Warrior Life Studios

Pam Palmater

Tag: racism

  • Maxime Bernier’s “Extreme Multiculturalism” Twitter Rants Sound More Like Sour Grapes

    Last week, Conservative Member of Parliament, Maxime Bernier posted a series of tweets on Twitter espousing his opposition to “extreme multiculturalism” and the “cult of diversity” in Canada. According to Bernier, diversity will “destroy” the cultural identity of Canada and worse, will result in “cultural balkanization” that leads to social conflict and even “violence”. These tweets were not the usual fair commentary offered by elected officials on matters of public policy. No – there was something a bit more frantic, even desperate about these tweets. These tweets sounded like the rantings of a wayward politician who, having failed in all of his political endeavours to date, couldn’t think of any other way to get attention but to ride the populist white supremacy wave.

    A combination of deep-seated racism and white superiority, together with Trump-like fear-mongering seems to be the current populist recipe for manufacturing hate and division for the purpose of political gain. It also seems to reward the instigators with gratuitous attention on social media.

    If we are to understand Bernier’s Sunday night tweet rant better, we have to understand that Bernier is a failed politician. He was a separatist from Quebec who voted in the 1995 referendum for Quebec to separate from Canada, but that vote and his efforts, failed. He was later successful in being elected a Conservative MP from Beauce, Quebec and was even appointed Foreign Affairs Minister under former Prime Minister Stephen Harper. However, he was forced to resign in scandal when he left classified documents at his girlfriend’s place for nearly a month. After Harper’s Conservatives were devastated in the last election, giving Trudeau’s Liberals a majority government, Bernier ran for leadership of the Conservative party and lost to Andrew Scheer. Soon after, he released portions of a cry-all book about how he lost the leadership bid, but publication was halted. His own peers said this cry-all book was more about “sour grapes” from losing and his “vanity” and need for attention. Most recently, he was silently kicked from Scheer’s shadow cabinet.

    If ever there was a recipe for some hateful sour-grapes, this would be it. A failed separatist, Minister, leader, author and shadow cabinet member, Bernier clearly wants to make a name for himself in whatever way he can. We all know that Republican President Donald Trump’s sexist, racist, anti-immigrant fear-mongering seems to have appealed to the ultra right-wing and white supremacists in the USA. It also seemed to work for Conservative Ontario Premier Doug Ford, a “fiercely right-wing populist”, who won an election with a “take care of our own” attitude devoid of any substantive public policy – unless you include his buck-a-beer-for-all promise. It would seem that Bernier is once again suffering from sour grapes and has resorted to this hateful, racist rant against every other culture than his own people– the very people that seems to have rejected him. 

    It is not the fault of new immigrants that Bernier’s own party have rejected him over and over. Nor can his misery be tied to the legal right of people from diverse cultures to enjoy their traditions in Canada. This is an example of popular white supremacism – the idea that people of other racial, ethnic or cultural backgrounds are inherently dangerous and should not mix with “old stock Canadians” – i.e. “white” Canadians. The difference between the white nationalism/supremacy of the past is that those who espouse these views today tend to do so in a less direct way under the guise of public policy debate.

    But his hatefulness doesn’t focus only on new immigrants. Several days later, he was also first in line on Twitter to trash the Trudeau government’s intention to create a statutory “holiday” in remembrance of the atrocities committed in residential schools. Despite this being 1 of the 94 Call to Action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and represents the wishes of many of the survivors, Bernier accused called this “another sick characteristic of extreme PC [political correctness] and multiculturalism”. To my mind, the wishes of the survivors should be paramount on the issue of whether there is a national day of remembrance. Bernier went on to categorize the day of remembrance as a “cult of victimhood and obsession with past wrongs”. I wonder if he would also apply this logic to Remembrance Day on November 11th, or any of the war memorials that exist in Canada? Somehow, I don’t think so.

    The whole point of national days of remembrance and memorials is to ensure that Canadians never forget the atrocities that happened. The idea is to honour those we have lost and make sure history never repeats itself. It is a concept shared by most nations around the world. Germany for example has taken great steps to not only erase any Nazi symbols from their society, but also create memorials to remember the many lives lost. Here in Canada, we hope to have several national days of remembrance that include one for residential schools and memorials to lives lost, like murdered and missing Indigenous women. In recent months we have also been talking about how to deal with statues and other symbols of individuals who, despite being historic figures, were the perpetrators of a campaign of genocide against Indigenous peoples – like Sir John A. MacDonald. The TRC report confirmed that Canada engaged in all three types of genocide against Indigenous peoples – cultural, physical and biological. It is long past time that we talked about how to reflect history accurately and responsibly.

    Bernier’s Twitter rants about “extreme PC” couldn’t be further from the truth when it comes the ongoing legacy of injustice against Indigenous peoples in Canada. His Twitter tirades about immigrants who don’t share the same skin colour, religion or culture as him don’t reflect the laws of this country – Indigenous or Canadian. It’s highly ironic that Bernier would advocate against any more diverse immigrants while at the same time demand that Indigenous history be erased. I guess that is the privilege assumed by those whose ideas reflect and promote (directly or indirectly) white supremacy – as if anyone else is not only dangerous, but a threat to whiteness. While Bernier is only the most visible example of this kind of thinking, in fairness, he is not alone.

    Senator Lynn Beyak was booted from Conservative caucus after her racist postings about Indigenous peoples. Conservative MP Pierre Poillievre said racist remarks against residential school survivors on the same day as the apology. Former Conservative Indian Affairs Minister Bernard Valcourt regularly made racist comments against First Nations, at one point calling First Nation treaty Chiefs “threats to national security”. With regard to Bernier’s most recent comments, Conservative party leader Andrew Scheer has failed to specifically condone them, nor has he removed Bernier from the party – which he should do. This is not much of a surprise given the fact that Scheer’s own campaign manager was the founding director for Rebel Media which promotes white nationalism. 

    In the end, the Conservative Party needs to be very clear with Canadians about their party and what it stands for today. Andrew Scheer and the party either stand wholly behind Bernier or they do not – there is no in between. Right now, Scheer seems to stand more behind Bernier than not. It’s Scheer’s move now.

    To watch my Youtube video on this issue and participate in the ongoing discussion, click here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKl3j1B6VK8&t=1s

  • Public Inquiry Needed to Address Sexualized Violence in Policing and Corrections System

    *Originally published in Lawyer’s Daily on November 6, 2017 (edited to include links)

    The integrity of Canada’s policing and corrections system has been called into disrepute from the sexualized violence committed by its police and corrections officers against Indigenous women and girls, female prisoners and even their own female colleagues.

    Recently, officials at Edmonton’s maximum security prison suspended seven employees — including managers — for allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault. The male guards are now under investigation not only for the sexual harassment and assaults but also for their retaliatory actions against their female colleagues who tried to report the harassment. In some cases, it is alleged that protocols were breached risking the safety and security of the female prison guards including using inmates as weapons of intimidation.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/prison-guards-accused-of-using-inmates-as-weapons-to-cover-up-alleged-sexual-harassment-1.4378784

    While many would like to believe that this is an example of “a few bad apples,” the number of similar complaints across the country points to a much deeper problem in corrections. Earlier this year, in another maximum security prison in Agassiz, B.C., the sexual assault of a female prison guard by her male colleague was actually caught on camera. Far from an isolated incident, the union representing various locals in B.C. say they regularly assist female corrections employees in similar harassment cases.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/female-prison-guard-sexually-harassed-1.4299400

    The widespread sexually abusive actions by corrections officers is not limited to female colleagues. In 2012, prison guards at Ontario’s Grand Valley Institution for Women were accused of sexual abuse of female prisoners by trading tobacco and drugs for sexual acts. This was not news to the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC). The Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, which represents women and girls in the justice system, has filed many reports on such incidents calling for an external review and for the CSC to stop using male guards in women’s prisons.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prison-guard-accused-of-trading-drugs-for-sex-1.1211354

    Prison advocates also made calls for surveillance cameras in all institutions after surveillance videos captured numerous incidents of prison guards beating prisoners in Ontario and Quebec prisons in 2013. Several videos depict prisoners cowering in fear in what some lawyers have referred to as absolute “terrorism” committed by prison guards. The Office of the Correctional Investigator responded that not only that video surveillance procedures failed 70 per cent of the time, but that “it’s probably not a coincidence that some alleged prison beatings occur in spots where there’s no surveillance cameras.” The importance of surveillance cameras cannot be overstated. It was surveillance footage that showed Vancouver police dragging an unconscious Mi’kmaw man, Frank Paul, out of a jail cell and into an alleyway where he died of hypothermia in 1998.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prison-beatings-caught-on-video-at-ontario-and-quebec-jails-1.2426904

    Who are the arrested, detained, or imprisoned supposed to call when they have been beaten or sexually abused by corrections officers? There is a major power imbalance between corrections and prisoners, and the police are part of the same abusive system that protects its own before protecting those in their charge. The RCMP have been inundated with class actions and public complaints about their long-standing racism, sexism, abuse and harassment against the public and its own members.

    Though not admitting any wrongdoing, this year, the RCMP recently settled a class action suit against it for the long-standing sexual harassment and assault of thousands of female RCMP members. In 2016, a second class action suit against the RCMP — this time male members — allege harassment and bullying. Also in 2016, another complaint alleges RCMP bullying and unwanted sexual touching and nudity at their own police college run by the RCMP in Ottawa. This is all on top of the 2014 report which documented hundreds of cases of corruption, involving hundreds of officers in the RCMP.

    The deep-rooted problem of racism, sexism and abuse in policing and corrections is not new in the male-dominated system. The Royal Commission on Donald Marshall Jr.’s wrongful imprisonment highlighted police racism back in 1989. The 1991 Report of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry was instigated at the failure by police to properly investigate the sexual assault and murder of Indigenous woman Helen Betty Osborne and the police shooting of unarmed Indigenous leader J.J. Harper. The report highlighted the fact that the police do little to protect Indigenous peoples, especially women and girls.

    The 2012 Missing Women Commission of Inquiry from B.C. found “blatant failures” and systemic bias against the victims and their families, many of whom were Indigenous. One of the most damning reports comes from Human Rights Watch in 2013 on abusive policing in B.C. which documented reports of RCMP physical and sexual abuse of Indigenous women and girls.

    Both CSC and RCMP have both been implicated in the bullying, harassment, physical assaults, sexual assaults and/or deaths of female officers, female civilian employees, fellow male officers, male and female prisoners, and Indigenous women and girls. The class actions against the RCMP should have been a wakeup call for Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale to take immediate remedial action. The 2017 CSC survey which reported that 40 per cent of CSC had been a victim of workplace harassment — 60 per cent of cases from their own CSC co-workers. The survey also showed that the problem is getting worse — having increased by over 30 per cent since 2014. Even the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has noted that sexual harassment “continues to take place in organizations with a historical male dominance.”

    The very fact that the terms of reference for the national inquiry into murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls excludes a review of police conduct is yet another example of the resistance of Canadian officials to address the problem. The knee-jerk reaction of governments to protect their police forces at all costs, may well cost them the loss of public confidence in policing and corrections.

    The fact that the federal government chose a commissioner, Qajaq Robinson, for the national inquiry whose husband is a RCMP officer who pleaded guilty to beating Indigenous prisoners in 2009, begs the question as to whether PM Trudeau and his cabinet had any real intention of getting at the truth — which so far, all points directly at racism, sexism, abuse and corruption in policing and corrections.

    One would have thought with a self-professed feminist prime minister and an experienced minister like Ralph Goodale, there would have been some immediate and substantive actions over the last two years since they took office. But, much like the perpetually absent Minister on the Status of Women Maryam Monsef — there are very few federal voices willing to tackle the monumental problem of racism, sexism, abuse and corruption in policing and corrections in Canada. It is hard to imagine a minister on the Status of Women as willfully blind on such high profile incidences of sexism and sexual abuse as Monsef.

    When those entrusted to serve and protect serve only their own interests and abuse those in their care, the system will inevitably start to unravel — becoming a national crisis. Trudeau ought to use the revelations about sexual abuse in the Edmonton’s maximum security prison to dismantle this broken system of male dominance and sexualized violence in government institutions and restore public safety.  

    *Link to the article originally published in Lawyer’s Daily on November 6, 2017: 

    https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/5055/public-inquiry-needed-to-address-sexualized-violence-in-justice-and-corrections-system-pamela-palmater?category=columnists Please check out my a related video on my Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5o1PCzjhhno&t=14s

  • Inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls Fatally Flawed

    (Originally published in Lawyer’s Daily on May 15, 2017)

    It looks like those who advocated for the long-awaited national inquiry into murdered and missing indigenous women and girls will be waiting a little while longer.

    Despite the promise from Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that the national inquiry would be his first order of business, it has been 19 months since his election and the inquiry hasn’t held a single day of hearings. Although the commissioners held two soft launches in September 2016 and February 2017 promising to launch the hearings soon, the inquiry has not started, nor will they hear from the families until fall 2017.

    Given that the commissioners were given exceptionally limited time to conduct the inquiry, the fact that they have already used up nine of the 26 months allocated to them is a major concern. At this point, the commissioners have very little to show for either the time used or the money spent to date — more than 10 per cent of its $53 million budget.

    Given the lack of communication from the commissioners to date, we are all left wondering what is going on.

    Equally concerning are reports that the federal government has been behind some of the delays by refusing to share its lists of potential witnesses with the commissioners or advance adequate funding to allow much-needed staffing to occur.

    The long list of Indigenous families, leaders and advocates raising public concerns has been met with extended periods of silence. Recent cancellations of scheduled meetings of the inquiry have led to increased criticism by the same indigenous families and advocates who originally pushed so hard for the inquiry. There are even calls for the inquiry to be “reset” both in terms of the panel of commissioners and the inquiry format itself.

    But, as problematic as all this administrative mess is — and it could very well unravel the inquiry — it is relatively minor in comparison to the fact that the inquiry, legally speaking, is fatally flawed.

    Even if the federal government had ensured the inquiry started earlier in Trudeau’s term, and even if the commissioners had been able to quickly launch hearings, neither of these conditions could save the inquiry from its flawed Terms of Reference.

    The Terms of Reference lack the two areas of inquiry that were most important to indigenous families, leaders and advocates: (1) a review of all the known police case files of murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls and (2) a comprehensive review and investigation of police behaviour, specifically racism, abuse and sexualized violence of Indigenous women and girls by police forces. Yet, these two things are specifically exempted or protected from review in the terms, forcing witnesses who want to give evidence about these issues, to go back to the very same police forces that committed the flawed investigations of their missing or murdered loved ones, or the same police forces that failed to act on abuses by their officers.

    There is no way to save this inquiry from such fatal flaws. The provinces and territories all passed orders-in-council to allow the inquiry to proceed in their jurisdictions based on the terms as drafted — in other words, based on these two exemptions. Yet this flies in the face of what Indigenous women, leaders and advocates have long requested and what the minister heard in the national engagement sessions leading up to the drafting of the terms.

    Despite the Human Rights Watch report about police officers sexually abusing Indigenous women and girls in British Columbia with impunity; or the police officers in Val D’or, most of whom will not face charges for allegations of ongoing sexualized abuse of indigenous women and girls in Quebec; or the rampant sexualized violence and discrimination within the RCMP as evidenced by the class action by its female members — none of this will be open for examination.

    At best, the commissioners might be able to look at systemic discrimination within policing policy — but nothing that gets to heart of why so many Indigenous women fear police, and why so many of their investigations, or lack thereof, have been challenged by the families. This poses a real risk that we will end up with an inquiry that is more damaging than helpful. We could end up with a report like that of commissioner Wally Oppal from the Pickton inquiry which hints at generalized police failures in investigations but doesn’t shine a light on the darker side of policing.

    One of the worst outcomes would be a report that presents a general historical overview of colonization, a recap of the well-known socioeconomic problems plaguing First Nations or one that represents the voices of so few indigenous witnesses that it misses the root problems altogether.

    The inquiry terms are already biased toward violence in general and best practices related to violence prevention and safety. This has already led many commentators to focus on domestic violence, which is part of the issue, but by no means the whole issue. Such an unstructured inquiry means we could end up with a report on the already well-documented research on domestic violence but have nothing about police violence for example.

    Given that the terms also focus the inquiry on the “vulnerabilities” of Indigenous women and girls as opposed to failures of federal, provincial and municipal governments and service agencies to protect the human rights of Indigenous women and girls — the inquiry risks missing the whole point. The fatal flaws of the Terms of Reference are reason enough for a reset of the inquiry.

    There is no shame in learning from the lessons of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s reset and making sure that the thousands of murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls, their families and communities get the inquiry they asked for and the justice they deserve.

    https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/3139/inquiry-into-murdered-and-missing-indigenous-women-and-girls-fatally-flawed-pamela-palmater?category=columnists

  • New Government, Old Ways: Racism is STILL Killing Our People – Updated

    “Millions promised for Indigenous kids is subsidizing mining companies, internal documents show”. This was the headline on March 2, 2017 which made me and many other people very angry. https://www.pressprogress.ca/millions_promised_for_indigenous_kids_is_subsidizing_mining_companies_internal_documents_show First of all, the Minister of Indigenous Affairs can’t be trusted to tell the truth and secondly, thousands  of First Nation children end up in foster care because instead of providing adequate funding for First Nations kids, our money goes to subsidize the mining industry. This makes me absolutely furious as there is no excuse for this. Dr. Cindy Blackstock already filed and won a human rights claim against Canada at the Canadian Human Rights Commission to prove Canada’s discriminatory under-funding for First Nation kids in care. http://decisions.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/chrt-tcdp/decisions/en/item/127700/index.do Then the tribunal actually had to direct Canada to comply with the order several times. Yet, instead of complying, Minister Bennett continues to claim they have, in fact, provided that funding. If I look angry when I speak about the injustice of this issue, it is because I am. http://www.pampalmater.com/child-welfare-unfair-for-first-nations/ Some people say: “Pam you are too angry” or “The AFN isn’t complaining, why should you?” Others say: “Pam, you have to admit that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made better promises on First Nation issues than former Prime Minister Harper” and still others say “But Minister Bennett is so nice?” They are all right. I am angry; National Chief Bellegarde looks exceptionally happy these days; Trudeau did make better promises than Harper; and having met Bennett on several occasion, I can say she seems to be a super nice person. Yet, I sometimes work in The Pas, Manitoba where Helen Betty Osbourne was kidnapped and raped, yet nothing has been done to stop the numbers of disappeared and murdered Indigenous women and girls. I am  often woken up in the middle of the night with phone calls or texts about someone’s child having committed suicide or community members who have died in a fire or frozen to death outside. The most recent hand-written letter I received was from an Indigenous man residing in prison who was hurting deeply because his mother had been raped by an RCMP officer and nothing was ever done about it. The over-incarceration of Indigenous peoples in prison has been a crisis for decades, but continues to get worse. I receive calls from people who are trying their hardest to get to university, but there is no funding for them, so they give up. PM Trudeau promised $200M in extra funding for post-secondary education, yet that hasn’t happened yet. And an email I received this week was from a Rape Crisis shelter who asked me to keep advocating on behalf of Indigenous women and girls despite how hostile the environment. The national inquiry is almost a year into its two year term and it still hasn’t started yet, but our Indigenous women and girls continue to go missing and be murdered. So, I admit that I am angry and I look angry and I sound angry. The pre-mature deaths and suffering of my First Nations brothers and sisters is nothing short of a national crisis. The lack of housing, proper schools, adequate health care, education, and child and family supports; along with the lack of basics like food and clean water,  have been called labelled as a “crisis” “grave” “discriminatory” and “inequitable” not just by First Nations and advocates, but also by former Prime Ministers, Supreme Court of Canada justices, the Auditor General for Canada, the Office of the Correctional Investigator, the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the United Nations. So why has little been done to address the crisis? Despite all the promises from Trudeau, where is the action? Instead of action, we see daily doses of misinformation at best and lies at worst. Whatever you choose to call it, it’s not the truth and herein lies the problem with Canada’s new obsession with reconciliation. We can’t ever get to reconciliation, no matter how it’s defined, until we find a way to get to the truth and share it and take responsibility for it. Canada is killing our people with its deeply ingrained racism towards to First Nations. If a, affluent neighborhood in Montreal had contaminated water which was making everyone sick, federal and provincial resources would instantly be brought to bear to remedy the situation. If a cozy suburb of Toronto developed the world’s highest suicide rate, massive amounts of financial and human resources would be dedicated to remedying the crisis. If 50% of the Members of Parliament’s children were stolen from them and put into foster care due to lack of funding for child and family services, watch how fast they’d reallocate funds from Canada’s 150th to get their kids back. So, why then does the government not act to do this when it involves First Nations? Why does the response always follow the same racist pattern: (1) DENY the problem: This is when the government either says that there is no crisis or that it is not as bad as the media or First Nations are saying it is. Then comes the inevitable Access to Information request which shows that the government was either lying or misinforming and they have to admit there may be a problem. (2) DEFER the problem: This is when the government says they will study the issue, even if it has been studied exhaustively and well-documented in the research. This is when they will buy the media silence of National Aboriginal Organizations like the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) by offering them some sort of project-based funding to meet about the issue, set up tables, or do policy papers on the subject. (3) DEFLECT the problem: At this stage, the problem can’t be denied any longer, so the government will blame previous governments, blame First Nations themselves or make excuses as to why the problem can’t be dealt with right now, like budgetary limitations or that changes can’t be made overnight. The most common response at this stage is: “We can’t just throw money at the problem” because (a) First Nations leaders are corrupt (Harper) or (b) First Nations have no capacity to address the issue (Trudeau). The end result is that all of the problems get worse and our people die. The government response is usually a Tweet or speaking point for the media which says: “Our hearts go out to the community” or “We are sorry for your loss” and then everyone goes back to their offices to plan Canada’s 150th birthday. Every day that this government fails to take urgent action says that there is no relationship less important to Trudeau than the one with Indigenous peoples. The underlying message is that there is no life worth less in Canada, than the life of an Indigenous person. Until we accept that this is current government policy and force change, then it doesn’t matter which party is elected – new or old, racism will continue to kill our people. Quick Facts: Indigenous peoples are 4% of Canadian population; 10x more likely to die in a fire; 5-10x more likely to commit suicide; Some jails are 80-100% Indigenous; 50% of all kids in care are Indigenous; More likely to go murdered or missing; 120+ First Nations without clean water. #racismkills Update: And, as if on cue, one day after I wrote this blog, Minister Bennett wrote an op-ed saying more than money is needed to address discrimination against Indigenous children. Their standard pattern of denial, deferral and deflection is both appalling and predictable. The very method of discrimination (under-funding) is now denied as the solution to the discrimination by the very department that has been found guilty of discrimination for under-funding. If Minister Bennett doesn’t think funding is part of the problem, she needs to go back and read the court order. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/hon-carolyn-bennett/indigenous-children-discrimination_b_15131394.html Just in case anyone thought the Minister’s special representative on Child Welfare might be the solution, keep in mind, Cynthia Wesley-Esquimaux is a failed liberal candidate who also has the same bias as Minister Bennett. She was quoted as saying the liberals “are not going to take money and throw it up in the air like confetti” promoting more racist stereotypes against First Nations. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/azraya-kokopenace-charlie-angus-1.3824868

  • Canadians are not racist? Indigenous Invisibility versus the Convenience of Racist Indifference – UPDATED

    This week, former Prime Minister Paul Martin, told the media that the failure to address the many overlapping crises faced by Indigenous peoples is not a problem with Canadians – Canadians are not racist. The problem is with Indigenous peoples – we are invisible. Martin further alleges that Canadians are “a generous people” that will “rise to the occasion” to support others in need – if they are aware of the issue.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/canadians-not-racist-but-aboriginal-issue-invisible-to-many-says-paul-martin-1.3579731

     

    In my opinion, not only do we have a very deep and long-standing race problem in some segments of Canadian society, but this racism has also infected every level, branch and institution of the municipal, provincial, territorial and federal governments. This race problem is not new. It is in fact, one of the primary root causes of the challenges faced by Indigenous peoples today. Canadians are well aware of both the racism issue and the many over-lapping crises in First Nations.

    Racism in Canada is Real

    The racism experienced by Indigenous peoples in Canada is not just a matter of insult or offence. While there are no shortage of racist, hateful comments made about us as individuals, communities and Nations – the racism we face is lethal. It doesn’t just hurt our feelings – it leads to our pre-mature deaths in a large variety of ways. Scalping bounties led to the deaths on thousands of Mi’kmaw people. There was a higher death rate for Indigenous kids in residential schools than for soldiers in WWII. Thousands of Indigenous peoples are murdered or are disappeared. We have higher rates of disease and injury. And deaths while in the custody of hospitals, foster parents and police show how prevalent racism against Indigenous peoples is in Canada.

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

    This isn’t just my opinion. The Royal Commission on the Donald Marshall Prosecution in 1989 found that he was wrongfully prosecuted and failed by everyone in the justice system because he was native. 1996 Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples spoke about racism against Indigenous women. The Aboriginal Justice Inquiry in Manitoba in 1999 admitted the justice system fails Indigenous peoples on a “massive scale”. The 2007 Ipperwash report confirmed that racism in the Ontario Provincial Police was widespread. And there have been many other reports which all speak to the deep-seated racism within Canada and its institutions.

    We’ve known for a very long time that stories in the media about Indigenous peoples draws a high number of racist and hateful comments from all segments of society including teachers, professors, authors, professionals and politicians. In November of 2015, the General Manager and Editor in Chief of CBC News Canada issued a statement explaining why CBC will no longer allow comments on stories about Indigenous peoples. The reason for this is that Indigenous-related stories brought out “higher-than-average” comments which were not only hateful but also racist.

    http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/community/editorsblog/2015/11/uncivil-dialogue-commenting-and-stories-about-indigenous-people.html

     

    MacLean’s magazine even went so far as to say that Canada’s race problem is far worse than America’s and part of what makes it so bad is that Canadians keep denying they are racist.

    http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/out-of-sight-out-of-mind-2/

    In case you require something a little more official, the Ontario Human Rights Commission confirms that Canada has “a legacy of racism – particularly towards Aboriginal persons”.

    http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/racial-discrimination-brochure

    The fact that Canada is so systemically and overtly racist is one of the reasons why Canada has so many laws against racism and hate speech, including federal and provincial human rights acts, the Criminal Code and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and is a signatory to numerous international human rights instruments. There would be no need for these protections if there were no issues around racism in Canada.

    Invisibility versus Racist Indifference

    Let’s just address this fiction before it becomes the new Liberal mantra. Neither Indigenous peoples, nor the many over-lapping crises we face are invisible. While 50% of Indigenous people live in remote reserves, about 50% live in or near urban centres. One can’t walk down the street in Winnipeg or Saskatoon without seeing Indigenous people. In terms of the challenges we face, First Nations like Attawapiskat have put our higher rates of suicide, poverty, homelessness in the forefront and is a prime example of Canada’s racist and differential responses to First Nation crises versus Canadian crises (Walkerton, Halifax, Fort McMurray).

    Trudeau’s uneven response to Fort McMurray and Attawapiskat shows tale of two cities

     

    Indigenous activists like Cindy Blackstock have ensured that Canadians are well aware of the over-representation of First Nations kids in foster care. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal concluded that the reason for the chronic underfunding and disproportionate number of kids in foster care was because they were native. The problem of racism in Canada means that a tribunal actually had to direct Canada to stop its discriminatory treatment of Indigenous kids – and we are all still waiting for Canada to abide by this decision.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/canada-discriminates-against-children-on-reserves-tribunal-rules-1.3419480

     

    The Native Women’s Association of Canada led the way with public education and advocacy to focus the country’s attention on the thousands of murdered and missing Indigenous women. Even Canada’s own Attorney General and Office of the Correctional Investigator rang the alarm on Canada’s discriminatory treatment of Indigenous peoples which led to under-funded education systems and prisons over-represented with Indigenous peoples. We are far from invisible, but don’t take their words for it – the numbers speak for themselves.

    In 2010, a study by Environics showed that 60% of Canadians are either somewhat or very familiar with Indigenous issues. This is nothing new. In fact, over the last two decades, at least half of Canadians were familiar with Indigenous issues. The majority of Canadians also believe that the challenges faced by Indigenous peoples are the result of the attitudes of non-Indigenous people and government policies. Since 1993, Canadians have ranked addressing the living conditions on reserve as one of the top priorities. There is absolutely no doubt that Canadians and their politicians know about the issues.

    Focus Canada 2010: Public opinion research on the record Serving the public interest

     

    Idle No More, the largest social movement in Canada’s history, brought the issues of social conditions and unresolved treaties and land claims to the front of the media, government and world’s attention and held it there for nearly a year. But Indigenous peoples didn’t just capture the media headlines in 2012. There have been regular flash points over the last few decades that garnered a great deal of media attention including Listuguj, Oka, Gustafsen Lake, Ipperwash, Burnt Church, Elsipogtog, Caledonia and others. There are few in Canada who could claim that Indigenous peoples are invisible. They may not want to acknowledge the lethal results of this kind of racism, but they are aware it exists. After the Truth and Reconciliation Report, few can deny the racist underpinnings of Canada’s genocidal policies against Indigenous peoples.

    So, no, racism is not a figment of our imaginations. The many tombstones from Indigenous peoples killed at the hands of priests, doctors, foster parents, police and bureaucrats prove otherwise. And, no, Indigenous peoples are not invisible. There isn’t a newspaper, news channel or magazine that hasn’t had pictures of dirty water, run down homes, or deceased Indigenous women as their lead story at some point. And finally, no, most Canadians are not unaware of our dire circumstances. It’s the racist segments of society that make a conscious choice to turn a blind eye to our suffering while running to the aid of their non-Indigenous neighbor.

     

    There are many authors, media commentators and people in society who deny the racist views held by the countless individuals and institutions who have stolen, sterilized, experimented on, scalped, beaten, raped, murdered, and dispossessed Indigenous peoples of their identities, cultures, children, lands, resources and independence. In my opinion, denying the racism which instigates the high level of violence and suffering in First Nations, is itself an act of racism. It is far too convenient to be willfully blind or indifferent to the lethal impacts of racism on Indigenous peoples. Apologies are easy, as are empty diversity policies, and promises for a new relationship. The hard work is in making amends for the damage done and which continues to be done to Indigenous peoples by people and governments which still have racist ideologies and intentions.

    Canada was built on the dispossession, oppression and genocide of Indigenous peoples. Addressing racism now means far more than apologies, photo-ops and fancy words – it means the return of our lands and resources, the recognition of our jurisdiction, and the full implementation of our rights. This means land, wealth, and power changes hands – it means an uncomfortable recognition that Canada benefits from our continued oppression. Justice will require some discomfort. If it isn’t uncomfortable, it isn’t justice.

     

    This isn’t a multi-cultural issue or one of diversity – we are not asking for “equality”, we are demanding justice. If we are going to move forward, we can’t hide behind the convenience of the status quo. We have to be brave enough to shine a light on the problem and work together to address is. Indigenous peoples have many allies in Canadian society – not everyone is racist. Unfortunately, many still hold racist views which threaten our lives.

     

    I think we can all do better than pretend the problem of racism against Indigenous peoples doesn’t exist. While the new theme may be reconciliation, reconciliation is not a process in an of itself – it starts first with the truth. If Canada cannot admit it has a racism problem, then we can never take steps to address it. Let’s continue the conversation in an open and honest way. Racism does exist in Canada. UPDATE: These comments that Mr. Martin said upset me. I’ve had to think about why they upset me so much, because it’s not like I haven’t heard them made many times from many different people. I don’t react to the vast majority of these comments. I know these comments originate from people who are in different places and in different contexts. I believe most people are good people at heart. Most of us love our families and communities and we want to see a brighter future for everyone. So, in fairness to Mr. Martin, perhaps in making those comments, he meant to show faith in Canadian citizens that once they know about Indigenous struggles they will act. His recent interviews seem to suggest that since leaving office, he wants to advocate on their behalf. He recently denounced former Prime Minister Chretien’s comments who suggested that First Nations should leave reserves; he has advocated for improved First Nation education and set up a foundation for that purpose; and he consistently called the chronic underfunding of First Nations social programs discriminatory. My blog was less about him – as a person – and more about the comments in general. I also know that we are in the business of social justice to gain support for our cause. I have been advised by lots of people who have heard me speak that I should tone down my words, be careful not to come on too strong, and to focus on encouraging allies and not make enemies. As a Mi’kmaw person, I am honour-bound to live up to the treaty commitments of my ancestors who promised to live in peace with the settlers. My Dad fought in WWII alongside Canadians to ensure our treaty commitments were kept. He did his despite everything that has been done to us. So, I understand the importance of maintaining allies. I have strong opinions and I share them not to hurt anyone, but to advocate as strenuously as possible for our people, because our lives depend on it. I feel a grave sense of urgency to not lose another generation of babies. I don’t want to see our languages die. I don’t want our lands to become so contaminated we can’t use them for our ceremonies. I have to be honest and say the truth as I see it. I’ve been in ceremonies where elders told me I have no choice but to speak the truth – regardless of the backlash. I have to be honest. Sugar-coating the situation only makes it worse. Sometimes the truth is uncomfortable and sometimes its painful – but its from the truth that we can come up with solutions. Reconciliation requires we go through this painful part to finally heal and make amends. It’s 2016 – there is no good reason to hold onto racist ideologies that allow the discrimination, violence, dispossession and oppression of our people to continue. It’s very frustrating to see our kids be forced into foster care, imprisoned, beaten by police, commit suicide or go murdered and missing every day. Every single day while governments ponder their budgets, edit speaking points and delay justice, another Indigenous man, woman or child suffers. what that politicians meet in wood-paneled offices with expensive meals while they talk about measured justice, first steps and plans for the future, our people still die. People I love still die. This is why I speak and write the way I do. To us, the issues are urgent. We can’t ever get our people back once we have lost them. We have to act now. While the easy answer might be to blame a rogue cop, a psycho serial killer or the KKK, the reality is that there are large segments of Canadian society in positions of power that hold extremely racist views about Indigenous peoples. Harper’s last decade of power is a prime example of how rampant racism is and the impacts it has on First Nations. Racism is not an anomaly. Its not an exception. It’s not about one bad apple – its widespread and it’s killing my people. Most of my friends and colleagues that work, study or volunteer in social justice causes hate answering the phone late at night. We know that it means another Indigenous person has committed suicide, died, been arrested or had their children taken from them. We all dread these calls. Because even though the government may have shifted a priority or the media has left, we are always left with the lived realities of not just inter-generational trauma, but modern-day racist laws, policies and decisions which affect our lives. I think this is why I reacted so strongly to Mr. Martin’s comments. Not because I think he is a racist or that all Canadians are racist. Mr. Martin has helped many individual First Nation people access education funds, he has supported them find employment, he has advocated strenuously in recent years for government to step up and act. On a personal level, he was supportive of my work at Ryerson University and even the work of many of us in the Idle No More movement. I think more people in positions of power should stand up and demand justice alongside our grassroots Canadians and Indigenous Nations. I truly believe we cannot have reconciliation until we can be brave enough to hear the dark truth, challenge one another on our opinions and be critical of what isn’t working. This shouldn’t be taken personally, but social conflict is a necessary part of growth, change and improvement. I apologize to anyone who thought I was saying that ALL Canadians are racist. I know that we have many good allies. In fact, Idle No More helped bring us all together. There has never been so much good will and cooperation between non-government organizations and community groups with Indigenous peoples. We have united to work jointly on child-welfare, anti-poverty, housing and homelessness, climate change and the environment, and human rights. The United Nations Human Rights Committee said last year that they never saw such a united force. I would like to believe that our collective efforts at social justice will make the changes we want to see in Canada. I am sorry that this process won’t be easy, it won’t be speedy, and we won’t always feel like we are on the same side. I hope in the end, you understand why it’s necessary.  

     

     

     

  • RCMP Report on Murdered and Missing Aboriginal Women is Statistically Skewed

    In 2014, the RCMP released a report on their “National Operational Review” on the issue of “Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women” which amounted to 1181 women total – 164 missing and 1017 murdered.  The core conclusion of the report was that “Aboriginal women”* were over-represented in the numbers of murdered and missing. They cautioned readers that their report contained a certain amount of “error and imprecision” given the thirty year period of review, the human error of investigators, inconsistency of collection, and definitional issues.

    Let’s look at that caveat a little closer. The RCMP had to “limit” their file review to missing women who had been identified by RCMP on CPIC (Canadian Police Information Centre) as “non-white” female or “blank”. The category of “Aboriginal origin” was only recently added to CPIC and so could not possibly capture all Aboriginal persons. Similarly, the numbers do not include Aboriginal women who were mistakenly recorded as “white” or Aboriginal women who were reported missing but were never recorded. Given the high level of overt and systemic racism in policing as confirmed in the Donald Marshall Jr., Manitoba Justice, Ipperwash, and Pickton inquiries, the numbers of those missing never recorded could be extremely high.

    Now, let’s look at how the RCMP or other jurisdictions determine who is “Aboriginal”. The RCMP report notes that they used “perception-based assessment”. In other words, “how a police officer defines how an individual looks in terms of complexion and/or ancestry”. However, even this determination is not consistent across jurisdictions. Any number of jurisdictions use the following to identify persons:

                (1) official Aboriginal “status”;

                (2) officer discretion; and

                (3) self-identification.

    Based on the above, it would seem logical that the RCMP would miss identifying a large portion or even majority of Aboriginal persons. In the first methodology, I presume they meant to say “Indian status” or “Indian registration” because there is no formal or official “Aboriginal status”. I hope the RCMP know at least this much about the legislated identity of Indigenous peoples in Canada (hint: it’s in the Indian Act). For those that only use “Indian status”, that would exclude all the non-status Indians, Métis, and Inuit individuals in Canada. The most recent National Household Survey indicated that there were 1,400,685 Aboriginal people in Canada and only 637,660 of them were registered Indians. That leaves 763,025 individuals (more than half the Aboriginal population) excluded from possible identification as Aboriginal by RCMP standards.

    Even those who are identified based on their official Indian status, the RCMP fails to take into consideration the fact that there are well over 20,000 people with Indian status who do not descend from nor identify as “Indian” or “Aboriginal”. This is thanks again to the Indian Act which made non-Indian women and their non-Indian male and female children registered as Indians, despite their lack of Aboriginal ancestry or cultural connection. This equates to thousands of men with Indian status that are not in fact Aboriginal.

    With regards to the second methodology, the RCMP are identifying Aboriginal peoples based on a racist set of biological and/or physical characteristics which they unilaterally assign to Aboriginal people. In other words, “Aboriginal people” are treated as one race of people with certain pre-determined physical characteristics – like hair, eye or skin colour. They ignore the fact that Indigeneity is social, cultural, political, legal, territorial, and nation-based – not an identity based on race. This racist methodology would be as useless as trying to identify a Canadian citizen gone missing in the USA based on skin colour. Clearly, the RCMP would miss the vast majority of “Aboriginal people” using this kind of methodology.

    With regard to the third methodology of self-identification, the RCMP failed to indicate what percentage of jurisdictions actually rely on self-identification. This of course would not work in the context of a murdered or missing Aboriginal woman as she cannot self-identify. It might only work in the context of the woman’s family or friends choosing to identify her as Aboriginal. It is impossible to know how many people would voluntarily self-identify given the extent to which every level of the justice system is infected with overt and systemic racism as per the numerous justice inquiries. Many Aboriginal people have a justified fear of the RCMP stemming from residential school days, Starlight tours, and deaths in police custody – as well as provincial police forces for similar reasons.

    So, it is logical to conclude that the RCMP grossly under-counted the actual numbers of murdered and missing Aboriginal women in Canada. This conclusion is confirmed by the RCMP’s own admission that due to these methodological problems “a high number of Homicide survey reports where the identity of the victim (and/or accused) remained unknown“. This admission on their part is extremely important in understanding the racist dialogue which has recently unfolded at the Ministerial level.

    Aboriginal Affairs Minister Bernard Valcourt has been very vocal in his refusal to conduct a national inquiry into murdered and missing Indigenous women and little girls. He has publicly stated that part of the problem is that First Nation men “have a lack of respect for women and girls on reserve”. Aside from the fact that he forgot Métis and Inuit people who don’t live on reserves, Valcourt went on to tell Treaty 6 Chiefs that 70% of the cases, Aboriginal women were killed by Aboriginal men. The RCMP refused to release the statistics on the alleged perpetrators as they claimed a commitment to “bias-free” policing. That commitment did not last long as they issued a letter several days later to Treaty 6 Grand Chief seeming to back up Minister Valcourt.

    The RCMP’s exact words to Treaty 6 Grand Chief Martial were as follows:

    “In considering the offender characteristics, a commonality unrelated to the ethnicity of the victim was the strong nexus to familial and spousal violence. Aboriginal females were killed by a spouse, family member or intimate relation in 62% of the cases; similarly, non-aboriginal females were killed by a spouse, family member or intimate relation in 74% of occurrences.”

    This statistic confirms that Canadian women are more often killed by their spouse or families than Aboriginal women. Yet, in the second paragraph of this letter, the RCMP explain that despite their bias-free policing policy and despite their confidentiality agreement with Statistics Canada, they would release the sensitive information relating to offenders anyway in order to back up Minister Valcourt’s claims that “70% of offenders were of Aboriginal origin”.

    Some commentators rushed to conclude that the RCMP statement does in fact support the Minister’s claims and (a) that this somehow reduces Canada’s culpability for both creating and refusing to deal with this crisis; and (b) that, in fact, 70% of offenders were Aboriginal. Neither of these conclusions are correct. The RCMP’s statistics, as noted above, are extremely skewed and unreliable when it comes to the identification of Aboriginal people – victims or offenders. It bears repeating that the RCMP’s own assessment of problems in its methodology led them to conclude:

    “a high number of Homicide survey reports where the identity of the victim (and/or accused) remained unknown“.

    This means that a high number of the accused in murder cases have an unknown identity. Therefore, the RCMP’s claim that 70% of the accused are Aboriginal is highly suspect at best and completely inaccurate at worst.

    There is also a problem with the assumption that because 64% of Aboriginal women are killed by their spouses or families, that those offenders were in fact “Aboriginal”. Aside from having to make the racist assumption that Aboriginal people only have relationships with other Aboriginal people, the statistics do not bear this out. If you look only at the case of First Nations people, the vast majority of First Nations have out-parenting rates (children with non-Aboriginal people) that are moderate to high. Specifically, 246 First Nations have an out-parenting rate of 40-60%; 162 First Nations have an out-parenting rate of 60-80%; and 49 First Nations have an out-parenting rate of 80-100%. It is safe to say that no less than half of First Nations are in spousal or familial relationships with non-Aboriginal people. So, even if 64% of Aboriginal women are murdered by their spouses, it does not follow that those spouses are “Aboriginal”. Statistically, they are just as likely to be non-Aboriginal.

    One must also keep in mind that the RCMP did not include statistics on the number of RCMP and provincial police officers who have been accused of physically and sexually assaulting, murdering and/or causing to go missing, Aboriginal women in Canada. Despite a Human Rights Watch report which details accounts by young Aboriginal women and girls at the hands of the RCMP – the RCMP has refused to investigate its own members. We know at least one RCMP officer who lost 7 days pay for violating an Aboriginal women and one provincial court judge who plead guilty to physically and sexually assaulted Aboriginal girls as young as 12 years old.

    This shell game of numbers and statistics is meant to blame the victim and deflect attention away from Canada’s continued inaction to address this crisis which the United Nations has called a “grave violation” of our basic human rights. The crisis of murdered and missing Indigenous women and little girls continues while Canada (through Valcourt) blames the victim and the RCMP fail to live up to their duty to serve and protect everyone in Canada.

    Shame on them both. Nothing in the RCMP numbers changes anything. Canada has a crisis of murdered and missing Indigenous women and little girls regardless of who is doing the killing – and we need to address it.

    Don’t be fooled or distracted by Canada’s games. 

    We should all stay focused on pushing for both a national inquiry and for an emergency action plan to protect our women and girls and address the underlying root causes and inequities which make them vulnerable to begin with. * I use the term “Aboriginal” in this blog to reflect the terminology of the RCMP report only.

  • My Response to Questions from Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on Bill C-51

    *Mr. Romeo Saganash (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Welcome and thank you to both of our witnesses this morning.  I want to start with Ms. Palmater. I’ve been in this business for more than 30 years as well. I’ve been called many names, too. All of our protests and challenges posed by aboriginal peoples in this country are always related to the economy of this country: resource development is, of course, an important aspect to all of that. The far-reaching proposed provisions in Bill C-51 are therefore somewhat a direct threat to section 35 rights. National Chief Bellegarde recommended that we scrap this bill. You say that this bill must be withdrawn because it’s not fixable. I happen to agree with that. For 150 years in the history of this country, governments have always been adversaries to aboriginal peoples in this country. We both know that. What we’ve always considered as rights issues have always been viewed or treated as police issues or law and order issues, on the other hand—by successive provincial, federal, and municipal governments, I might add. Will this proposed legislation make matters worse or better for indigenous peoples in this country, and why?  Dr. Pamela Palmater: Thank you for your question. It’s an important one because, as I stated, it doesn’t just impact indigenous peoples, it impacts the rest of Canada: environmentalists, unions, women’s groups, children’s advocates. We have to get real about what is the clear and present danger here. How many Canadians on Canadian soil have died from acts of terrorism? Compare that with how many thousands of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls there are. Where is the Bill C-51 to protect them? How many husbands have killed their wives? How many serial killers have we had? Yet we’re focusing on Bill C-51. The problem is this bill isn’t really about terrorism. If you do an analysis of this omnibus bill, the focus is, just as you’ve said, less about being anti-terrorism and more about protecting the status quo in terms of power relations and economic relations. This new national security law focuses on threats to sovereignty, territorial integrity, diplomatic relations—of all things—economic stability, critical infrastructure. All of these things are an essential part of the daily lives of Canadians and first nations. Passing this bill for any activity, any person, any purpose that threatens national security so defined as financial stability and territorial integrity, makes us all suspects. Canada won’t even have to pass this bill, the terrorists will have won. What is terrorism? Fundamentally it’s the denial of life, liberty, and security of the person. If Canada goes ahead and takes those rights away, terrorists just have to sit back, job done. We worked far too hard in our treaty negotiations. We worked far too hard in the development of the charter, and the Constitution, and all of the international laws that protect core, fundamental human rights, to allow that to happen because we want to protect some corporate economic interests. Mr. Romeo Saganash: Given that your access to information request has shown that you’ve already been surveilled for perfectly legal civic actions, is it reasonable to assume—let me put it that way—that if this law is passed, this legislation is passed, you could be viewed as a terrorist for the same lawful activities? Dr. Pamela Palmater: Bill C-51, as currently written, would capture everything under Idle No More. Imagine, Grand Chief Matthew Coon Come of the Grand Council of the Crees offered a quote for my submission as well that said that had their activities been done today as opposed to back then, there wouldn’t be the negotiation of the the James Bay Agreement, they would all be in jail. The Idle No More movement, which was a historical coming together of first nations and Canadians peacefully dancing and singing and drumming, would now all be monitored—if it isn’t already, as the media has indicated that we are clearly monitored—and perhaps arbitrarily detained. All of these things are very frightening for this country. Keep in mind that the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples protects us, grants us, and recognizes under international customary law that we can act autonomously, that we can occupy our lands. Under the Department of National Defence’s manual, occupying our lands, advocating for autonomy, and advocating for political rights is described as “insurgency” alongside jihadists. It is no comfort that there is a proviso saying that lawful activity, lawful dissent, lawful protest, lawful art—whatever that is—won’t be captured by this bill, because the second we do a round dance in the street without a permit, it very quickly becomes unlawful. We have to remember that I already went over all of the very validly enacted laws that Canada has had that have ended up in the killing, murder, rape, violence, sterilization, and scalping of our people. Those were valid laws. The only way to protect ourselves was to act unlawfully in resistance. What we’re saying now is that the clear and present danger to first nations and Canadians is in the environmental destruction and the contamination of our water, and that we have a right to defend our life, liberty, and security to protect our future generations. Under this bill that will all be captured as a threat to national security and/or terrorism.  The Chair: Thank you very much. Your time is up, Mr. Saganash. … Hon. Diane Ablonczy: Okay, thank you very much. I just wanted to give Ms. Palmater time to put her legal training to work. And her activist knowledge and just to help us to understand how you feel that Section 2 Activities might impact you. The Chair: Ms. Palmater, we’ve already expired the time but I will certainly give you an opportunity to just briefly to respond to that if you wish. Dr. Pamela Palmater: Thank you for asking because as you probably know I was a lawyer for Justice Canada and worked on legislation and have taken training in legislative interpretation and regulatory drafting. Which is why I was quite shocked that this legislation ever made it here. The Justice Canada lawyers, that I know would never have said that this is any where near constitutional. The problems are that little list that you just read, is just a list. It’s just an example, some examples of what would be threats to national security. There is no limit on the threat to national security. That “any activity”, means any activity. My problem is under the Bill, who gets to decide? Clearly, it’s Canada and independent law enforcement officers. What’s happening here is there is an infinite number of offences that are created, it’s not knowable. And we have a right as citizens to basic tenet of law. We have a right as citizens to know the offence for which we’re being charged, to be able to predict it in the future. We know we aren’t allowed to steal things, so we don’t steal things, or we know there’s consequences. Under this Bill, it’s literally anything. And that’s a problem in law, basically, and it’s certainly doesn’t correspond, it would never survive a Constitutional or Charter challenge, and I think that the former Supreme Court Justices have been pretty specific about that. Thank you. The Chair: Excuse me, Mr. Palmater, you are well over the time. Thank you very much. We will now go to Mr. Easter, please. Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque, Lib.): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you to both witnesses for your presentation today. And also for both your efforts out there beyond your appearance at the community, one on policing and one of legitimate public dissent, that profiles issues. I think that both are important in a democracy. First starting with you Ms. Palmater. You’ve mentioned the need for special first nations advocate. And I’m making an assumption here, I expect that relates to the section in the Bill where CSIS can apply for a warrant to do certain things. I take from your comments you’re suggesting that if the Bill goes through, there needs to be an amendment in that area that would allow for special advocates, in this case, first nations, that would be able to, I guess, provide the other side of the argument, before a judge in terms of whether or not a warrant is granted. Am I correct in that? Do you want to expand on that a little bit?   Dr. Pamela Palmater: Sure, just to be clear, I’m saying there is no way to save this bill at all. Hon. Wayne Easter: I understand that. Dr. Pamela Palmater: My recommendations were how to address the problem right now. We have a crisis right now, first nations being targeted by police officers and the government at large. If this bill were to pass and they added this provision of a special first nations advocate for all of these core processes, that wouldn’t stop first nations from being targeted to begin with. That’s like trying to provide compensation to murdered indigenous women after they’ve already been murdered. It’s too little, too late. So I don’t think it would be effective to counter all of the rights violations that are  currently under Bill C-51. Hon. Wayne Easter: Coming back to the request. One of the problems with the current bill where CSIS goes to a judge, the Minister of Justice called this judicial oversight. It’s not. It’s traditional authority to allow CSIS to do certain things. There are some that feel you need the balance before that judge that makes that decision. That’s what I’m trying to target on. Would there be better balance if you had a special advocate with first nations expertise where CSIS was asking a judge for that warrant to do certain things? Dr. Pamela Palmater: I think it would be more balanced than the current unbalance that there is in the bill keeping in mind that this bill also turns the justice system on its head and how our constitution works. That in fact, judges are, their role is to uphold the constitution and charter rights and not to find ways to get around them. So really asking them to undo all of their training or how we govern ourselves, even with the first nation advocate isn’t going to really address the core problem. Hon. Wayne Easter: I hear what you’re saying. Thank you. *Taken from Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security Committee Meeting March 24, 2015 – Evidence #57 – Unedited Transcript Copy provided by House of Commons Canada.

  • Transcript of my Testimony on Bill C-51 Anti-Terrorism Act – March 24 2015

    Dr. Pamela Palmater (Chair in Indigenous Governance, Ryerson University, Department of Politics & Public Administration, As an Individual)*  Thank you for inviting me here today to speak. I want to first acknowledge that we’re on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Nation and that’s not just the polite acknowledgement. That’s the very reason why all of you get to sit here today. Were it not for the cooperation, generosity, kindness, and political alliances, Canada wouldn’t be what it is. Were it not for the peace treaties between our nations that are now constitutionally protected and form part of the foundational aspect of Canada, none of us would be sitting here today. I think that goes to the very heart of Bill C-51 and why I am opposed to it. Canada has placed Bill C-51 before indigenous peoples without any information, analysis, details on how it will impact our nations, any consultation, information or consent from our part. It is a gross violation of our nations to nation relationship. I don’t have time to go through all of the technical legal details and problems with this bill except to say that I echo all of the concerns that have already been brought and will be brought by the thousands of lawyers in this country, security experts, former prime ministers and former Supreme Court of Canada justices. My main concern is how this bill will impact me, my family and indigenous peoples all over Canada and our treaty partners, other Canadians.   Canada has a long history of criminalizing every aspect of indigenous identity. From the scalping bounties in 1949, which nearly wiped out my Mi’kmaq Nation, to the Indian Act, which has outlawed our culture, our right to educate our own children, and even excluded indigenous women from our communities. Every aspect of our identity has been criminalized, both historically and continues into present day. In every single instance, we’ve had to resist all of these laws, keeping in mind these were all validly enacted laws. It was legal to take Mi’kmaq scalps; it was legal to confine us to reserves; it was legal to deny us legal representation. All of these things were law in Canada. We had to be criminals as in, we had to break the law in order to preserve our lives, our physical security, and our identities. We are being faced with this very problem again with Bill C-51. Over the years, these laws have morphed into provincial and municipal regulations that deal with even our traditional means of providing subsistence—hunting, fishing, gathering have all been so criminalized for indigenous peoples that we end up skulking around in the forest just to be able to provide food for our families. Every single court case that has been won at the Supreme Court of Canada has been a battle between indigenous peoples trying to live their lives and exercise their rights and identities facing some kind of criminal or regulatory charge. In every single instance, we have been labelled as criminals, treated as criminals, and one need only look at the current prison population to understand that this is still the case; not just the case, but as Howard Sapers, from the Office of the Correctional Investigator, has indicated, a “national crisis and embarrassment.” And why? Not because we’re actually terrorists; not because we’re more culturally predisposed to being criminals, but as a direct result of Canada’s discriminatory laws and policies. There have been endless justice inquiries, which have pointed to the infection in our Canadian justice system of racism. The Donald Marshall wrongful prosecution inquiry, the Manitoba justice inquiry, the Ipperwash Inquiry, say that every aspect of our justice system, from the arresting officers, to the lawyers, to the judges, to the prison systems, overtly and systemically discriminate against indigenous peoples. That’s our current reality. Bill C-51 proposes to take that to the last and final step. All we have left now, as indigenous peoples are our thoughts. Our private thoughts will now be criminalized. It will now be possible to be considered a terrorist for storing alleged terrorist propaganda on our own personal computers. My declaration of sovereignty, and I’m going to say it before Bill C-51 passes, I’m part of the sovereign Mi’kmaq Nation. That kind of material on my computer could be considered terrorism, a threat to national security because it’s a threat to Canada’s sovereignty. Welcome to the new terrorist. My name is Pam Palmater. I’m a lawyer, I’m a professor, I’m a mom, and I’m a social justice activist. I’ve won numerous awards for my work in social justice, women’s equality, and children’s rights but depending on whose radicalized view you speak of I have also been called a radical, bad Indian, eco-terrorist, enemy of the people, top-five-to-fear Canadian, dangerous militant, and Waco extremist. My biggest concern isn’t how I’m presented in the media or by government officials, I’m stronger than that. My biggest concern concern is how this impacts me right now, the level of government surveillance for a law-abiding, peaceful, social justice activist, who’s never been arrested or convicted of any crime. In my ATIP to CSIS they explain that they have a right to prevent subversive and hostile activities against the Canadian state which is why they have a file on me. However they don’t offer me the courtesy of saying why I would be considered subversive or hostile, in fact everything I do couldn’t be more public.   In my ATIP to Indian Affairs they would not confirm that they monitor me. However they said they do conduct an analysis of me and my activities because I’m an active voice. That analysis comprised 750 pages of documents which tracked all of my whereabouts, what provinces I was travelling to, where I was speaking, and the dates and times. However they could not provide my security file because it was destroyed. When I attend gatherings, rallies, protests, or public and private events I often cannot make cell phone calls, send texts, or access my social media, my bank cards, or my credit cards. I can be at an Idle No More rally or protest and text my children but I cannot communicate with the very chief who has the same protest. This causes me great concern for my safety. How am I supposed to help ensure the comfort and safety of the people at rallies and myself if I can’t communicate with anyone…and I don’t have to remind this committee the staggering statistics and vulnerabilities of indigenous women in this country. I contacted the RCMP as well. They never responded to my ATIP, however individual RCMP officers at various events have confirmed that they were there to monitor me. At numerous protests I have been informed by RCMP and provincial police that I had to keep my protest peaceful. Sometimes they didn’t identify themselves. At speaking engagements the host first nation would demand that any undercover RCMP, or Ontario, or other police officers identify themselves and in many cases they did. What’s more concerning is the number of government officials that follow me around from speaking engagement to speaking engagement and often identify themselves when called upon to do so. Probably the most shocking is when I travel internationally in countries like Samoa, Peru, England, and Switzerland only to be informed by local authorities that Canadian officials are there to monitor me. That’s very frightening in a country where I have committed no crime, but to advocate peacefully on behalf of my people. In the Prairie provinces the RCMP are very active. They will often call ahead to the University of First Nations where I’m speaking and ask them to identify what my target will be or where I plan my protest. This isn’t just a problem for me. We’ve all heard about Cindy Blackstock and others. Skipping of course to what my recommendations are because I can see that I’m out of time. Bill C-51 must be withdrawn there is no way to fix it. There must be proper public information consultation, specific consultation for indigenous peoples, and a proper parliamentary study. Directing Justice Canada to rubber stamp the bill is compliant even if it has a 95% chance of being overturned in court is not democratic. We need an independent review body to report on the ongoing surveillance of indigenous peoples that will take complaints, do proper investigations, and offer redress. Finally, we’re in desperate need of a special first nation advocate to be appointed for any and all court processes in all provinces and territories whenever applications are made in secret for court warrants. This person would be an amicus, a friend of the court who would be independent and can speak to all of the various constitutional and indigenous rights at stake. This is absolutely essential especially if Bill C-51 is to be passed. The Chair: Fine thank you very much, Ms. Palmater. *Taken from: Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security Committee Meeting March 24, 2015 – Evidence #57 – Unedited Transcript Copy provided by House of Commons Canada.

  • Genocide? Murder? Criminal Negligence? Or Passive Indifference? Canada is Killing Our People

    Racism doesn’t just hurt our feelings – racism kills. The two senseless deaths of First Nations children in a house fire in Makwa Sahgaiehcan First Nation in Saskatchewan from an unpaid bill of less than $4,000 has sparked outrage across Canada. In no other place in Canada would an ambulance, fire fighter or police officer ask a provincial resident if they had paid their taxes before answering an emergency call for help. Canada has a deep-seated racism problem which is killing our people. But to truly understand Indigenous outrage and sadness, one must understand both the context and true depth of this problem in Canada.

    In the mid-1700’s, colonial governments in what is now Nova Scotia considered the Mi’kmaw Nation to be “rebels” because we refused to give up our land. As a result, Governor Cornwallis issued a scalping proclamation that decimated the Mi’kmaw Nation by as much as 80%. In 1971, Donald Marshall Jr., was sentenced to life in prison for murder and spent 11 years in jail before his wrongful prosecution was exposed. A subsequent Royal Commission found the reason for his imprisonment was racism against Mi’kmaw people by all levels of the justice system.

    In 1999, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that the Mi’kmaw right to fish and trade it commercially was protected in our constitutionally-protected treaties. The result? Canada sent in law enforcement to beat, pepper spray and run over our fishing boats – in addition to legal charges. In 2013, Elsipogtog First Nation and other members of the Mi’kmaw Nation who supported their anti-fracking stance in Mi’kmaw territory were labeled “terrorists”, “militants” and “bad Indians”. The scalping law was not used but our people were beaten and imprisoned.

    From small pox blankets and scalping bounties to imprisonment and neglect – Canada is killing our people and Canadians will be next if nothing is done to change the value (or lack thereof) that we collectively put on human life – all human life. This dictatorial, police state is not what newcomers to Canada had in mind when they came to Canada. A territory shared with Indigenous Nations based on formal agreements (treaties) and information agreement (alliances) were founded on three principles: (1) mutual respect, (2) mutual prosperity and (3) mutual protection. Indigenous peoples, their families, communities and Nations protected and cared for newcomers. Our people fought in Canada’s world wars to protect our shared territory and people. Now it’s time for Canadians to stand up for Indigenous peoples.

    In 1971, Helen Betty Osborne was kidnapped and murdered in The Pas, Manitoba. Her grieving friends and family were treated like criminals while the accused men were given the royal treatment by law enforcement and left to walk free for years. This wasn’t the first time our Indigenous women and little girls have been victims of a racist Canada, but no action was taken. Today, Canadians are well aware of the thousands of Indigenous women and little girls have gone murdered and/or missing in Canada. Yet, there is no sense of alarm in Parliament, nor has the Canadian state taken any steps to work with First Nations to embark on an inquiry or implement an emergency action plan.  

    By 1996, the last residential school had closed which was supposed to mark an end to the theft of Indigenous children from our Indigenous families, communities and Nations. Literally thousands of Indigenous children were victims of murders, rapes, tortures and medical experiments – and upwards of 40% never made it out of some of those schools alive. The legacy of thousands of our children who died as a matter of state law and policy should at least have included a promise to stop stealing our children. Today, we have more than 30,000 Indigenous children in care and growing. The problems have not stopped – they are getting worse.

    The use of small pox blankets on our people to try to kill us off faster has been described by medical doctors as the first example of “biological warfare” during non-war times. Indigenous women and little girls were forcibly sterilized without their knowledge and consent for decades in an effort to stop us from reproducing. The Canadian state does not need to use such blatant policies to reduce our populations anymore – willful neglect has the same lethal effect. Federal, provincial and municipal governments are standing by while our people die. This is not an “Indian problem” – this is a Canadian problem that impacts every single Canadian and our collective future.

    In 2005,  Jordan River Anderson, a little boy from Norway House Cree Nation with many medical issues, died in hospital at 5 years old never having seen his home because the federal and provincial governments couldn’t stop arguing over who would pay. In 2008, Brian Sinclair, a double amputee, whose family had roots in Berens River and Fort Alexander First Nations, died after waiting 34 hours in a hospital waiting room waiting for treatment for a bladder infection – while nearly 200 people passed him by – including staff who wrongly assumed he was “sleeping it off”.

    The former Auditor General for Canada raised the alarms about discriminatory funding and the failure by Indian Affairs to take action on programs that would significantly impact the lives of First Nations. The Office of the Correctional Investigator has called the increasing over-representation of Indigenous peoples a crisis that needs to be addressed. The United Nations Special Rapporteur has made numerous recommendations on how Canada can address this multi-faceted crisis in First Nations. But Canada fails to take action.

    Despite Canada’s failure to act, First Nations continue to try to raise the alarm bells on this lethal situation. A failure to address the chronic underfunding has led to First Nations being 10 times more likely to die in a house fire than Canadians. Indian affairs own report done in 2011 indicated that a minimum of $28 million dollars was needed to prevent deadly fires in Manitoba alone – yet all 633 First Nations in Canada only get $26 million.

    Canada sits back and watches our people die needless deaths while we struggle to heal our families and communities, to rebuild after the theft of our lands and resources and to resist ongoing attempts to assimilate and eliminate us. The herculean effort at the grassroots level to protect our people is made more difficult by state propaganda that would blame us for our own misery, or deflect media attention by vilifying our leaders. Now Bill C-51 will make those of us who speak out against such inhumanity all “terrorists”. Then who will defend this territory?

    The Chief Coroner for Ontario released an especially rare and powerful report in 2011 on the child suicide epidemic in Pikangikum First Nation which had declared a state of emergency – a desperate call for help that went unanswered by Canada. Within a two year period between 2006 and 2008, 16 children between the ages of 10-19 committed suicide. 16 children died – not from accidental car crashes or unpreventable diseases but because the “basic necessities of life are absent” in Pikangikum who struggles to heal and survive amidst the “backdrop of colonialism, racism and social exclusion” and government neglect.

    16 little First Nation children committed suicide because the Canadian state creates and maintains the conditions of life that will either kill them or make them so hopeless they will kill themselves. That’s the UN definition of genocide.

    In the words of the coroner, this “was not a story of capitulation to death, but rather, a story of stamina, endurance, tolerance, and resiliency stretched beyond human limits until finally, they simply could take no more.”

    In what vision of Canada are the ongoing deaths of our people ok? We need Canadians to stand beside First Nations and support us as we defend the health of our lands and waters as well as the rights and freedoms of Canadians. This should not be our burden to bear alone anymore. Help us turn this ship around before we lose any more precious children.

    #StopBillC51 #RacismKills #Genocide #FirstNationsLivesMatter #foodfor7gens #mmiw P. Palmater, Genocide, Indian Policy and legislated Elimination of Indians In Canada (2014) vol.3, no.3, Aboriginal Policy Studies 27-54. http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/aps/article/view/22225/pdf_22 P. Palmater, Stretched Beyond Human Limits: Death by Poverty in First Nations (2011) No.65/66, Can. Rev. of Social Policy 112-127. http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/crsp/article/viewFile/35220/32057

  • Laurie River Lodge Adventures: Watch Out for Animals and Indians?

    It is hard to believe that in 2014, there are still businesses who provide services to the public that have no problem profiting from the lands, resources and traditional knowledges of Indigenous peoples, but who, at the same time, spread racism and hatred against us. Laurie River Lodge, an outdoor adventure business located in northern Manitoba and owned by Brent and Erin Fleck, is one such company. Laurie River Lodge has a website which includes a link to a promotional brochure which explains what clients can expect when they purchase an adventure with their lodge. Their website is: http://www.laurieriverlodge.com/index.php And their brochure can be found under the Heading “Outpost Plan” at the following link: http://www.laurieriverlodge.com/downloads/2014/2014_trip_planning_guide.pdf On the same page that the Lodge warns its customers about animals, it provides a warning about its Cree Indian guides. The offending comments can be found on page 10, under the section entitled “Section 1-9 What You Can Expect From Us”:

    We take great care when hiring our staff; however the subject of Native Guides must be touched upon. We use Cree Indian guides from the town of Pukatawagon in northern Manitoba. They are wonderful people and fun to fish with however, like all Native North Americans, they have a basic intolerance for alcohol. Please do not give my guides alcohol under any circumstances. This is rarely a problem and by telling you in advance I hope to avoid it altogether.

    The Lodge is speaking about the band members of Mathias Colomb Cree Nation (MCCN) whose primary reserve is located in Pukatawagan in northern Manitoba. They apparently use MCCN band members as guides for their business. It is also noteworthy that this business uses the lands and resources contained within MCCN’s traditional, treaty and reserve lands as well as their trap-lines. Band members were so upset by these racist remarks that they contacted Chief Arlen Dumas and asked that he look into this and he responded immediately by sending out a letter to the Lodge owners. Chief Dumas explained that he was “appauled” to see that this business profits from his Nation’s lands, resources and people to ensure a profit for the owners, but at the same time promotes racist stereotypes against the very people they use to make a profit: Cree guides. Chief Dumas explains: Not only did you single out the band members from our reserve in Pukatawagan, but your brochure presented an ominous or threatening tone by stating and/or implying that: (1)  Our Cree people have a genetic and/or biological intolerance for alcohol due to their race; (2)  You warned the public against giving our members any alcohol due to this intolerance, one can only presume you meant that some sort of harm would come to the public; and (3)  That while rare, this “problem” does occur and the public needs to avoid it. None of the above statements or implications about our people are true. The comments are racist and negative stereotypes which only serve to promote or incite hatred against our people. There is no scientific basis for your claim that Cree people have an intolerance for alcohol, nor is there any basis for alleging that our Cree people would drink while working or that the pose a risk to the public. As a result of such discriminatory remarks, Chief Dumas demanded that the remarks be removed from the website; a public apology be offered to all Cree and First Nation people; personal letters of apology be sent to all their Cree employees; and that they make amends to MCCN.

    He concluded the letter by stating that if the Lodge owners refuse to address the issue, he would “have no choice but to take further steps to protect my band members from your racist, discriminatory incitement of hatred.”Chief Dumas is right to be upset about these public comments. It is not just a matter of taking offense to insulting words, this Lodge potentially faces a discrimination complaint, a civil suit and very bad publicity for their business. The Manitoba Human Rights Code (provincial law) provides that Manitobans recognize that “to protect this right it is necessary to restrict unreasonable discrimination against individuals, including discrimination based on stereotypes or generalizations about groups with whom they are or are thought to be associated, and to ensure that reasonable accommodation is made for those with special needs” and such discrimination is prohibited. The Criminal Code (federal law) under section 319 makes the public incitement of hatred against a particular group, like the Cree people a criminal offense. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms (constitutional law) also provides that: 15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability”. Even international law protects people from racism and discrimination. If morals could not guide these business owners, certainly they have an obligation to follow the law. It is no wonder why discrimination against Indigenous peoples has not subsided, given openly racist attitudes like this. One would have thought the days of warning people against animals and Indians were over.