our Indigenous women at the Pickton inquiry? Why are we not celebrating the small victories we have and use those to create our own momentum and start pushing back against Cons’ politics? What’s the worse that can happen? More funding cuts? How bad does it have to get before we stand up? Our people need to hear their leaders act on their behalf, not make political deals behind closed doors. I’ll tell you who is standing up – grassroots people and First Nations communities. Chief Simon v. INAC Does anyone recall hearing about INAC trying to reduce the social assistance amounts for First Nations in New Brunswick? Chief Jesse Simon on behalf of Elsipogtog First Nation and the Mi’kmaw First Nations in New Brunswick challenged that heavy-handed federal decision. They applied for an interlocutory injunction (an order from the court) to stop INAC from implementing a decision the Minister made to force First Nations to reduce their social assistance levels to provincial levels. The court noted that this decision was being imposed on a community that already confronts “severe poverty” where 85% of residents are on social assistance. The Chiefs had previously passed a motion stating they would not be part of assisting INAC in implementing cuts to social welfare programs. They refused to give in to INAC pressure and even vowed legal action if necessary. The court noted that the Chiefs were “justifiably annoyed” that no consultations had taken place and that INAC was going to impose this policy regardless of what the Chiefs said and letters from INAC confirmed this. The difference would be approximately $300 per month less for individual recipients if they used provincial levels, whereas some would lose all their income assistance, like those that live off-reserve or who have to live with others on reserve. The judge held: “In my view, the estimated decline in income assistance rates under the Policy and the potential for ineligibility will cause emotional and psychological stress amounting to irreparable harm for some Recipients. Individuals who are reliant on income assistance are especially vulnerable even to small changes in the resources available to meet their basic needs”. Therefore the judge granted the injunction which prevents INAC from reducing social assistance amounts in New Brunswick until a court has a chance to hear the whole case. Why has there not been much media coverage or AFN commentary on this case? This issue, while not flashy like a national panel or CFNG, impacts the daily quality of life of many grassroots First Nations peoples in New Brunswick. That is not to say that we should all be focused on social assistance as a means of addressing our Nation-building and decolonization efforts, but the disastrous effects of long-term federal control, the theft of our lands and resources, and the genocidal actions committed against our people has led to such extreme poverty, that the issue merits attention – especially when chronically under-funded First Nations are threatened with even further cuts. First Nations Child and Family Caring Society v. INAC Or perhaps some of you have heard of this case? It is a decision that came from the federal court on April 18, 2012. It is a case that challenges the chronic and severe underfunding of child welfare services for First Nations children living on reserve. Cindy Blackstock, who heads the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society (FNCFCS) has been championing this issue for years now. She is adamant that First Nations children, the most vulnerable in our society, should not receive less funding simply because they are First Nations peoples. Her tireless efforts, passion and dedication to the children resulted in her filing a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) for discrimination. http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/rss/FNCFCS%20decision%2018-04-2012%20ENG.pdf Blackstock alleged that Canada funds First Nations child welfare at rates far below those of the provinces and that this is discrimination. The CHRC forwarded the complaint to the Tribunal for consideration, but INAC kept trying to find ways to have the complaint thrown out. One of INAC’s arguments convinced the Tribunal to do just that. They successfully argued that since First Nations were the only group which receive child welfare funds from the feds, there was no comparator group and thus no discrimination. The federal court considered the Tribunal’s decision and found that it was “unreasonable” and that it in fact erred in law. In the court’s opinion, “the Tribunal applied a rigid and formalaic interpretation of the provision – one that is inconsistent with the search for substantive equality mandated by the Canadian Human Rights Act and Canada’s equality jurisprudence.” What the court is referring to here is the difference between formal and substantive equality. Formal equality means treating everyone the exact same. Substantive equality means providing people with equal opportunity taking into account their differences, many of which are beyond their control. First Nations are provided with significantly less funding than non-First Nations children in the range of 22%. Some of the services that would prevent children from being removed in the first place are not funded at all. This means that a “disproportionate number of First Nations children are removed from their homes, thus perpetuating the legacy of the residential school system”. This has resulted in upwards of 30-40% of all children in care being Aboriginal, despite only being 4% of the total population. Canada has refused to act despite being aware of the problem and being presented with studies which prove it. Even INAC’s own website noted that the high rate of First Nation children in care reflects a lack of prevention services. Finding the Tribunal decision to be unfair and unreasonable, the federal court ordered the Tribunal to rehear the case with a new set of Tribunal members. While this is a small, interim victory, it means a great deal to First Nations children in care. Federal, provincial and First Nation leaders should be making this a priority issue to be addressed instead of litigated and should at least be talking about the solutions to chronic underfunding with First Nations communities and in the media. We need to be informing our grassroots, building our collective capacity and at least talking about the issues covered in the Simon and FNSFCS cases. First Nations include everyone: First Nations include not just Chief and Council, not just well-known First Nation business men or national leaders, but also include those grassroots citizens who live in poverty on social assistance, those who are over-represented in jails, and those who are over-represented in the child welfare system. We cannot forget about our most vulnerable simply because they are out of sight. How many of our citizens were lost to our Nations by the 60’s scoop forced adoptions? How many live homeless on the streets of major cities? How many more hundreds of our Indigenous women need to go murdered and missing? Some of youth are forced to sit on waiting lists that are over 10,000 students long hoping for a chance at post-secondary education. Some of our families live in sheds without running water or heat. Where is the action for them? We Need an Emergency Plan: We have a crisis of poverty on our hands which requires an immediate action plan that involves the federal, provincial and First Nations governments. We don’t need any more studies, panels or commissions – we need action. No one wants to talk about Kelowna and that is fine, but we need an intervention of that magnitude to just deal with the immediate crisis which affects many (not all) of our First Nations. If I hear another politician stand up and talk about reconciliation or how mining will be the cure for all our woes, I think I might burst. Destroying our lands to provide short-term jobs will never cure the generations of illness caused by past and current colonization. Landing a consulting job with a timber company won’t bring back our languages once they are gone. Owning an acre of land in fee simple and having a house with a mortgage won’t revive our traditional laws, governing systems and values. Canada needs to halt its genocidal, assimilatory laws and policies now and national First Nations leaders need to start acting on their responsibility to stand up for those who can’t. If the AFN can’t come up with a better strategy, they will start to become less and less relevant to not only regional First Nation organizations but to the rising number of grassroots activists who are not going to take much more inaction. None of us are a “success” until all of our men, women, children, elderly, and the forgotten ones are back under our jurisdiction, protection and love. We suffer collectively as Nations and prosper collectively as Nations. If any of our leaders need some help, I know a few hundred thousand grassroots people who have unique skills, ideas and aspirations for the future that are well-grounded in our diverse traditional languages, laws, beliefs, and values. Try reaching out. Decolonization is not easy, but it is easier together.
Tag: politics
-
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
-
Brazeau’s Tiresome Campaign Against Chiefs Will Not Maintain His 15 Minutes of Fame
Although my blog site already says this, I have to repeat it for the small handful of Brazeau fans that exist in Canada. This blog and every single word contained therein represents my own personal opinions and views as an Indigenous person. It does not represent legal advice nor should it be relied on as such. This blog, as with all others, represents my “fair comment”, on a wide range of legal and political issues, i.e., my honestly-held, personal opinions which I have based on personal experiences, media reports, Senate documents, as well as other discussions and events that have been relayed to me by Indigenous people all over this country. There is no malice in any of my blogs and, in fact, they are designed to engage with other Indigenous Peoples and to think critically about our state of affairs. This blog also does not hurt his “reputation” for his reputation, as has been relayed to me by Indigenous people, media and himself others confirms that he is an Indigenous person (some would argue used to be) who obtained his fame and political power by trashing Chiefs. Senator Patrick Brazeau went from obscurity to enemy number one in Indian country because of his singular focus on trashing First Nations and Chiefs at every public opportunity. I have seen him on TV, quoted in newspapers, speaking in the Senate, heard his videos, and even been present in public forums where he literally trashes Chiefs as though such negativity and stereotypes were acceptable or even helpful in the debate. Whenever he loses some of the limelight, he will come up with his own bizarre home video to share with the public to again stir up some controversy and of course, publicity for himself. Prior to becoming a hand-selected conservative Senator, Brazeau was the President of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP) for a very short period of time. I say President, because although he called himself “Chief”, he certainly did nothing to earn that title and in fact so often trashed Chiefs, I often wondered why he was so desperate to be called Chief? He only became President by default when the former one stepped down. He served out that term and was elected again amongst much controversy and several political plots to have him removed as President shortly thereafter – of course none of that ever made the media. He appeared to use his very limited time as President to get as much media attention for himself as possible and the common theme was to stereotype First Nations and Chiefs in negative ways. This of course caught the attention of the conservatives, whose former political advisor was none other than Tom Flanagan – the poster boy for promoting the assimilation of First Nations. There is no better way to sell an otherwise objectionable or unconscionable idea than to get an Indian to do it. Here is where Brazeau found his niche. By doing conservative bidding, he would get his media fame and make up for his failed modelling career and his failed attempt to become a real lawyer. We have to keep in mind that Brazeau brought no real political experience to the table when he became the President of CAP. He was a self-described former model and had completed some law school courses. Oh, and I can’t forget – he was also allegedly a whiz in martial arts. How that ever qualified him to try to lead a national Aboriginal organization is beyond me. FORMER MODEL: “PRESENTABLE FACE” FOR CAP: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=3f7827a1-d524-4c56-a6f4-d86bb1aada68 I think the above article may have unknowingly hit the nail on the head about where Brazeau gets his qualifications – it could be unresolved anger and jealousy for having lived a “rock’s throw” away from the reserve and perhaps is why he is so bent on “throwing a few” rocks at First Nations. First Nations are not to blame for his living as a non-status Indian for part of his life and growing up off reserve. We all know that is Canada’s legacy. There is also a saying – don’t throw rocks if you live in a glass house. While Brazeau clamored for media attention through throwing rocks at chiefs, he forgot to look in his own backyard. There are many media sources which say that Brazeau left CAP in financial and administrative shambles, that he had originally wanted to double-dip, i.e. get a 6-figure salary from CAP and a 6-figure salary from the Senate, that he was not paying his child support and even worse, that several former employees had filed sexual harassment complaints against him. Here are some links to related media reports: SEXUAL HARASSMENT COMPLAINT AGAINST BRAZEAU http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/01/07/brazeau-senate.html BRAZEAU LAGGED ON $100 CHILD SUPPORT http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/585027 BRAZEAU WANTED BOTH JOBS AND BOTH SALARIES http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/568616 SECOND WOMAN FILES SEXUAL HARASSMENT AGAINST BRAZEAU http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/568616 BRAZEAU CHOOSES STAFF ALLEGED AS “OFFICE DRINKERS” http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20090208/senator_brazeau_090208/ BRAZEAU DEFENDS DRIVING PORCHE AND REPRESENTING IMPOVERISHED http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20090208/senator_brazeau_090208/ Certainly, this is not the kind of resume I would want from a person that would represent me in the Senate. In addition, the current President of CAP, Betty-Ann Lavallee has indicated that Brazeau is suing her and CAP for speaking out publicly about Brazeau. I have not seen the actual Statement of Claim, so I can’t provide any details. When interviewed, Brazeau always tries to shift the focus on his critics, as if they just make these things up. Some elders have indicated their view that by not taking responsibility for any of his actions, Brazeau cannot ever grow and become a better person. If we are to believe what is reported in the media about the horrible mess that CAP’s finances were left in after Brazeau’s reign, then we start to get a picture about his real talents or lack thereof. CAP’s ACCOUNTS FROZEN: http://media.knet.ca/node/2089 On a more personal note, I used to be a member of the New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council (NBAPC), which is a provincial affiliate of CAP. I used to attend their Annual General Meetings (AGMs) and one year Brazeau, then President of CAP attended to give a speech to the delegates. Instead of focusing on the severe poverty in off-reserve Aboriginal communities, lack of housing, jobs, and recognition of rights, his mantra was “Down with the Chiefs”! I believe that session was taped, but I never saw it ever reproduced. There were many of us sitting in the audience in absolute shock as he loudly and passionately shouted “Down with the Chiefs”. He completely ignored the fact that although the NBAPC represented off-reserve Aboriginal peoples, many of them still had band membership with their home communities; many had close relations with their families and friends on reserve, and more still worked in solidarity with their communities, including their chiefs, to bring about change for their people. His stereotyping of all chiefs as bad, not only hurt the hearts and souls of the people he spoke to, but he betrayed the very position with which he occupied – to be a spokesperson of the people he represented. No one in my family or circle of friends and relations held such negative, stereotypical views about our leaders – so I was left who the heck was he representing? From that point on, every time I saw him in the media, he was literally parroting everything that the Minister of Indian Affairs or conservative MPs had to say about Aboriginal peoples. At one of the last AGMs of CAP that he ever attended during his short reign, one of the delegates stood up and turned his back to Brazeau, when Brazeau got up to address the delegation. In our tradition, this is our way of saying that the person being shunned is no longer considered an Indigenous person which belongs to the community. No one yelled or challenged Brazeau because from that point on, as far as many were concerned, he was no longer a part of the Indigenous community. It was not long after that, that Brazeau was appointed to the Senate where he has been given a forum to continue trashing our communities through our leaders. Many people across the country who write to me, call or meet me, feel that Brazeau has single-handedly set back all the public education that has been done over the last 20 years to overcome the racist stereotypes about First Nations. Now, thanks to Brazeau and other right-wing groups and academics, it has become acceptable again to publicly insult, stereotype, and humiliate our people. The really sad thing about Brazeau’s situation is that he was so young and inexperienced that he could not see how easily he was manipulated and used by the conservatives. What was so clear to those of us who were more experienced and used to the kinds of political games and divide and conquer methods used by governments, was beyond Brazeau’s comprehension. Instead of seeking advice and guidance from the many experienced leaders in our communities – some of whom have done amazing things for their communities, he acted as if he had all the answers. It was pitiful to watch, especially since it is so rare for an Indigenous person to be so completely “converted”. Despite all this, what it comes down to at the end of the day is personal responsibility. Many elders have told me that Brazeau had a choice: he could be a spokesperson for his people or for himself and it appears as though he chose the latter. According to the elders, he therefore has to accept full responsibility for all the damage he has done and is doing in his pursuit of fame and power. I have learned over the years that our elders’ wisdom should not be discounted lightly. Even if Brazeau would take time to consider the criticism that is levelled against him, he might be forgiven for ignoring it. Yet he seems to relish in the spotlight and use those opportunities to further insult and stereotype our leaders and in so doing, our communities and future generations. I have written previously about my concerns over Brazeau’s use of Senate insignia and meeting rooms to film his bizarre videos criticizing chiefs, his uninformed opinions on our communities, and the disrespectful way he talks about our leaders. Many experienced Senators work on various issues outside of the Senate to support important community issues – but they do so in a helpful, positive way. Using the resources of the Senate to vilify, even if only by implication, a cultural group that is already the most vulnerable group in society, goes well beyond what is conduct expected of a Senator. Readers may also recall that when I was invited to the Senate to present on Bill S-4 regarding matrimonial real property (MRP) as an expert witness, Brazeau later, when I was not there to defend myself, wrongly accused me of being a paid consultant to the Chiefs and therefore asked the Senate to ignore my expert legal testimony based on the unfounded allegation that I was only there to “feather my nest”. When APTN made my subsequent complaint public, it was the Chiefs who stepped forward to defend me publicly and by letters. Did Brazeau ever apologize to me personally? No. But I can tell you that the next time I was invited as an expert witness to speak to the Senate on Bill C-3, I was unexpectedly disinvited at the last minute after having already made travel and other arrangements. I have to wonder whether I will ever be invited back after having spoke out against Brazeau’s behaviour. Now, Brazeau’s tiresome campaign against the Chiefs continues. Many chiefs have complained how he treats them disrespectfully whenever they appear before a committee of the Senate. Brazeau himself admits to “testy” exchanges. I wonder if Brazeau would ever think to speak to PM Harper that way?? Of course not. Some of you may be questioning why I would compare First Nations Chiefs to a PM – well, if its good enough for the salary issue, why is it not applicable for other issues? The public can’t have it both ways. Below is a link to APTN’s story on the issue: http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2011/02/09/brazeau-not-legitimate-represenative-of-first-nations-ontario-chiefs/ The letter that is referenced comes from the Chiefs of Ontario and is addressed to all Senators and Members of Parliament. It is signed by the heads of its regional organizations as well as Chiefs from Six Nations and Akwesasne. They raise a very important issue: that Brazeau was never nominated, appointed, elected or in any way chosen by First Nations people to speak for them and therefore he should not do so. In fact, they argue that it is a breach of our numerous international human rights. The letter goes on to state that while they recognize that the conservative government has the right to appoint anyone it chooses to the Senate, the government must recognize that First Nations have the right to choose their own leaders and have asked that the Conservatives: “desist from characterizing Senator Brazeau as someone who can speak to our issues”. This seems like a reasonable request given that many have questioned not only his ability to be a Senator and former President of CAP, but also his lack of experience personally or politically in First Nations. Given that some of Brazeau’s own “grass roots” people have literally turned their backs on him and no longer even consider him Indigenous, I think the request is more than reasonable. We are all sick of Brazeau’s tiresome campaign against First Nations and their leaders. Many of us are even sick of seeing him on TV. Let him sit in the Senate with his former CAP employees and work on other issues. Leave the business of First Nations issues to those with the experience to add something positive to the agenda. Let’s get on with the business of finding solutions to the serious and even deadly issues facing Indigenous peoples in Canada and finally wrap up Brazeau’s 15 minutes of fame.
-
The Slow, Painful Death of CAP: Can it be Saved?
THIS BLOG DOES NOT REPRESENT LEGAL ADVICE AND IS SOLELY MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION. The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP) is a national Aboriginal organization that once claimed to represent the interests of status and non-status Indians living off-reserve in Canada. The current national President is Betty-Ann Lavallee who used to be the President of one of CAP’s affiliates – the New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council (NBAPC). CAP has recently changed its website and in so doing, has changed the focus of who it claims to represent being “the interests of its provincial and territorial affiliate organizations”. The provincial and territorial affiliates of CAP located in the East receive core funding for their operations, whereas those in the west have struggled without much success in obtaining funding. CAP’s board of directors are comprised of the Presidents of each of the affiliate organizations – most of whom, including CAP, prefer to be referred to as “Chiefs” – ironic given their anti-Chief stance. CAP used to be known as the Native Council of Canada (NCC) and in its early years had incredibly dynamic, passionate leaders who advocated strongly on behalf of those Aboriginal peoples who were excluded from legal recognition and equal access to Aboriginal and treaty rights as well as programs and services. Incredible leaders like Viola Robinson, Tony Belcourt, Harry Daniels, Ron George, and Dwight Dorey went on to make other significant contributions to the plight of off-reserve Aboriginal peoples. The NCC was there at the constitutional talks, they advocated for equality for Aboriginal women during the Bill C-31 era, and were on the front-lines organizing protests when governments were going to reduce housing for off-reserve Aboriginal peoples. The NCC at the time also represented Metis peoples and their struggles for recognition and equality long before the Powley case and the creation of the Metis National Council (MNC). Some may find it hard to believe, but the NCC and the Assembly of First Nations (AFN)(formerly NIB) used to work closely together on a wide variety of issues. Unfortunately, those days are long over. The NCC (now CAP) started its slow, downward descent when Patrick Brazeau (then Vice-President) assumed the position of President when former President, Dwight Dorey stepped down after 7 years in office. There was no election for the position of President by the members of the off-reserve – it was an automatic assumption of Presidency as per CAP’s Constitution and By-Laws. Brazeau served less than 3 years as the National President, but in that short time managed to nearly destroy CAP and its reputation. Some Board members of CAP have indicated that Brazeau served a limited purpose in that he at least raised the profile of CAP and should be commended for his aggressive media agenda. I disagree. Simply raising the media profile of an organization is not an accomplishment if the reasons for why the profile was raised are negative or serve to hurt others. Brazeau used CAP as his “launching pad” to obtain media attention for himself, not CAP; align himself politically with the Conservative Party; and eventually jump ship and land himself a conservative Senate seat all while trashing First Nations and their leaders. That might suit Brazeau’s interests, but what did CAP get out of the deal? If you listen to Board members and various media reports, what Brazeau left CAP with was controversy, destroyed relationships with other NAO’s, allegations of sexual harassment, a decreased budget, financial turmoil, and worst of all – a confused and discouraged membership. Brazeau, now Senator Brazeau, has been described in the media as a “loose cannon” and “self-promoting” for spewing negativity against First Nations communities and their leaders at every opportunity. Unfortunately for CAP, this still has repercussions for them given how he used his position at CAP to gain his initial media profile. But that is as far as my sympathy goes for CAP. Once Brazeau finally agreed to give up his Presidency at CAP (and not obtain both a CAP salary and Senate salary as the he had originally intended) CAP had every opportunity to distance itself from the self-serving Brazeau-legacy. It could have elected leadership which would bring CAP back to its roots and its core mandate to be THE political voice for off-reserve Aboriginal peoples and take the much-needed steps to repair its relationships with other NAO’s and more importantly, the grass roots people Brazeau left behind. That is not what happened. Wisely or unwisely, some voters in the Atlantic region reported difficulty getting the then President of NBAPC, Betty-Ann Lavallee, to do any work on behalf of its constituency and so decided that if they could not get rid of her constitutionally (as she always had her lawyer by her side), then voting her into CAP would at least get her out of NB. I can see the appeal of such an approach. The plan worked, except no one could foresee that no election would held at the NBAPC and that a staff member of the NBAPC would eventually acclaimed as President. This has left many NB members dazed and confused to say the least. But, that is all just the behind the scenes and media gossip. It will never be confirmed or denied and no explanations will ever be forthcoming as is the case in political controversies. In fairness, CAP should be judged on its record. In the short time that Betty-Ann Lavallee has been President of CAP, she has shown an eerily similar disposition to that of Brazeau, although much less informed. Lavallee has demonstrated that she will flip-flip CAP’s position on just about any issue to suit the conservative party line. All of this is done in the name of CAP but without consulting in a meaningful way with its own members (not Board) on issues that are important to them. By way of example, CAP prepared a submission to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC)to put on the record its position on Bill C-3 Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act. CAP argued that INAC did not consult with Aboriginal peoples, that the Indian Act’s registration provisions were discriminatory, and that section 6(1) of the Act should be amended to include all those born pre-1985 to remedy the full extent of gender inequality in that provision. By the time it rolled around to CAP’s turn to present to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (AAON) on Bill C-3, CAP had changed its tune and was willing to support the bill. In case there was any doubt about CAP’s Brazeau-esque support of the Conservative Government, when CAP appeared before the Senate Standing Committee on Bill S-4 Matrimonial Real Property on Reserve, Lavallee specifically endorsed the Conservative Party’s suite of legislation. In fact, if you read the transcripts of her submission on Bill S-4, it sounds more like a Conservative Party ad for their initiatives than any sustantive input on the bill. She cited the residential schools apology, Bill S-4, Bill C-3, and the right of Indians to vote as significant evidence of the Conservative Government’s commitment to “humanity” for Aboriginal peoples. If anyone was under any doubt about whether Lavallee’s CAP would abandon the Brazeau legacy or cuddle up to the Conservatives – Lavallee settled it that day. Furthermore, in stark contrast to Brazeau’s media blitz, Lavallee is almost never in the media on any issue. It is as though CAP has fallen off the face of the earth. CAP used to stand for equality and didn’t make deals that were harmful to its members. Now the CAP Presidency is used either as a political launching pad or just a job. Some might say that I am simply being critical of any NAO. To my mind, what I am most critical of is the holier-than-thou hypocrisy started by Brazeau and being carried forward by Lavallee. When Brazeau accepted his Senate seat, he announced to the public that he would be maintaining his position and salary at CAP as well as drawing a Senate salary. This seems to be a pretty hypocritical position for one who has so vocally criticized any First Nation Chief that only makes ONE 6 figure salary, let alone TWO. Brazeau criticizes First Nations for not respecting the rights of Aboriginal women, yet it was Brazeau who made headlines for having sexual harassment complaints and made disparaging remarks against all the Aboriginal women who offered testimony on Bill S-4. Lavallee has proven to be no different. It is reported that Brazeau left CAP in financial turmoil, with various federal departments claiming “financial irregularities” and large sums of money that were not accounted for in their financial reports. So, some could argue that he left CAP in a mess. That doesn’t prevent Lavallee from taking the bull by the horns and getting the situation under control. Yet, at CAP’s recent AGM, many AGM delegates and some Board of Directors reported that CAP showed a deficit of nearly 2 million dollars. Yet despite this fact, Lavallee allegedly requested a significant increase to her 6 figure salary at a board meeting preceding the AGM. While some board members were against a raise until the deficit was addressed, it is reported that she nevertheless ended up with a raise. Now I don’t know about other Aboriginal people living off-reserve, but aside from the obvious hypocrisy, what does this say about the usefulness of CAP? Am I getting any value for the tax dollars I use to pay Lavallee’s inflated salary? It would be one thing if CAP was in a deficit because it had accomplished a long list of things for Aboriginal peoples living off-reserve, but I fear my tax dollars are being used to fund her trips to Bolivia and her salary increase, as opposed to any tangible improvements for Aboriginal peoples living off-reserve. Where is the self-restraint or the self-sacrifice? How could a real leader inflate their own salary when she has not even secured core funding for her own western affiliates? If CAP is not already dead, it is surely in the process of a slow, painful death as years now pass without advancing the cause for off-reserve Aboriginal peoples. Can CAP be saved? I think the better question is should it be saved? Is there anyone in Indian country ready and willing to support another NAO that appears to be more concerned about securing enough funding for consultants and staff to administer programs and services, than it does with making any substantive difference for Aboriginal people politically, legally, culturally or otherwise? I guess that call is for the grass roots people to make.