Indigenous People

CAP's National Chief - Has a Blog!

2007-05-12T08:47:00.000-04:00

Have your say on Indigenuos issues of importance to you:

http://brazman.blogspot.com/

White men get a taste of own medicine

2006-08-21T17:57:00.000-04:00

Thu Aug 17 2006
Terrance Nelson

'SHRILL, ugly and lawless," says the Free Press editorial Lawless rule (Aug. 9), describing the situation in Caledonia, where the Mohawks now occupy the land.

As the chief of Roseau River, I say, "How does it feel, White Man, to have people who come to what you consider your property, set up their own system, refuse to go home, refuse to recognize your laws and then when you ask them to leave, they tell you that you no longer own the land?"

I say, bravo to the Mohawks, it is about time the white man got a taste of his own medicine.

Speaking of lawlessness, Delgamuukw, Haida, Marshall, Taku River, and many other Supreme Court decisions sided with the indigenous people, yet Canada ignores the very law you say must be upheld in Caledonia. So, is the law you speak of only good for the white guys, not for the Indians? Why did it only take 100 days for the white business people to get $12 million of compensation from Canada and yet the Indians are still waiting 200 years later?

You ask that First Nations be patient, to accept a process that National Chief Phil Fontaine stated averages 27 years to settle a land claim. For example, when CN Rail expropriated land belonging to the Birdtail Sioux reservation in 1905 for about $80 (without the consent of the real owners) the order-in-council removing the land from reserve status took only three days to complete. Our Treaty Land Entitlement purchases have not been converted, despite the fact that we have had a legally binding agreement with Canada since 1996. Our lands in 1903 that were similarly taken without our consent were converted to non-reservation status in 26 days with an order-in-council. So, when it benefits the white man, the law works fine.

In Delgamuukw, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized aboriginal title, but it also ruled that the original owners have no access to Canadian courts to apply for injunctive relief. So, the white man has protection against the law but not the Indian. The law you speak of, the injunctive relief, is only available to the whites, not the Indians. Yeah, the law is great when it is on your side, White Man. Each of the provinces ensured that they have the notwithstanding clause, so they can ignore the law whenever it is not in their favour. Former Ontario premier David Peterson called Justice David Marshall's decision "bizarre."

It is a bizarre decision, because Superior Court Justice David Marshall would never be allowed to decide injunctive relief for the Indians. Did you see Marshall calling the police and government officials criminals for ignoring the law, did you see him asking to jail government officials? Of course not. Perhaps, the Indians would have a little less contempt for the law if it really was equal and available to everyone, not just the white guys.

I strongly support the Mohawks of Six Nations in their application of the indigenous notwithstanding clause to ignore this bizarre white man's decision.

In case you don't realize the consequences yet of seeing Mohawks on TV with bloodied faces, being beaten by OPP, I'll state this for you again. Hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in resource wealth are travelling on thousands and thousands of kilometres of railway lines in this country. You whites did not bring these resources to our lands in your little boats; you left your God-given resources in Europe. If you didn't hear the anger at the Treaty 1-11 conference, where aboriginals met to discuss the original intent of Canada's numbered treaties, you don't realize the consequences of bloodying the faces of Mohawks. Right now, the government is negotiating without the economic consequences of railway blockades. Don't underestimate the consequences of killing unarmed Mohawks.

Terrance Nelson is chief of Roseau River First Nation

Creation of the first Aboriginal Government in Canada - including the Creation of the first Canadian off-reserve Grand Council of Chiefs

2006-08-11T10:18:00.000-04:00

Creation of the first Aboriginal Government in Canada - including the Creation of the first Canadian off-reserve Grand Council of Chiefs

July 11, 2006 - The off reserve Aboriginal People are done waiting. They have waited 35 years only to find out that nothing is moving. They are also concerned regarding the fact that they are still in the same position that they were at the beginning. They have decided to take their own destiny in their own hands; they have created the CONFEDERATION OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLE OF CANADA (CAPC). The creation of the CPAC will assure a dedicated and adapted development for the next seven generations. This is our responsibility and this is the way our culture has always been.

Continue Reading Article Here.

First Nations say land claim fights handed down through generations

2006-08-07T11:05:00.000-04:00

First Nations say land-claim fights handed down through generations

August 6, 2006
By Michelle Macafee
http://ca.news. yahoo.com/ s/06082006/ 2/national- first-nations- say-land- claim-fights- handed-generatio ns.html

WINNIPEG (CP) - For as long as he can remember, Chief Pascall Bighetty has heard the stories of how his great, great grandfather urged his people not to sign a treaty with the Crown.

It was a conclusion the trapper named Namikos (Trout), reached after he had been chosen to spend time in England studying the document.

"He said we'd be giving up our lands for nothing and his belief was that without a land base you're nothing," said Bighetty, head of the Mathias Colomb First Nation in northwestern Manitoba.

That warning has been a constant echo in his head, and has guided him through a political life that has seen him elected chief for 23 of his 55 years.

And it's what brought him to historic Lower Fort Garry last week, just north of Winnipeg, for a four-day gathering of aboriginals from across Western Canada.

Discussion centred around the original spirit and intent of Canada's numbered treaties, and how to enforce them in a modern era of lengthy land-claim negotiations with government.

The timing and location of the event were carefully chosen - the national historic site sits on what is considered Treaty 1 territory. Aug. 3 marked the 135th anniversary of the treaty's signing in 1871.

Aboriginals ceded most of what is now Manitoba in exchange for reserve land and about $5 per person each year in cash or goods and services.

Now the focus is on pressing the federal government to honour treaty rights.

Chiefs say the last few decades have left them with the impression that their concerns have fallen off the radar.

They wrapped up their meeting by appointing Chief Ovide Mercredi, former grand chief of the Assembly of First Nations and head of the Grand Rapids First Nation, to be the spokesman for chiefs representing Treaties 1 through 11.

The group wants "to create a movement, not a political organization" to help bring a speedier resolution to outstanding claims.

Bighetty wants to go one step further and gather chiefs to visit the Queen this fall to make a political statement by redelivering treaty documents.

"We're poor, but we're not supposed to be," said Bighetty. "If we reclaim our lands, at least we'd have an equal footing as the governments. "

The Mathias Colomb band is still trying to get about 518 square kilometres of land.

The Department of Indian Affairs considers the claim settled, but reaching a deal at the negotiating table is often just the beginning of a long, winding road for bands to actually get the land back.

Almost a decade after the Manitoba Treaty Land Entitlement Framework Agreement was signed, only about five per cent of the 1.1 million acres owed to First Nations in the province has actually been converted to reserve status, said Carl Braun, executive director of the Treaty Land Entitlement Committee.

"The process can take years," said Braun. "There can be a whole collection of problems."

The federal government often must first get the land back from the provinces before turning it over to the bands, a process that can be complicated when third parties are using the land.

Bighetty said he's willing to be patient and doesn't share the view taken by others that protest and civil disobedience will speed things up.

Tensions erupted last spring at Caledonia, near Hamilton, Ont., in a series of nasty confrontations over a subdivision of land reclaimed by Six Nations members.

In southern Manitoba, the Roseau River First Nation says it will use surprise rail blockades to get Ottawa's attention.

Chief Terry Nelson says the reserve is owed at least $60 million from a 1903 claim.

"I believe in negotiations, " said Bighetty. "You have to sit down at the table and if you don't get what you want, you go back. Protests and civil disobedience only work for awhile, it's only a Band-Aid solution, not long-term."

Chief Norman Bone believes peaceful talks are what ultimately got his Keeseekoowenin First Nation in southwestern Manitoba a successful resolution in 2004 of 440 hectares of land in Riding Mountain National Park and about $11 million.

The case took 32 years to resolve - "and it was an easy one."

But Bone attributes the delays to everything from a repeated change in government negotiators to calculating the price of "loss of use" of the land over more than 100 years.

"The system that's set up is very flawed because it's given to bureaucracy and there's all kind of delays and every kind of situation occurs," said Bone.

"Sometimes we felt like it was never going to happen. Thinking back, if we'd wanted it done quickly we might have done some blockades, but we were so confident in our research, no matter which way you looked at it, it was reserve land."

But Bone, 53, warns the system must be revamped because younger generations will be quicker to turn to protests to get results.

The Department of Indian Affairs has said about 20 specific claims are settled each year, compared with 55 new cases filed annually. There are 770 outstanding specific claims on file at various stages of the process.

Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice has said he plans a major "retooling" of the land-claims process, calling the current backlog unacceptable.

He's considering more mediation, adding more skilled negotiators and further funding. Ottawa spent $536 million in 2004-05 to negotiate, settle and implement claims.

Far too many of these cases are passing through several generations without final resolution, said Cynthia Wesley-Esquimaux, who teaches aboriginal studies at the University of Toronto.

"That's a sense a lot of native people have about the future and resolution of these things - how do we do this in a way that protects the integrity of the community in the moment but assures viability for the future?" said Wesley-Esquimaux, a member of the Chippewas of Georgian Island First Nation in southern Ontario who has helped research and write several claims.

"A lot of people are reluctant to sign agreements because they're not sure how to avoid condemning the future."

Warriors Against Violence Conference

2006-08-07T10:55:00.000-04:00

Warriors Against Violence Conference

September 25-26, 2006.

Vancouver, BC.

http://www.interpro fessional. ubc.ca/Brochure_ IWW.pdf

In warmer world, even Inuit buy air conditioners

2006-08-07T10:48:00.000-04:00

By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

OSLO (Reuters) - With signs that the world is warming, even Inuit peoples of the far north are ordering air conditioning.

Better known for building igloos during hunts on the polar ice, Inuit in the village of Kuujjuaq in Quebec, Canada, are installing 10 air conditioners for about 25 office workers.

"These are the times when the far north has to have air conditioners now to function," said Sheila Watt-Cloutier, a leading campaigner for the rights of 155,000 Inuit in Canada, Alaska, Russia and Greenland.

"Our Arctic homes are made to be airtight for the cold and do not 'breathe' well in the heat with this warming trend," she said. Temperatures in Kuujjuaq, home to 2,000 people, hit 31 Celsius (88 Fahrenheit) in late July.

If the Inuit are feeling the heat, chances are that people further south are sweltering too.
Billion-dollar shifts in lifestyles in rich nations are likely as people adapt to what most scientists say is a warming stoked by use of fossil fuels -- affecting demand for everything from soft drinks or foods to architecture and tourism.

Scientists who advise the United Nations say a build-up of heat-trapping gases emitted by power plants, factories and cars are likely to spur more heatwaves, droughts, floods and raise sea levels by up to a meter in the 21st century.

"Lifestyles will change ... but businesses have to be flexible," said Manfred Stock of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. He noted the climate is also likely to have bigger swings in a warmer world.

FLOODS, HEATWAVES
"For instance in making ice creams you may have a bad year and you have to stand that," he said. "A winner one year can be a loser the next." In Europe, searing heatwaves in 2003 followed widespread floods in 2002.

"Today we've sold almost nothing," said Miriam Eid Bergan, 20, working at an ice cream parlor in Oslo's main street and looking out the window as people hurried past in the rain. "When it's sunny the queue can stretch down the street."

Most studies of global warming focus on businesses' opportunities to save energy or to shift to wind or solar power from fossil fuels, especially with oil prices around $75 a barrel.

Lifestyle often gets less attention, even though a rising temperature will affect sectors as diverse as producers of beer, suntan lotion, lightweight clothing, air conditioning, swimwear and open-top cars.

Farmers may be able to grow new crops closer to the poles, changing the range of choice, and tourists may shun low-altitude Alpine ski resorts which could lack snow or traditional beach resorts that get too hot.

People in Florida might become wary of living by the ocean, especially if they have to pay higher insurance premiums linked to rising seas. In cold climates, houses may have to be designed to lose heat in summer as well as trap it in winter.

The 1990s were probably the warmest decade of the past 1,000 years, with 1998 the warmest year, according to U.N. data. Temperatures have risen by 0.6 C since the late 1800s and may gain 1.4-5.8 C by 2100.

David Viner, a senior climate scientist at the University of East Anglia in England, said tourism could shift dramatically in the 21st century -- Mediterranean beaches might get too scorching for northern Europeans who would instead stay at home.

"People in northern Europe go to the Mediterranean because they have unpredictable summers at home. But the summers in the north will become warmer," he said.

HOTTER, THIRSTIER
With hotter, thirstier populations, air conditioner makers such as United Technologies Corp. or Japan's Daikin Industries seem obvious winners along with brewers such as Anheuser-Busch or Heineken.

But it is often hard to disentangle how climate affects demand -- fashion, health or other concerns are at play.

Analysts are unsure how far the share price of brewers, for instance, reflects expectations that warm years will continue.

Larry Watt, mayor of Kuujjuaq, said one reason for ordering air conditioners was to stop dust from outside blowing into computers. Before the municipality owned computers, the windows could be kept open in hot weather.

And Bergan in the ice cream shop in Oslo said: "People are buying fewer ice creams here than five years ago ... Maybe they're buying somewhere else or they worry about eating so much sugar."

And many consumer efforts to keep cool may have unwanted side-effects. Air conditioning, like in Kuujjuaq, relies on electricity generated by fossil fuels -- blamed by most scientists for global warming.

Jacqueline House- letter to Queen Elizabeth

2006-07-26T09:35:00.000-04:00

Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II
Buckingham Palace
London, SW1A1AA

Your Royal Highness,

Scano, (Hello)
I am writing to you with the utmost respect regarding our On gwe ho weh (True people) Territory, Kanenhstaton (The Protected Place) a.k.a. Douglas Creek Lands. Our Nation is in terrible turmoil at the hands of the Canadian Government. The acting officials, Governor General Michelle Jean, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper, have shamed and disgraced Canada as they continue to ignore the Haundensaunee Traditional People of Six Nations, as they do not hear our cries. They have been in violation of our Human Rights when it comes to our people for many, endless years.

Our waters are contaminated and are unsafe to drink. In some places we are unable to bathe in the water as it holds so much sulfur that it makes us sick and leaves the color of our white tubs brown. As the filth seeps into the ground, it causes Mother Earth to suffer and when she suffers, we suffer. We become sick with diseases and our skin often breaks out with sores. The pesticides that are being used carries through our women and into our unborn children. Our children suffer the consequences as they are born with deformed limbs. In other Territories there are a high percentage of miscarriages. All these factors serve as genocide against our People.

Our past dealings with the outside world have not changed and, in fact, the mistreatment has gotten worse. This is not a Third World Country, nor are we foreigners to this land. We have Treaties made with King George III, with respect to Your people and His intention was, “to protect us from further harm.” Because of our Military Alliance, we defeated Your enemy, making us, “Allies to the Crown.” This title we earned with great honor. Together we sealed, The Two Row Wampum, The Covenant Chain and the Peace Treaty. These agreements state that “we travel the same river together, each in our own canoes and we will not steer each others’ vessels.” Both of our Ancestors have laid out this path for us to honor and respect each other and to govern ourselves accordingly as we practice peace, power and righteousness.

In 1924, the government forcefully imposed the illegal Elected Band Council on us, which went against our Inherent Rights. Through this act of betrayal, our Traditional Confederacy Council was ignored. Their intention was and has always been, to banish and do away with us. However, our traditions are very much alive today as they were back then, and we are here with that same spirit. We have taken everything that Canada has shoved at us leaving us no other alternatives. As it was foresaid long ago, “There will come a day when we have had enough." Today, we have had enough.

We were meant to enjoy this land, “As long as the water flows, the grass grows, and the sun shines.” Through the land comes peace and harmony. Mother Earth is crying and it is our duty to protect her for when she cries, our people cry. We can no longer tolerate having to place a toxic blanket over our loved ones when we place them into the ground. We have been cheated, robbed and molested of our lands and I am reaching out to You so that You hear our cries. We are trusting, caring and loving People of this Earth and we are born natural defenders of the land for which we should be treated with respect and dealt with in an appropriate manner according to “The Great Law.” We have respected Your people throughout.

Fifteen years ago, the shrewd developers, Don and Ron Henning of Henco Industries, Inc., bought a parcel of land along side the Haldimand Tract. Who they purchased this land from is unknown to us and they have never shown us a Title. These developers knew this land was under dispute because three years prior, Henco Industries placed a proposal on the table for discussions with the Six Nations Elected Band Council and our Council never responded to Henco. The Henning brothers took it upon themselves to proceed with a multi-million dollar development investment that would eventually place as many as 50,000 families upon the land. The People of Six Nations have been concerned about where we are going to house our own future generations as we are running out of space. This is unfair and unjust as it suppresses our extended families and their given right to stay with us on our lands. In the meantime, we hold title to this land through Sir Frederick Haldimand and the Royal Proclamation affirms this. We are aware that our Ancestors gave away title to a small portion of land on the tract as gifts and also agreed to lease some of the land for 99 years with stipulations. These agreements have been broken by settlers and yet, we as a People, made no attempt to remove anyone, though the leases have been expired for some time now.

On February 28, 2006, we made a long overdue stand for our land rights and it has been quite the journey we have taken and one we are proud of. On March 7, 2006, Judge David Marshall of the Cayuga Court placed illegal court injunctions upon our People. Judge Marshall’s intention is to remove us off our land with whatever force necessary, as we have had threats made against us to call in the Army. We have asked Judge Marshall to step down on several occasions as he has a biased opinion in that he claims he has title to property along the Grand River (the Haldimand Proclamation.) Judge Marshall states in his book written in 2002 that he is, “an Honorary Chief to the Six Nations,” and to us this means he was adopted into our Nation. Again, Judge Marshall stands in a conflict of interest in that he is rendering a judgment against his own “family members.”

We have served papers addressing our rights to Judge Marshall, the OPP, RCMP, Henco’s lawyer, Michael Bruder and to all officials involved who have taken an oath, “to protect Her Majesty’s interests.” This case is not a criminal matter. This is an International matter that concerns all of us regarding who we are as Six Nations people and what we represent. We have been unwillingly placed in the middle of psychological warfare. Mr. Bruder has threatened to file a lawsuit against the OPP. Judge Marshall threatens to hold the OPP in contempt of Court for not removing our people from our own lands. The OPP came in upon our unarmed people on April 20, 2006 and attacked them while they slept at 4:45 AM. The OPP came in with guns drawn; tear gas and tasers were used with as many as eight officers on one of our people. For simply standing up for our given rights, many of our people were placed under arrest with absurd charges. In the meantime, our Confederacy Chiefs were at the negotiation table and were told that as long as talks were taking place, they would not come in and try to remove us. They lied.

When the OPP came in upon our people, they placed barricades up so the media, and hence, the world communities, could not witness the savagely brutal attacks against us. They act like terrorists as they inflict terror upon our people. We replaced the barricades with palisades for the safety of the people from any further attacks. This caused major conflict with some of the Caledonia residents who only thought of themselves as far as their local economy and convenience of travel were concerned. Many of the local residents must have believed we were going to evict them from our land. Racist people from Caledonia and outside communities were brought in to insight hate crimes and throw rocks at our people while trying to entice us to step outside of the boundary lines. We have been treated badly and given poor representation in the media who continuously slander our names in their newspapers and broadcasts while not speaking the truth anywhere.

This has not been an easy ordeal trying to maintain peace while such volatile language and abuse is thrown at us. Nor has it been easy trying to keep our children from becoming just as hateful as the non-natives around us while we continue to make a stand for our birthrights. We stated from the start, “We are peaceful, unified and unarmed,” and, “We do NOT declare War.” We believe Canada has no intention of upholding and honoring the Treaties. Therefore, I am asking, no I am begging You, on behalf of our People, that You step in so that we can continue to have peace, Nation to Nation.

Nya weh (thank you)
Jacqueline House

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Responds to Conflicting Statements by Conservative MPs Regarding First Ministers Meeting Agreements

2006-06-16T08:57:00.000-04:00

January 11, 2006
Assembly of First Nations National Chief Responds to Conflicting Statements by Conservative MPs Regarding First Ministers Meeting Agreements: Calls on Leader to Clarify Party Position

Read this document here.

Transformative Change Accord

2006-06-16T08:47:00.000-04:00

Transformative Change Accord
-between-

Government of British Columbia
-and-
Government of Canada
-and-
The Leadership Council
Representing the First Nations of British Columbia

The Government of British Columbia, First Nations and the Government of Canada agree that new approaches for addressing the rights and title interests of First Nations are required if First Nations are to be full partners in the success and opportunity of the province.

At the First Ministers' Meeting on Aboriginal issues on November 24th/25th, 2005, First Ministers and Aboriginal Leaders committed to strengthening relationships on a government-to-government basis, and on focussing efforts to close the gap in the areas of education, health, housing and economic opportunities.

This accord respects the agreement reached on November 25th and sets out how the parties intend to implement it in British Columbia.

Two important documents preceded the First Ministers' Meeting:
First Nations - Federal Crown Political Accord - on the Recognition and Implementation of First Nations Governments signed in May 2005

The New Relationship - A vision document setting out an initial work plan to move toward reconciliation of Aboriginal and Crown Titles and Jurisdictions within British Columbia
The goals in each document continue to be pursued and the understandings reached in both serve as the foundation for this tripartite accord.

The purpose of this Accord is to bring together the Government of British Columbia, First Nations and the Government of Canada to achieve the goals of closing the social and economic gap between First Nations and other British Columbians over the next 10 years, of reconciling aboriginal rights and title with those of the Crown, and of establishing a new relationship based upon mutual respect and recognition.

The Accord acknowledges and respects established and evolving jurisdictional and fiduciary relationships and responsibilities, and will be implemented in a manner that seeks to remove impediments to progress by establishing effective working relationships.

The actions and processes set out herein are guided by the following principles.

Recognition that aboriginal and treaty rights exist in British Columbia.
Belief that negotiations are the chosen means for reconciling rights.
Requirement that consultation and accommodation obligations are met and fulfilled.
Ensure that First Nations engage in consultation and accommodation, and provide consent when required, freely and with full information.
Acknowledgement and celebration of the diverse histories and traditions of First Nations.
Understanding that a new relationship must be based on mutual respect and responsibility.
Recognition that this agreement is intended to support social and economic well-being of First Nations.
Recognition that accountability for results is critical.
Respect for existing bilateral and tripartite agreements.

The parties to this Accord acknowledge the importance of First Nations' governance in supporting healthy communities. Actions set out in this Accord and in subsequent action plans will reflect this reality.

The parties understand that new resources will be required to close the gaps and federal and provincial investments on and off reserve will be made available pursuant to the decisions taken at the November 2005 First Ministers' Meeting. The parties also recognize the need to examine how existing resources are expended with the view that transformative change will require different funding approaches.

The Province of British Columbia, the Government of Canada and the First Nations of British Columbia agree to establish a 10 year plan to bridge the differences in socio-economic standards between First Nation citizens and other British Columbians. It is understood that a 10 ten year plan must by necessity evolve over time, and that concrete actions are required at its outset to build the relationships and momentum to achieve the desired outcome.

Accordingly, the parties to this Accord agree to undertake immediate actions in the following areas:

To improve relationships by:
Supporting a tripartite negotiation forum to address issues having to do with the reconciliation of Aboriginal rights and title;
Engaging in the review and renewal of claims, treaty implementation and self-government policies;
Holding an annual meeting of political leaders intended to jointly discuss issues of mutual concern, report on progress and plan ongoing action; and,
Developing and implementing a communications plan to increase public awareness of the diversity and value of First Nations cultures, including support for the 2008 North American Indigenous Games

Possible Indicators include:
Concluded Treaties and other agreements
Increased awareness by the public of diversity and value of First Nation cultures

To close the gap in education by:
Concluding a tripartite agreement on First Nation jurisdiction over K-12 education;
Supporting First Nation learners;
Focusing resources on early childhood learning and post-secondary training, including skills, training and apprenticeships; and,
Creating a high quality learning environment for First Nation students through curriculum development, teacher certification and the early detection of, and response to, learning disabilities.

Possible Indicators include:
First Nations children exhibiting readiness for Kindergarten.
Aboriginal students meeting expectations in reading, writing and numeracy (Foundation Skills Assessment).
K-12 (or Dogwood equivalent) completion rates .
Aboriginal students enrolled in post-secondary education (alternatively "highest level of education attained").
Number of First Nation teachers.
K - 12 curriculum modules.

To close the gap in housing and infrastructure by:
Building on-reserve housing units.
Developing a partnering agreement to address off-reserve housing.
Exploring the devolution and development of Aboriginal off-reserve housing units to an aboriginal housing authority.
Supporting capacity development in the area of housing, including building maintenance and standards, and training and employment having to do with housing construction;
Undertaking measures to ensure the safety of water supply;
Improving other basic infrastructure such as wastewater systems, roads and fire protection;
Undertaking comprehensive community planning; and,
Providing broadband connectivity to First Nation communities.

Possible Indicators include:
First Nation households in core housing.
First Nations people trained in construction and maintenance of housing and related infrastructure.
Number of Aboriginal subsidized housing units .
Number of on-reserve and off-reserve housing units built.
On-reserve boil water advisories.
First Nation communities with broadband access.

To close the gap in health by[1]:
Establishing mental health programs to address substance abuse and youth suicide;
Integrating the ActNow strategy with First Nations health programs to reduce incidence of preventable diseases like diabetes;
Establishing tripartite pilot programs in the Northern Health Authority and the Lytton Health Centre to improve acute care and community health services utilizing an integrated approach to health and community programs as directed by the needs of First Nations; and,
Increasing the number of trained First Nation health care professionals.

Possible Indicators include:
Increased life expectancy.
Age standardized mortality rates.
Youth suicides.
Infant (up to one year) and neonatal (up to 28 days) mortality rates.
Level of incidence of diabetes.
Level of childhood obesity.
Practising, certified First Nation health care professionals.

To close the gap in economic opportunities by:
Providing increased access to lands and resources through interim measures;
Considering the implementation of revenue sharing arrangements;
Holding a provincial summit on economic development; and,
Supporting First Nations business and entrepreneurial development by increasing access to business training, and skills development and considering ways to facilitate greater access to capital funding sources.

Possible Indicators include:
Employment rates.
Average weekly and hourly wage levels (LFS data).
Business start ups.
Number of entrepreneurs in BC.
First Nation registered apprentices.

The Parties agree that by December, 2006 a detailed tripartite implementation strategy will be developed laying out specific actions and building upon a shared commitment to undertake as many initiatives as possible in year one of the 10 year plan (2006 - 2016). The Parties understand the collective responsibility for reporting on the progress of closing the socio-economic gaps that exist between First Nations people and other British Columbians.

Accordingly, resources will be focussed towards developing the data and information necessary to appropriately monitor and report on agreed upon action plans. Canada, British Columbia and the First Nations of British Columbia agree that regular public reports are necessary. Data collection will respect the privacy of individuals.

For greater certainty, nothing in this agreement shall be construed so as to abrogate or derogate from the protection of any existing or future Aboriginal or treaty rights of the First Nations peoples of British Columbia.

Signed this 25th day of November, 2005.

[ORIGINAL SIGNED]

Canada
Rt. Honourable Paul Martin

Province of British Columbia
Honourable Gordon Campbell

First Nations Leadership Council
Representing the BC Assembly of First Nations:
Regional Chief Shawn Atleo

Representing the First Nations Summit:
Grand Chief Edward John
Grand Chief Doug Kelly
Dave Porter

Representing the Union of BC Indian Chiefs:
Chief Stewart Phillip
Chief Robert Shintah
Chief Mike Retasket

First Nations Leadership Council Information Bulletin : 2006 Federal Budget

2006-06-16T08:44:00.000-04:00

2006 Federal Budget

The federal government announced its budget on May 2, 2006. Despite the Conservative Party platform of accountability and addressing the fiscal imbalance, the federal government did not live up to its obligations under the Kelowna agreement and did very little to address the poverty and poor socio-economic conditions of First Nations peoples and communities. The new government is proceeding with its own plan for aboriginal peoples, developed without consultation with First Nations; over the next two years, the new government plans to:
Honour the residential schools agreement ($2.2 billion)
Improve educational, socio-economic conditions for Aboriginal women, children and families, and water supply and housing on reserve ($450 million)
Address pressures in off-reserve Aboriginal housing ($300 million)
Institute affordable housing in the North ($300 million).
However, this budget provided a mere 20% of the funding committed in the Kelowna agreement, which included $600 million for on-reserve housing, $1.3 billion for health, and $400 million for safe drinking water.

The First Nations Leadership Council (FNLC) is disappointed with this budget, and has sent letters to the Prime Minister, Finance Minister, and Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development calling for the Kelowna commitments to be upheld. The FNLC has also been lobbying opposition parties to support an amendment to the budget and uphold the honour of the Crown by supporting the Kelowna agreement. The FNLC is also calling for:

A First Ministers’ Meeting on Aboriginal Issues to be convened to address First Nations-Crown relations, fiscal imbalances faced by First Nations governments, Aboriginal and treaty rights in Canada, and federal government responsibilities and legal obligations to provide services to First Nations peoples;

First Nations to be fully represented in the federal/provincial/territorial Finance Ministers’ meeting to be held in the spring to consult on the federal government’s discussion paper, Restoring Fiscal Balance in Canada; and

The full involvement and representation of Aboriginal peoples at the First Ministers’ Meeting on the fiscal imbalance to be held in the fall.

On May 4, 2006, Premier Campbell also voiced his disappointment in the federal government, and vowed to work with the federal government, Leadership Council and other Aboriginal peoples to achieve the goals set out in Kelowna. The Premier’s Ministerial Statement was unanimously supported by both sides of the Legislature, which subsequently passed a motion of support for the Kelowna agreement and Transformative Change Accord:

“That this House unanimously recommend the federal government reaffirm its commitment to the Transformative Change Accord, a document signed by the federal government, the province of British Columbia and the BC First Nations Leadership Council and, further, to uphold the honour of the Crown by carrying through on the joint commitment reached by First Ministers and national Aboriginal leaders in November 2005 to close the gaps in education, housing, health and economic opportunity for Canada’s aboriginal people within the next ten years.”

A detailed information kit on this budget, including a form letter from First Nations to the federal government, has been sent to all First Nations in BC. The FNLC urges you to read through this information, and to publicly support an amendment to the federal budget in support of the Kelowna agreement.

Private Members Bill to Implement Kelowna Accord

2006-06-16T08:39:00.000-04:00

BC First Nations Leadership Council Welcomes Private Members Bill to Implement Kelowna Accord
News Release
For Immediate Release
May 19, 2006

Coast Salish Traditional Territory/Vancouver, BC – The BC First Nations Leadership Council applauds the introduction of a Private Member’s bill to implement the historic Kelowna Accord.

The enactment of Bill C-292 requires that the Government of Canada fulfill its obligations and commitments reached under the Kelowna Accord and recognizes that the Accord was the result of a collaborative process among the Government of Canada, provincial and territorial governments, and Aboriginal leadership across Canada.

The First Nations Leadership Council urges all Members of Parliament to embark on a non-partisan approach to Aboriginal issues, as demonstrated by the BC legislature, in supporting the proposed bill. The Bill supports previous calls made by the First Nations Leadership Council, Premier Gordon Campbell, and the BC Government for the federal government to uphold the financial commitments set out in the Kelowna Accord in order to address critical socio-economic gaps. This includes a dedicated ten-year plan to improve the quality of life for Aboriginal peoples. The Act, cited as the Kelowna Accord Implementation Act¸ enacts that the Government of Canada take all measures necessary to implement the terms of the Kelowna Accord.

The First Nations Leadership Council reiterates their demand for the federal government to amend the 2006 federal budget to include the financial resources required to close the gaps in health, education, housing and economic opportunity as set forth in the Accord. This Bill provides an opportunity for the Crown to restore its honour and to acknowledge that a “new approach” for addressing Aboriginal issues was demonstrated in the jointly developed Kelowna Accord and notable tri-partite agreement, the Transformative Change Accord.

The First Nations Leadership Council strongly recommends that the federal government cooperates with the Leadership Council and the Province of British Columbia in providing timely investments to ensure that the mutually agreed upon goals of the Transformative Change Accord are achieved. The Kelowna Accord and the Transformative Change Accord are the result of a collaborative process between all parties leaving the Government of Canada accountable to more than just themselves.

-30-

The First Nations Leadership Council is comprised of the political executives of the First Nations Summit, Union of BC Indian Chiefs and the BC Assembly of First Nations. The Council works together to politically represent the interests of First Nations in British Columbia and develop strategies and actions to bring about significant and substantive changes to government policy that will benefit all First Nations in British Columbia.

For more information:
Chief Stewart Phillip, Union of BC Indian Chiefs (250) 490-5314
Colin Braker, First Nations Summit (604) 926-9903
Heather Gillies, BC Assembly of First Nations (604) 922-7733

Spirit Keepers Caravan - Bringing the Children Home - Canadian Aboriginal Holocaust

2006-06-12T09:43:00.000-04:00

Spirit Keepers Caravan

August 14 - September 30, 2006

Bringing the Children Home

More than 50,000 aboriginal children died in church-run residential schools across Canada between 1890 and 1984. Few of their remains were ever brought home for a proper burial. Their killers were never brought to justice. And the truth of the Aboriginal Holocaust has remained buried.

Until now.

Clan Mothers and Elders have decided to launch a Spirit Keepers Caravan that will visit the sites of former residential schools and help give voice to the spirits of the children who died there. The Caravan will rally survivors and ask the government of Canada and the Catholic, Anglican and United Church to return the remains of the disappeared children to their homes so they may finally be laid to rest.

It is time for the full truth of their fate to be known, and for those who have passed on to receive their healing, too. The Spirit Keepers Caravan expects full disclosure and accountability by those responsible for the deaths of so many children.

This is an invitation to your elders and all your people to welcome and participate in our Caravan. We intend to travel across Turtle Island and bring our message to the world, so that all of the residential school children may finally be brought home and have their story told.
The Caravan will be leaving Unceded Coast Salish territory ("Vancouver") on August 14, 2006, to be joined by others. Contact us now to plan a ceremonial event or public forum on your territory.

For more information, contact our Elders at this email:

spiritkeeperscaravan@yahoo.ca

With thanks from The Elders of the Spirit Keepers Caravan: Growing Rock, Anishinabe-Cree NationMartha Joseph, Getksan NationWhispers Wind, Anishinabe Nation

Read and Hear the truth of Genocide in Canada, past and present, at this website: www.hiddenfromhistory.org

...... and on this radio program: "Hidden from History", every Monday from 1-2 pm (PST) on CFRO 102.7 FM (www.coopradio.org) (Vancouver)

"When the desire for Truth and Virtue becomes the only bias in our mind, only then can we know in ourselves what is right."
Peter Annett, Humanist and dissident, 1769
(jailed and persecuted by the Church of England for his questioning of the Bible and the church)

Prentice announces clean water plan for reserves

2006-03-25T09:52:00.000-05:00

CTV.ca News Staff

Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice outlined the clean water plan for native reserves today, saying residents of First Nations communities should feel as safe about their drinking water as all Canadians.

"It is unacceptable that many First Nations communities across Canada continue to face ongoing risk to the safety of their drinking water," Prentice told a news conference in Ottawa.

The government has a five-point plan for improving water standards on native reserves, which includes:

- Set standards for the design, construction, operation, maintenance and monitoring of reserve water plants.
- Ensure all systems are overseen by certified operators by 2007.
- Kick-start action plans for 21 First Nations considered most at risk.
- Help develop related legislation with input from First Nations.
- Require regular progress reports.

Work is expected to begin right away in 21 communities identified as most at risk for waterborne health hazards.

Under the long-term plan, natives will be in charge of making sure reserves live up to federal standards for design, construction, operation, maintenance and monitoring of drinking water.

In the short term, the federal government will temporarily contract out water services to private companies.

According to Prentice, the problem with drinking water on reserves is not money. It has to do with accountability and standards, he said.

First Nations will be expected to meet federal or provincial standards, whichever is higher, or risk related funding, Prentice said.

"The water systems that this department will fund will be obligated to live up to the standards that are being put forward in this protocol."

Liberal native affairs critic Anita Neville called that an alarming plan.

"I find that very troubling," she told The Canadian Press in an interview.

"You don't threaten to withdraw funding when people's health and well-being are at risk."

Furthermore, the Conservatives are re-hashing Liberal commitments without maintaining $400 million in extra water-treatment cash promised under the landmark Kelowna deal for First Nations, Neville said.

That money was earmarked "on the basis of an assessment of what's needed in the department and a real commitment to make a change."

Prentice evaded the topic when pressed.

"I'm not addressing the issue of Kelowna today," he said of the $5-billion pact made last November by the Liberals, premiers and native leaders after 18 months of talks.

Prentice says that a $1.6-billion water fund pledged in 2003 over five years is enough to help the 21 high-risk First Nations, establish the plan and accelerate training.

As for the other communities struggling with contaminated water, the minister promised to tackle those "in the days and years ahead."

While Prentice came under fire from Neville, he earned the praise of the Head of the Assembly of First Nations Chief Phil Fontaine.

"I applaud the decision taken by the minister to address these communities immediately. They are in crisis and their situation requires an immediate response," Fontaine said, appearing on CTV Newsnet's Mike Duffy Live.
Fontaine said he worked closely with the minister on the clean water plan.

"It's been very much a collaborative approach, and this approach began soon after he was sworn in as minister of Indian Affairs," he said.

"We've had many discussions, we've had meetings, and water was always a top priority with him."

Bad drinking water on First Nations made headlines last October when 1,000 residents of a remote northern Ontario community were evacuated while their water treatment plant was cleaned up.

Many residents of Kashechewan needed treatment for skin rashes and illness blamed on dirty water and poor sanitation.

A report released in November 2005 found that more than half the operators running water treatment plants on Ontario reserves lack the training needed, and many aren't certified.

The federally funded Ontario First Nations Technical Services Corp. said operators at only 60 of the province's 134 reserves have been provided personal training by the advisory group.

In 2001, Indian Affairs found a significant risk to the quality or safety of drinking water for three-quarters of reserve systems.

Kashechewan is not on the list of 21 most at-risk reserves although it's still under a boil-water order until frozen water pipes can be disinfected in the spring.

The reserves considered by Indian Affairs consultants to be most at-risk for waterborne hazards:
- New Brunswick: Woodstock, Pabineau
- Quebec: Kitigan Zibi
- Ontario: Constance Lake, Shoal Lake No. 40, Moose Deer Point, Northwest Angle, Ochiichagwe'babigo-ining, Kingfisher, Muskrat Dam Lake, Wabigoon Lake Ojibway
- Alberta: Dene Tha', Driftpile, Frog Lake
- British Columbia: Shuswap, Toosey, Toquaht, Lake Babine (Fort Babine), Canoe Creek, Semiahmoo, Taku River Tlingit

With files from The Canadian Press

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SURVIVAL FOUNDATION

2006-03-01T15:06:00.000-05:00

One World, One Mission, One Humanity

The Indigenous Peoples Survival Foundation (IPSF) is a non-profit organizationwhich helps needy peoples regardless of origin, race, religion, nationality, or gender.

P.O. Box 25, Yonkers N.Y. U.S.A. Office: 914-237-4642 Fax: 914-237-4651

Visit this site here.

Highway of Tears

2006-03-01T14:59:00.000-05:00

B.C.'s top cop acknowledges there may be a serial killer in northern B.C.

DIRK MEISSNER Wed Mar 1, 1:01 AM ET

VICTORIA (CP) - British Columbia's top cop acknowledges some of the killings along the so-called Highway of Tears may show signs of a serial killer, though RCMP haven't found much evidence.

"There does not appear to be much evidence to support that (serial killer) conclusion at this point. Perhaps one or two cases, you know, could have some aspects of a serial killer at work to them. But again, precious little evidence to support that overall theory," Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General, John Les, said in an interview.

The RCMP have been careful to sidestep any discussion of a serial killer at work along Highway 16, where nine young women - eight of them aboriginal - have disappeared or been killed since 1990.

When pressed if this means there might be a serial killer on the loose in northern British Columbia, Les responded: "Don't put words in my mouth.

"We always, and I'm sure the police will tell you this too, have to keep an open mind to all possibilities."

RCMP spokesman Sgt. John Ward declined to comment on Les's statement.

He stated again that there's nothing to indicate a serial killer at work.

"But, and this is a very big but, we always investigate with a very open mind. There may very well be information down the road that shows that."

Twenty-two officers have been working on the case of Aielah Saric-Auger, 14, after her body was found outside Prince George earlier this month. Police have said her death may not be connected to the highway cases.

Another 15 officers have been working on investigations into the disappearances or deaths of eight other women.

Missing or found dead along the highway since 1990 are Saric-Auger, 14, Tamara Chipman, 22, Lana Derrick, 19, Ramona Wilson, 15, Delphine Nikal, 15, Roxanna Thiara, 15, Aleisha Germaine, 15, Nicole Hoar, 25 and Deena Braem, 17. Only Hoar is non-native.

The cases involve women in Smithers, Burns Lake, Prince George, Terrace and Prince Rupert.

Work includes a detailed review of all files for possible linkages between evidence already obtained in each case, said a statement released early Tuesday by Les's ministry.

"These tragic deaths have shocked and saddened people across the province," Les said.

"A targeted police team will help ensure that we have the resources and tools to find out what happened to these women so that justice is done and the communities can start to heal."

Les said more officers may also be added to the investigation., but he said police have yet to suggest forming a task force to investigate the deaths and disappearances.

"I haven't had any suggestion made to me that that would be useful at this point in time," he said.

"I think the RCMP are doing good work. Obviously these are very difficult cases."
Rena Zatorski, a councillor with the Lheidli T'enneh Nation in Prince George, welcomed the possible addition of more police officers to the case, but she said such a response has been a long time coming.

"There still is an element of frustration and anger in the communities here. Part of that anger and frustration is because the government has taken so long and part of it stems from not fully understanding what the RCMP is doing or have done," Zatorski said.

There's also a feeling the issue hasn't been taken seriously enough because most of the missing and murdered women are aboriginal, she said.

"Aboriginal women seem to have become the aboriginal minority and therefore they've become prey."

On Wednesday, community leaders will meet to set a date for a symposium in March to discuss ways to deal with the case, Zatorski said.

Part of the problem they'll discuss is the disconnect between aboriginal youth, who tend to choose dangerous lifestyles, and the larger community, she said.

"Because this is happening within our aboriginal communities, our aboriginal youth, it's up to the aboriginal leadership and communities themselves to deal with these issues."

Response to the symposium from various organizations, including women's groups, the University of Northern B.C. and other First Nations groups, has been overwhelming, Zatorski said.

Les said the government will match funds pledged for the symposium.

He will also attend the symposium, where the RCMP are expected to outline the progress of their various investigations.

Harris to face allegations of uttering obscene slur at Ipperwash inquiry

2006-02-14T08:33:00.000-05:00

Sam George's decade-long campaign to uncover the truth behind his brother's death at the hands of a police sniper reaches a crescendo this week as Mike Harris submits to the scrutiny of the Ipperwash inquiry.

During four days of testimony, the former Ontario premier will face a gallery of spectators, a room full of lawyers and damning allegations he uttered an obscene slur in demanding native protesters be removed from a provincial park.

On Tuesday, Sam George will assume his preferred seat at the judicial probe into the 1995 fatal police shooting of his brother - directly in front of the witness stand.

"It's going to be close," George said of his front-row view of the proceedings, just metres away from where Harris will sit. "We managed to get him up here. I want to see him on the stand, giving his answers."

Those answers have been long coming for the George family, who for years sought a public inquiry into the Sept. 6, 1995 confrontation between Ontario Provincial Police and native occupiers that culminated in the death of Dudley George.

The extent to which Harris directed the police response to the occupation of Ipperwash Provincial Park has been a key issue at the Forest, Ont.,-based inquiry, which has seen some 100 witnesses provide testimony spanning 20 months.

Last November, former attorney general Charles Harnick stunned the inquiry in testifying he heard Harris say "I want the f**king Indians out of the park" during an emergency meeting held just hours before George was shot.

That allegation has become the unofficial focus of the probe in recent months, with ensuing witnesses who attended the so-called "dining room" meeting consistently questioned, and re-questioned about Harris's words.

Former solicitor general Bob Runciman testified he doesn't recall any such comment being made. Runciman's former deputy Elaine Todres attributed similar obscene words to Chris Hodgson, then minister of natural resources.

Hodgson told the inquiry that neither he, nor Harris, uttered any slurs concerning the protesters.

Harris's lawyer, Peter Downard, told the inquiry his client will testify "he does not recall saying anything like that in the meeting."

Still, the George family wants to hear Harris respond to the allegation.

"We've had some pretty strong evidence, come out from a very reliable witness, saying that Mr. Harris made these statements," Sam George said. "Now we're going to have the opportunity to listen to what Mr. Harris has to say about them."

The allegation has shone the spotlight on the Sept. 6 meeting in the premier's dining room, attended by Harris, his executive assistant, three cabinet ministers, their deputies, and two plain clothes O.P.P. officers seconded to the Ministry of the Solicitor General.

"The dining room meeting in the premier's office was critical, quite possibly," said George family lawyer Murray Klippenstein. "When the most powerful man in the province (speaks), you know he expects to be listened to."

During his testimony, Harnick defended his former boss in saying he believed the offensive words were spoken in anger, and that Harris quickly realized his mistake.

Still, Klippenstein argues that such an outburst, if it was made, could have enormous repercussions.

"When, and if, the premier said these things, did that get pipelined to the police commanders and police officers on the ground with the guns? Did it affect their behaviour? Was it the critical tipping-point factor that made the difference between Dudley George dying and not dying?"

Those are among the most pressing questions facing Harris this week as he is cross-examined by a battery of lawyers at the inquiry.

Even if the former premier fails to provide any further insights into George's death, Klippenstein says the inquiry has uncovered "a lot of truths that could never had been brought out any other way."

"For people, native and non-native, who care about the benefits of truth in a public process, we think the benefits of this inquiry are great."

Greg Bonnell
Canadian Press 2006

Fontaine seeks re-election as National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations

2006-02-14T08:31:00.000-05:00

Phil Fontaine from the Sagkeeng First Nation in Manitoba announced he will seek re-election as national chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

Fontaine cited mounting pressure from chiefs across the country asking him to run again in this summers election of national chief.

Other challengers for the position of national chief have yet to come forward and will be faced with an uphill battle to un-seat National Chief Fontaine.

Chief Fontaine is seen as being instrumental in the negotiating of a residential school agreement that was endorsed by the previous Paul Martin government and a majority of past residential school students. It is believed that the new Stephen Harper government will honour the agreement.

Chief Fontaine also led First Nations discussions in the Kelowna agreement, which saw federal, provincial and territorial leaders agree to a $5.1 billion financial package designed to improve living conditions for Aboriginal people living in Canada. However, the Stephen Harper government has not openly endorsed all aspects of the agreement, and some Aboriginal leaders fear the Agreement, as it was originally negotiated, may now be in jeopardy.

Wolf Magick webpage

2006-02-07T23:52:00.000-05:00

Wolf Magick Collection
Poetry and Live Performance Show by Irene Goodwin
An Ojibway Poet from Northwestern Ontario, my Ojibway name is:
"Wasa Newab MahEngun Onaqosh Qua" a.k.a Astral Wolf Star

http://www.indigenousspirit.com/astralwolf/wolfmagick.htm

Astral Wolf Star

2006-02-07T23:49:00.000-05:00

My new web site:

http://www.indigenousspirit.com/astralwolf/astralwolf.htm

“A Gathering in Unity” for Leonard Peltier

2006-01-31T12:18:00.000-05:00

http://www.leonardpeltier.org/worldevents.htm

Race relations good despite shootings: Indigenous leader

2006-01-30T19:54:00.000-05:00

An Indigenous leader in Rockhampton, in central Queensland, says the Australia Day drive-by shootings are not a sign of racism in the community.

A 15-year-old girl underwent surgery on Saturday night to remove an airgun pellet from her back.
She had initially dismissed her pain as an insect sting until she heard media reports about a 13-year-old boy being shot in the back on Thursday.

Five men are expected to appear in Rockhampton Magistrates Court tomorrow charged over the shootings.
Indigenous community spokesman Michael White says there is a good relationship in the community.

"Look, I've been in this community for a number of years and, you know, the relations has been a good one and incidents like these, they come from minorities and certainly this [is the] case here," he said.

"So certainly this community is a safe community and if we can ensure people are working towards that there can only be a better future for us."

2006-01-30T19:50:00.000-05:00

UBCIC's Protecting Knowledge Conference site:
http://www.ubcic.bc.ca/protect.htm

The Projects on the Prairie - Eliminate the Rez

2006-01-30T19:43:00.000-05:00

Article below has uncanny parallels with recent newspaper polls in Canada and the Conservative Party's underlying aboriginal agenda in Canada: Get those Indians off the reservation and into the workforce...privatize thier land, etc." They all see private property as the panacea to Indian poverty.....and even the Liberal Party approach, Fontaine "Getting Results", the Satsanic Governance Centre and Kelowna Accord are all based on similar assumptions about building capital without access to natural resources. Perhaps its true in view of the lack of effective counter-analysis except by "fanatics" and the pervasive nature of this viewpoint even amongst First Nations people.
RP
~ snip ~

January 27, 2006
The Projects on the Prairie
By JOHN J. MILLER
Wall Street Journal,

January 27, 2006;

Page W11

The fallout from the Jack Abramoff corruption scandal has all of Washington atwitter about congressional reform -- everything from proposals to restrict travel perks and lunches with lobbyists to a potential shakeup in the Republican House leadership.

A subtheme of the controversy involves not a shakeup but a shakedown -- of Indian tribes by Mr. Abramoff, who used casino cash to throw money around town as well as to line his own pockets richly. The common perception is that once again the white man has cheated the red man.

Perhaps a few expressions of sympathy are in order. Yet Indians would benefit much more from their own sweeping reforms. The Abramoff rip-off should be the least of their worries. The time has come to abolish reservations for the good of the people who live on them.

In the American imagination, grinding poverty is often a picture of urban slums full of broken families, abandoned apartments and back-alley drug deals. But an equally valid portrait might focus on the rural squalor of the rez. Of the 10 poorest counties in the U.S., seven of them are contained wholly or largely on reservations in Arizona, North Dakota and South Dakota.

Professional victimologists offer no shortage of explanations for this miserable state of affairs, but most of their analysis boils down to a core grievance: The federal government stole land from the Indians by conquest and treaty. Although Indians once were able to obtain title to specific parcels within reservations, this practice ended in 1934 -- an act that essentially turned the reservations into not-so-little housing projects on the prairie.

The main problem with Indian reservations isn't, as some argue, that they were established on worthless tracts of grassland. Consider the case of Buffalo County, S.D., which Census data reveal to be America's poorest county. Some 2,000 people live there. More than 30% of the homes are headed by women without husbands. The median household income is less than $13,000. The unemployment rate is sky high.

Just to the east of Buffalo County lies Jerauld County, which is similar in size and population. Yet only 6% of its homes are headed by women without husbands, the median household income is more than $30,000, and the unemployment rate hovers around 3%. The fundamental difference between these two counties is that the Crow Creek Indian Reservation occupies much of Buffalo County. The place is a pocket of poverty in a land of plenty.

Maybe we should give land back to the rez-dwellers, so that they may own private property the way other Americans do. Currently, the inability to put up land as collateral for personal mortgages and loans is a major obstacle to economic development. This problem is complicated by the fact that not all reservations have adopted uniform commercial codes or created court systems that are independent branches of tribal government -- the sorts of devices and institutions that give confidence to investors who might have the means to fund the small businesses that are the engines of rural economies.

Tribal ownership of the land is defended as the sine qua non of Indian sovereignty, which many activists regard as sacrosanct. It maintains the semifictional notion that the reservations are separate nations within the U.S. Although tribal members are American citizens, the reservations themselves are exempt from many federal and state laws. This is why so many Indian casinos have sprung up in areas that otherwise curb gambling.

Sovereignty also is understood as a form of cultural protectionism. Without it, goes the thinking, Indians eventually will follow the course of immigrant groups and assimilate into the great American melting pot. Intermarriage between Indians and non-Indians is pervasive, especially off the rez. More than half of all Indians already marry outside their race, according the Census. For racial purists who believe that the men and women of today's tribes should be preserved like frozen displays in natural-history museums, this is a tragedy akin to ethnic cleansing (albeit one based on love rather than hate).

Yet the real tragedy is that reservations, as collectivist enclaves within a capitalist society, have beaten down their inhabitants with brute force rather than lifting them up with opportunity. As their economies have withered, other social pathologies have taken root: Indians are distressingly prone to crime, alcoholism and suicide. Families have suffered enormously. About 60% of Indian children are born out of wedlock. Although accurate statistics are hard to come by because so many arrangements are informal, Indian kids are perhaps five times as likely as white ones to live in some form of foster care. Their schools are depressingly bad.

Even if casino revenues were able to address these soul-crushing problems -- a doubtful proposition -- most reservations are too isolated geographically to profit from big-dollar gambling. Yet the rise of the casinos may help point the way forward: Their ability to flourish contradicts the tenured Marxists in ethnic-studies departments who claim that communitarian Indian cultures aren't compatible with market capitalism. After all, it takes entrepreneurship to run some of the world's biggest casinos.

What's more, this modern-day entrepreneurship is part of a long tradition: Meriwether Lewis (of Lewis & Clark fame) described the Chinooks as "great hagglers in trade." I once visited Poverty Point, a 3,000-year-old set of earthen mounds in Louisiana; the museum there displayed ancient artifacts found at the site, including copper from the Great Lakes and obsidian from the Rockies. These prehistoric Americans were budding globalizers, and there's no reason why their descendants should remain walled off from the world economy.

When Indians enter our political conscience at all, it is usually in the most trivial of contexts: Should Florida State University call its sports teams the Seminoles? Does Leonard Peltier, a 1970s radical imprisoned for the murder of two FBI agents, deserve clemency? Isn't it a shame how Jack Abramoff bilked naïve tribal councils?

Yes, it is a shame. But it will be an even greater shame if reservations were to continue staggering along as they do now. The sleazy Abramoffs will always be with us. Must the failing reservations stick around as well?

Mr. Miller is the author, most recently, of "A Gift of Freedom: How the John M. Olin Foundation Changed America."

Rolland Pangowish
Wikwemikong Community Development Group
Wikwemikong Unceded Indian Reserve
P.O. Box 112
Wikwemikong, Ontario
P0P 2J0
Direct Line: (705) 859-1275
E-Mail: realpang@hotmail.com

URL for this article:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113833760164357997.html

Conservative Party Declares War on Aboriginal People

2006-01-24T09:16:00.000-05:00

PENTICTON, BC--(Jan. 10, 2006) - In an interview with CJWW Radio Saskatchewan, Monte Solberg, the Conservative Finance Critic said, "(The)Kelowna Agreement is something that they crafted at the last moment on the back of a napkin on the eve of an election. We're not going to honor that. We will have our own plan that will help natives a lot more than the Liberals"

I am completely shocked and deeply angered to learn that a Stephen Harper government would simply rip up the hard-fought historic agreement, which represents a $5.1 Billion dollar investment commitment to Canada's Aboriginal population, made at the Kelowna First Ministers Meeting on Aboriginal issues on November 25, 2005", declared Chief Stewart Phillip of the Penticton Indian Band.

"For the first time in the history of Canada we achieved a historic consensus between the Government of Canada, the Provincial Premiers and Territorial Leaders and the national leadership of the Assembly of First Nations, the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, the Metis National Council, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and the Native Women's Association of Canada. All parties committed to strengthening relationships on a government-to-government basis, and on focusing our collective efforts to close the gap in the areas of education, health housing and infrastructure and economic opportunities," said Chief Phillip.

"We take great offence to the arrogant notion that these comprehensive 10 year goals and objectives were scribbled on the back of a napkin at the last moment. Nothing could be further from the truth. The proposals discussed at the Kelowna First Ministers meeting were the result of nearly two years of nationwide consultations and conferences."

Chief Phillip concluded by observing, "In the event that the Conservative Party of Canada forms government and completely reneges on the commitments made at the Kelowna First Ministers Meeting; it will essentially represent a declaration of war on the Aboriginal People of Canada. Simply put, it will be - 'Back to the Barricades'. Rather than enjoying a decade of respect and reconciliation, we shall be faced with the grim reality of a decade of conflict and confrontation. Clearly, the recent tragedies of Kashechewan have demonstrated just how desperate the socio-economic conditions are in First Nation communities. These are real life and death issues."

CONTACT INFORMATION
Stewart Phillip,
Chief, Penticton Indian Band
Primary Phone: 250-490-5314

Notice to Aboriginal Voters re: Conservative Party, Mr. Harper and Tom Flanagan

2006-01-17T12:03:00.000-05:00

January 9, 2006
For Immediate Release

Notice to Aboriginal Voters:
Globe and Mail Confirms Thomas Flanagan still a part of Stephen Harper's "Inner Circle"

Ottawa
On January 7, 2006, the Globe and Mail reaffirmed the worst fears of Aboriginal peoples across the country. In an in-depth article on the Conservative Party campaign, How Harper fashioned his lead, it was confirmed that Stephen Harper "still relies on individuals such as his former political science professor at the University of Calgary, Tom Flanagan."

Mr. Flanagan is a part of "a small inner circle" that influences Mr. Harper and operates behind the scenes in the Conservative Party.

Mr. Flanagan, who was born and raised in the United States, has spent most of his career arguing against the rights and self-government aspirations of Aboriginal peoples in Canada.

Mr. Flanagan has published numerous articles and a book entitled First Nations? Second Thoughts to support his proposition that Aboriginal peoples should be assimilated.

"All Aboriginal peoples need to be concerned that Mr. Flanagan is still in a position of great influence in the Conservative Party.

Jim Prentice and other Conservatives have been telling Aboriginal people not to worry and that Mr. Flanagan is no longer in a position of power.

This recent article demonstrates that those claims are untrue.

Aboriginal peoples need to beware of what is lurking in the shadows of the Conservative Party," said Hank Rowlinson, Co-President of the Liberal Party's Aboriginal Peoples Commission.

Mr. Flanagan was the Co-chair of the movement that brought Harper back into to federal politics, during the Stockwell Day leadership review in 2001. He later went on to be Harper's Chief of Staff."

In the last federal election, the leadership of the Assembly of First Nations, Métis National Council and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami collectively asked Mr. Harper to distance himself from the "antiquated, ill-informed, regressive and offensive writings of Mr. Flanagan in articles and books such as First Nations?, Second Thoughts."

Mr. Harper dismissed the question as solely "partisan" in nature and said that if he won he would be "a forgiving lot" towards First Nation, Inuit and Métis peoples.

Since that time, Mr. Harper has never publicly distanced himself from the positions and writing of his ally and mentor, Thomas Flanagan.

While Mr. Harper will not distance himself from a man who wants to assimilate Aboriginal peoples, the Conservative Party has distanced itself from the historic $5.1 billion agreement reached between Prime Minister Martin, all Premiers and Aboriginal leadership at the First Ministers Meeting on Aboriginal Issues held in Kelowna in November 2005.

Jim Prentice, the Conservative Party's critic for Aboriginal Affairs has stated that the Conservatives are only willing to "examine those figures in an overall budget context."

Conservative Finance Critic Monte Solberg confirmed this on January 9, saying "we aren't going to accept the Liberal approach. We think it's flawed."

Given these statements, it is clear a Conservative Party would not follow through on the commitments made to Aboriginal peoples at the First Ministers Meeting on Aboriginal Issues.

The Aboriginal Peoples Commission is also calling on other minority groups to recognize that the influence of Thomas Flanagan in the Conservative Party also puts their rights and interests at stake.

"If, as the Conservative Party would have it, governments can ignore the constitutional rights of Aboriginal people today, they might equally be able to ignore the constitutional rights of others tomorrow. You have an interest in seeing to it that governments recognize, respect, and protect the rights of Aboriginal peoples, for you may be in the same position tomorrow," concluded Hank Rowlinson, Co-President of the Aboriginal Peoples Commission.

What Stephen Harper's "Inside Circle" Says About Aboriginal Peoples Aboriginal Peoples are Immigrants

"Europeans are, in effect, a new immigrant wave, taking control of land just as earlier aboriginal settlers did. To differentiate the rights of earlier and later immigrants is a form of racism."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

Aboriginal Culture is Inferior and Primitive
"European Civilization was several thousand years more advanced than the aboriginal cultures of North America, both in technology and social organization."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

Colonization of Aboriginal Peoples was Inevitable and Justifiable
"Owing to this tremendous gap in civilization, the European colonization of North America was inevitable and, if we accept the philosophical analysis of John Locke and Emer de Vattel, justifiable."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

Aboriginal Peoples are Incapable of Governing Themselves
"Sovereignty is an attribute of statehood, and aboriginal peoples in Canada had not arrived at the state level of political organization prior to contact with Europeans."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

"Aboriginal government is fraught with difficulties stemming from small size, an overly ambitious agenda, and dependence on transfer payments."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

"In practice, aboriginal government produces wasteful, destructive, familistic factionalism."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

Aboriginal Peoples Must Assimilate
"Perhaps the damage to Canada would be tolerable if it meant that aboriginal peoples would escape from the social pathologies in which they are mired to become prosperous, self-supporting citizens"
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

"Prosperity and self-sufficiency in the modern economy require a willingness to integrate into the economy, which means, among other things, a willingness to move to where jobs and investment opportunities exist."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

"Current public policy* is flooding reserves with money, enticing people back, enticing people to stay and weakening their resolve to participate in Canadian society."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

Aboriginal Rights and Treaties Should Be Ignored
"The treaties mean what they say. Their reinterpretation* has the potential to be both expensive and mischievous for the economies of all provinces in which treaties have been signed."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

"Contemporary judicial attempts to redefine aboriginal rights are producing little but uncertainty. Recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions define aboriginal title in a way that will make its use impossible in a modern economy."
* Thomas Flanagan, Conservative Party Insider

-30-

Liberal Party of Canada Press Office: (613) 783-8888
Hank Rowlinson, Co-President
Aboriginal Peoples Commission
Ph: 613-764-1077
Cell: 613-858-4809

First Nations leaders worried about Conservative plan

2006-01-12T14:53:00.000-05:00

Last Updated Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:42:00 EST
CBC News

B.C. First Nations leaders are bristling over the Conservative plan to revisit the recent Liberal commitment to spend more than $5 billion to improve health care and housing

The financial pledge was part of the agreement drafted at the First Ministers meeting in Kelowna last year.

Ottawa pledges $5 billion to aboriginals

But Conservative finance critic Monte Solberg says a Stephen Harper government would not be bound by the terms of the agreement.

He says it was, "something (the Liberals) crafted at the last moment on the back of a napkin on the eve of an election."

He also said the Conservatives have their own program that is going to help Aboriginal people "a lot more than the Liberals."

Métis group upset with Solberg

The Conservative critic for Indian Affairs Jim Prentice has since clarified the party's position, saying the Conservatives support the objectives of the Kelowna Agreement – but not the Liberal plan to fund them.

The President of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs says that's just damage control to deal with the backlash from First Nations leaders across the country.

Chief Stewart Phillip of the Penticton Indian Band also says the Conservative comments represent a very "arrogant and dismissive attitude."

He calls the Kelowna agreement an historic achievement – the result of years of negotiation. And Phillip says he is offended that a top Conservative would consider it an election goodie.

"It causes us a great deal of concern about the possibility of a Stephen Harper government," said Phillip.

Grand Chief Ed John of B.C.'s First Nations Summit is also critical. He says that without a financial commitment, the Kelowna agreement would just be just another political promise.

"I mean, if you make a commitment as a government, then if you put the resources behind it, it strengthens the degree and level of commitment. Otherwise, it becomes another empty promise, another wasted exercise on trying to address these issues."

Aboriginal Canadians form own political party

2006-01-09T14:17:00.000-05:00

(Photo: Doug Dokis, FPNP Candidate)

CTV.ca News Staff

Some native Canadians, who say they are tired of not being adequately represented in the House of Commons, have formed their own political party.

The First Peoples National Party of Canada represents Aboriginal, First Nations, Inuit and Metis people.

The party is running five candidates in the current federal election -- in ridings in Alberta, B.C. and Ontario.

"The FPNP will give us this opportunity to participate and have ownership of a political process that has sometimes seemed foreign and unresponsive to our needs and concerns," Barbara Wardlaw, interim leader of the FPNP, wrote on the party's website.

FPNP Calgary Centre-North candidate Doug Dokis said no federal government has ever done a good job of trying to find long-term solutions to the economic and social problems facing aboriginals.

"(We exist) so issues that directly affect aboriginal people can be heard and supported within the Parliamentary system," Doug Dokis told CTV Calgary's Bill McFarlane.

Dokis, manager of the Chinook Centre Lodge Aboriginal Resource Centre at the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology, is the first native candidate to ever run in the riding.

"Aboriginal people are only looking for acknowledgment and truth within the treaties and those relationships and equal representation and sharing of what we call primarily the resources of this country," Dokis said.

The FPNP's website says the party is concerned about:

promoting economic growth, sustainable communities and fighting poverty
encouraging Canadians to participate in politics
creating and building health, education and cultural programs
respecting the spiritual and cultural values of its members and Canadians

Dokis said the party's platform is based on kindness, caring, sharing, honesty and respect, which is designed to increase public awareness of issues.

He is running in the riding held by Conservative Jim Prentice, who is the party's critic for Indian and Northern Affairs. Prentice promises to do better than the Liberals in dealing with the natives' problems.

"We are going to take steps to improve the lives of every day aboriginal Canadians in terms of social services in terms of health care in terms of education housing all of the issues that matter to people," Prentice said.

The Calgary West Liberal candidate, Jennifer Pollock, agreed with Dokis that natives haven't been treated well.

"The rights of aboriginal peoples have long been ignored by all Canadians that includes all political parties," Pollock said.

She said the Liberals could do a better job of representing natives.

But Dokis doesn't trust either party and predicts the FPNP will have more candidates in future elections.

With files from CTV's Bill McFarlane in Calgary

-----
Visit the First Peoples National Party Website Here.

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Seeks Answers to Seven "Key Questions" from Federal Political Party Leaders

2006-01-09T14:00:00.000-05:00

Assembly of First Nations - press release

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Seeks Answers to Seven "Key Questions" from Federal Political Party Leaders: Seeking Response by Friday, January 6

OTTAWA, Jan. 5 /CNW Telbec/

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Phil Fontaine has presented the leaders of the major, national political parties with a set of seven key questions that will be used to assess each party's commitment to a progressive and productive agenda for First Nations and Canada.

"We are seeking clear statements of commitment to a new relationship between First Nations and Canada, and the seven key questions we have put to each party leader will help us determine their commitment to a new relationship and a new, positive agenda for our people and all Canadians," said AFN National Chief Phil Fontaine.

Letters and questions were sent on December 14, 2005 to the leaders of the Bloc Quebecois, the Conservative Party, the Green Party, the Liberal Party, the New Democratic Party and the newly-formed First Peoples National Party of Canada. The letters requested that party leaders provide information about the policy positions of each party on key subject areas of interest to First Nations by January 6th.

"We will note the responses we receive and do not receive from the various parties and share this information with First Nations and the general public so they can make an informed decision on how to vote," said National Chief Fontaine.

The National Chief stated that the role of the AFN is not to tell First Nations citizens how to vote, but to provide them with best information and analysis of party platforms and commitments so they can make an informed decision when casting their ballot.

"This is part of our overall initiative to encourage First Nations voters to exercise their right to vote, to go to the polls, and to make our voices heard," said the National Chief.

Currently, there are at least 62 federal ridings in which Aboriginal peoples comprise a substantial portion of the electorate and 25 ridings where Aboriginal peoples make up 10% or more of the voters.

National Chief Fontaine stated: "First Nations can be the deciding factor in these ridings. We can have a real say in who forms the next government. If this election is as close as predicted, that means First Nations voters have tremendous influence over the final outcome. Every vote counts. This reality should compel all the parties and their leaders to speak out about First Nations issues and their agenda for change."

The Assembly of First Nations will make available responses from the various parties as they are received. The responses will also be posted on the AFN website.

The Assembly of First Nations is the national organization representingFirst Nations citizens in Canada.

Attachment:
Seven Key Questions for Party LeadersQuestions for the Party Leaders

1. Does your party support the principles and objectives of the First Nations-Federal Crown Political Accord on the Recognition and Implementation of First Nations Governments that was signed on May 31, 2005?

Specifically, does your party agree to implement the work plan that has been jointly developed by the Government of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations, including the following:- Ensuring that adequate financial and human resources and accountability mechanisms will be provided which are necessary to sustain the involvement of the Assembly of First Nations and its regional organizations in policy development; and- Developing processes and legislation with us that will enable the further development of First Nation governments?

2. Does your party support the goals and commitments made by the First Ministers and National Aboriginal Leaders at the November 2005 First Ministers Meeting?

Specifically, will your party commit to:- Supporting the 10-year dedicated effort to closing the gap in the quality of life that now exists between First Nation peoples and other Canadians; and- Holding another meeting between First Ministers and National Aboriginal Leaders within the next two to three years to measure the progress made towards closing the gap; and- Supporting the commitments made in the First Nations Implementation Plan, including specific actions in the areas of health, education, housing and economic opportunities; and- Providing all of the First Nations portion of the $5.1 Billion financial commitment made by the Government of Canada, including all of the specific commitments made in the areas of education, children, health, housing and infrastructure, economic opportunities, and relationships and accountability?

3. If elected, is your party committed to fully honouring the Settlement Package for Residential School survivors that was agreed to by the Government of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations on November 21, 2005?
Will you make a full apology to all survivors?

4. If elected, is your party committed to the joint development of a joint bilateral review process (Canada-First Nations) to examine and overhaul federal policies respecting self-government, comprehensive claims, specific claims and treaty rights?

5. If elected, is your party committed to addressing the systemic inequities created by the 1985 Amendment to the Indian Act (commonly referred to as Bill C-31), and to work with First Nations governments so that they can assume control of First Nation citizenship?

6. If elected, is your party committed to amending the current consultation and accommodation policies of the federal government to reflect the emerging case law as addressed in the Haida, Taku River Tlingit, and Mikisew Cree cases by the Supreme Court of Canada?

7. If elected, is your party committed to greater First Nations involvement in government decision making that affects First Nation citizens directly?

-30-/
For further information:
Don Kelly, AFN Communications Director, (613) 241-6789 ext. 320, cell: (613) 292-2787;
Ian McLeod, AFN Bilingual Communications Officer, (613) 241-6789 ext. 336, cell: (613) 859-4335;
Nancy Pine, Communications Advisor, Office of the National Chief, (613) 241-6789 ext. 243, cell: (613) 298-6382/

Runciman tells Ipperwash inquiry he kept his nose out of police operations

2006-01-09T13:56:00.000-05:00

FOREST, Ont. (CP) -

The politician responsible for law enforcement in Ontario when protester Dudley George was shot by police says he kept his nose out of police operations.

Former solicitor general Bob Runciman says it was clear to him that politicians should in no way, shape, or form interfere with the day-to-day running of the Ontario Provincial Police.

Runciman, now justice critic in the provincial parliament, took the stand today at the Ipperwash inquiry in Forest, Ont.

The extent to which then-premier Mike Harris interfered with the police handling of the 1995 standoff with aboriginal protesters has been a key issue at the judicial probe.

Runciman told the inquiry he can't recall ever being appraised of specific police operations while he was solicitor general in the Harris government.

George was shot dead by an OPP police sniper on Sept. 6, 1995.

A splinter group of aboriginals from the nearby Kettle and Stony Point reserve had taken control of the park two days earlier, claiming they were protecting burial grounds.

That claim was supported by documents released by Ottawa one week after the fatal shooting.

Native leaders push the message that aboriginal vote can make the difference

2005-12-27T16:04:00.000-05:00

By TIM COOK

REGINA (CP) - Tina Keeper concedes that the decision to join the rough-tumble world of federal politics was a huge one for her.

It's a long way from the set of the 1990s TV show North of 60, where her role as a First Nations police officer won her a Gemini award in 1997. But Keeper, who spent the last few years as a community activist specializing in suicide prevention and working on aboriginal issues with the Liberal party, says she felt an overwhelming urge to have a direct say in the future of her people.

"Any nation has to be self-determining. That is the basis of well-being," says Keeper, who decided to run for the Liberals in the northern Manitoba riding of Churchill.

"My personal feeling about it all is that if I can use my profile to . . build bridges between the aboriginal and non-aboriginal sectors of our society, then I think that is well worth it."

Keeper hopes she can be a role model for young people, teaching them that involvement in mainstream politics - even something as simple as showing up to vote - is good for aboriginal people.

It's a message that aboriginal leaders and Elections Canada have been working to drive home to First Nations, Metis and Inuit as they battle sagging turnout numbers.

This year, the focus is on the fact that with a growing aboriginal population and an election shaping up as a tight two-horse race, courting the native vote could make a big difference.

"Every vote counts, and there is a real opportunity for us to influence the outcome in a positive way," says Phil Fontaine, national chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

"But we will only be able to make a difference if we vote, and so our push here is to try and convince our people to participate."

Information on voting rates among aboriginals in the federal election is sparse.

An Elections Canada study of the 2000 vote showed turnout was 16 per cent lower at polling stations on reserves than it was for the rest of the population.

The reasons vary, according to the study, from a "perceived lack of effectiveness" and "feelings of exclusion," to the disproportionate rates of poverty in aboriginal communities.

"It's a tough sell," said Peter Dinsdale, executive director of the National Association of Friendship Centres.
"Typically aboriginal people haven't been all that engaged in Canadian elections."

In an effort to make the sale, native groups are trying to show that the aboriginal vote will count this year.

Statistics Canada points to 26 ridings where aboriginal people account for at least 10 per cent of voters.

On its website, the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples has published a list of more than two dozen ridings where the number of aboriginal voters in 2004 was greater than the margin of victory.

Dinsdale's association is planning a campaign with briefing material about election issues to be sent to more than 100 friendship centres nationwide.

"I think, by and large, people have to see a benefit in turning out to vote," says Clement Chartier, president of the Metis National Council.

"I think people see, more and more, the need to do that, and as leaders we need to ensure that they get that message."

Fontaine says politicians are starting to respond.

He cites the desire of all parties to delay an election until after last month's first ministers' meeting on aboriginal issues as an example.

"No one wanted to pull the plug before," Fontaine says. "That tells me they are listening and they see us as an important issue."

The Liberals say they have 15 aboriginal candidates running in this election, while the NDP boasts five. The Conservatives say they don't profile their candidates in that way and declined to give a number.

Keeper knows that one of the biggest hurdles she will face is getting aboriginals into polling booths, so that's what she's telling people on the doorsteps.

"One of the things I've been trying to do is just key-message that: 'Get out and vote. We have to participate,' " she says.

"People need to know that it will impact and that's an important message."

STOLEN SISTERS - Discrimination and Violence Against Indigenous Women in Canada

2005-12-21T18:55:00.000-05:00

A Summary of Amnesty International’s Concerns
The full version of this report can be viewed on the AI Canada website in HTML or PDF format.

Helen Betty Osborne was a 19-year-old Cree student from northern Manitoba who dreamed of becoming a teacher. On November 12, 1971, she was abducted by four white men in the town of The Pas and then sexually assaulted and brutally killed. A provincial inquiry subsequently concluded that Canadian authorities had failed Helen Betty Osborne. The inquiry criticized the sloppy and racially biased police investigation that took more than 15 years to bring one of the four men to justice. Most disturbingly, the inquiry concluded that police had long been aware of white men sexually preying on Indigenous women and girls in The Pas but "did not feel that the practice necessitated any particular vigilance."(1)

Three decades later, on March 25, 2003, Felicia Solomon, a 16-year-old cousin of Helen Betty Osborne, failed to return home from school in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Felicia’s family says the Winnipeg police did not treat the case seriously when they first reported Felicia missing. A Winnipeg police spokesperson told Amnesty International that the force responds to missing persons reports based on an assessment of the likely risk to the missing person and does not have a policy of waiting 48 hours for the person to turn up, as many in the public believe. However, the family says that the officers who took the report said they could not take action until another 48 hours had passed. The first posters seeking information on Felicia Solomon’s disappearance were distributed by the family, not the police.

A family member comments: "When something happens to someone else’s child, whether they are white or from any other kind of race or culture, the police do everything. It’s completely different when an Indian person goes missing." In June 2003, body parts were found that were later identified as Felicia Solomon’s. Her killer has not been found.

The murders of Helen Betty Osborne and Felicia Solomon are two of the cases highlighted in a new report by Amnesty International – Stolen Sisters: A human rights response to discrimination and violence against Indigenous women in Canada.(2) These stories of missing and murdered Indigenous(3) women and girls take place in three Western provinces of Canada over a period of three decades. The perpetrators, where known, include both intimate acquaintances and strangers. In some cases, the crimes remain unsolved. In every instance, Canadian authorities could and should have done more to ensure the safety of these women and girls or to address the social and economic factors that had helped put them in harm’s way.

The Scope of the Violence

A shocking 1996 Canadian government statistic reveals that Indigenous women between the ages of 25 and 44, with status under the Indian Act, were five times more likely than all other women of the same age to die as the result of violence.(4) Understanding the true scale and nature of violence against Indigenous women, however, is greatly hampered by a persistent lack of comprehensive reporting and statistical analysis.

Reports of murders, assaults or missing persons may be investigated by municipal police forces, provincial forces or the national police force, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). Police have said that they do not necessarily record the ethnicity of crime victims or missing persons when entering information into the Canadian Police Information Centre database, the principle mechanism for sharing information among police forces in Canada.(5) According to the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, in 11 percent of homicides in 2000, Canadian police did not record or report on whether or not the victim was an Indigenous person.(6)

Continue reading this important Document Here.

Young Aboriginal Women Missing: Who Cares?

2005-12-21T18:52:00.000-05:00

By Nicole Eshkakogan, AYN Writer, Edmonton, AB (Apr 1, 2003)

Over 500 Aboriginal women have been reported missing in the past 15 years across Canada, predominantly in western Canada.

Continue reading this Article Here.

Helen Betty Osborne - MURDERED

2005-12-21T18:47:00.000-05:00

Helen Betty Osborne was abducted and brutally murdered near The Pas, Manitoba, early in the morning of November 13, 1971. The high school student,with dreams of becoming a teacher, originally from the Norway House Indian Reserve, was 19 years old when she was killed.

Several months later Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers concluded that four young men, Dwayne Archie Johnston, James Robert Paul Houghton, Lee Scott Colgan and Norman Bernard Manger, were involved in the death. Yet it was not until December 1987, more than 16 years later, that one of them, Dwayne Johnston, was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Betty Osborne. James Houghton was acquitted. Lee Colgan, having received immunity from prosecution in return for testifying against Houghton and Johnston, went free. Norman Manger was never charged.

While walking along Third Street in The Pas on that cold Saturday morning, Betty Osborne was accosted by four men in a car. Houghton, who was driving, stopped the car and Johnston got out, attempting to convince Osborne to go with them to "party." She told them that she did not wish to accompany them. She then was forced into their car and driven away. In the car Osborne was assaulted by Colgan and Johnston as Houghton drove.

Johnston ripped at her blouse and Colgan grabbed at her breasts. In spite of her screams and attempts to escape, Osborne was taken to a cabin belonging to Houghton’s parents at Clearwater Lake.

At the cabin she was pulled from the car and beaten by Johnston while the others stood watching and drinking wine they had stolen earlier. Osborne continued to struggle and scream and, because her assailants were afraid they might be heard, she was forced back into the car and driven further from town to a pump house next to the lake. At least some of her clothing was removed by her assailants in the car. At the pump house she was once more taken from the car by one or more of her assailants and the beating continued. Her clothes, those which had not been removed earlier, were taken from her. Wearing only her winter boots, she was viciously beaten, and stabbed, apparently with a screwdriver, more than 50 times. Her face was smashed beyond recognition. The evidence suggests that two people then dragged her body into the bush. Her clothes were hidden. The four men then left, returned to The Pas and went their separate ways.

By the end of 1972, although rumours were circulating in The Pas as to the identity of those involved in the killing, the investigation had stalled.

Between 1973 and 1983 only intermittent checks were made on the case. In July 1983 an extensive review of the file was begun by Const. Robert Urbanoski, of the Thompson RCMP detachment. Many of the original informants were reinterviewed. The suspects were contacted again. In June 1985 the RCMP placed an article in the local newspaper, requesting the assistance of the public in solving the murder. The result was that several people came forward to recount comments about the murder made over the years by Colgan and Johnston. It was the disclosure of those remarks that finally led to charges of murder being laid against the two in October 1986.

Before the beginning of their preliminary hearing in March 1987, Lee Colgan was granted immunity from prosecution in return for his testimony. On the strength of Colgan’s evidence, Houghton was arrested and charged on July 5, 1987. At the preliminary hearing later that month, both Houghton and Johnston were committed to stand trial. The Attorney General’s department brought the case to trial in December 1987. Sixteen years after the murder, a jury found Johnston guilty of the murder of Betty Osborne. He was sentenced to life imprisonment without eligibility for parole for 10 years. Houghton was acquitted.

Johnston’s appeal of his conviction was dismissed by the Manitoba Court of Appeal on September 14, 1988 and his application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was denied on March 13, 1989.

Many Manitobans asked why it took 16 years to bring people to trial for this brutal murder. It was suggested that many people in the town of The Pas learned the identity of those responsible, some within a very short time after the murder, but chose to do nothing about it. It was suggested that because Osborne was an Aboriginal person, the townspeople considered the murder unimportant. Allegations of racism, neglect and indifference, on the part of the citizens of the town, the police and of the Attorney General’s department, were made.

The Inquiry:
Continue reading this vitally important issue Here.

RCMP investigate after human remains found near community north of Regina

2005-12-21T18:26:00.000-05:00

By: TIM COOK

REGINA (CP) - An already uncertain Christmas has become unimaginably worse for the mother of a missing woman now that unidentified skeletal remains have been found on a riverbank north of Regina.

Gwenda Yuzicappi, whose 19-year-old daughter Amber Redman vanished from outside a bar in nearby Fort Qu'Appelle on July 15, said she has been enveloped by a sense of confusion that is almost too much to bear.
"I'm just devastated," a tearful Yuzicappi said in an interview Wednesday.

"We don't know. We know there is human remains found, but we don't know what age or what race. I have a lot of mixed emotions and thoughts."

RCMP spokesman Cpl. Brian Jones said police could only say that the partial remains are those of a woman.
That would rule out Tamra Keepness, a five-year-old girl who disappeared from her Regina home in July 2004. No trace of her has been found despite a massive search.

But there are 27 other unsolved missing persons cases involving women in Saskatchewan. Nearly two-thirds of them involve aboriginal women, like Redman.

The situation is so serious that last month the province announced a $2-million task force to review all open missing persons files in the province dating back to the 1940s.

Jones sympathized with the uncertainty the discovery has created among friends and family.

"We are absolutely cognizant of . . . how everyone's thoughts turn to families, especially during the Christmas season. If we can provide answers as quickly as we can, we will," Jones said.

"At this point in time it is an assumption by investigators - not to the exclusion of any other possibility - that the remains may be those of one of the current 28 missing Saskatchewan women."

Police hope to know more about the identity after an autopsy. DNA analysis and dental records will be used.
But Jones said he's not expecting results until well into January.

The remains were found Tuesday along the banks of the Qu'Appelle River by people on horseback near Southey.

The small community is about 50 kilometres north of Regina and is about the same distance west of Fort Qu'Appelle.

Jones said police are not sure whether the remains washed up from the river or were dumped.

Investigators were on the scene Wednesday and planned to use sniffer dogs to search for further evidence.

First Nations groups have been highly critical of the lack of public attention paid to missing aboriginal women.
The Native Women's Association of Canada has said preliminary research and anecdotal evidence suggest at least 500 aboriginal women have vanished or been killed over the last 20 years.

In the face of such criticism, the federal government is contributing $5 million over five years for research, a database of cases and a hotline.

Yuzicappi said her daughter has not left her thoughts from the moment she disappeared.

Family members and volunteers have repeatedly searched Fort Qu'Appelle and surrounding areas on foot and with all-terrain vehicles. They have turned up nothing.

Redman has been described as a "typical teenager" with no reason to run away.

On the night she vanished, she was seen speaking to someone in a grey, older sedan outside the bar. Police found no signs of foul play.

Yuzicappi said she has gotten to the point of telling well-wishers she's fine just so they will stop asking.
But really, she's dying inside.

"It's hard. Every day is a struggle."

Pollution on Canada reservation is probed

2005-12-20T16:31:00.000-05:00

By MATT CRENSONAP NATIONAL WRITER
AAMJIWNAANG FIRST NATION, Canada --
Growing up with smokestacks on the horizon, Ada Lockridge never thought much about the pollution that came out of them.

She never worried about the oil slicks in Talfourd Creek, the acrid odors that wafted in on the shifting winds or even the air-raid siren behind her house whose shrill wail meant "go inside and shut the windows."

Now Lockridge worries all the time.

A budding environmental activist, she recently made a simple but shocking discovery: There are two girls born in her small community for every boy. A sex ratio so out of whack, say scientific experts who helped her reveal the imbalance, almost certainly indicates serious environmental contamination by one or more harmful chemicals.

The question: Which ones? And another, even more pressing question: What else are these pollutants doing to the 850 members of this Chippewa community?

Lockridge and her neighbors live just across the U.S.-Canada border from Port Huron, Mich., on the Aamjiwnaang First Nation Reserve. For nearly half a century, their land has been almost completely surrounded by Canada's largest concentration of petrochemical manufacturing.

Much of their original reserve, founded in 1827, was sold out from under them via questionable land deals in the 1960s. It is now occupied by pipelines, factories and row upon row of petroleum storage tanks.

The area is so dominated by the industry that it is referred to on maps and in local parlance as "Chemical Valley."

About two years ago, Suncor Energy - which already operates a refinery and petrochemical plant next to the Aamjiwnaang reserve - proposed adding another factory to the mix, an ethanol plant to be built on one of the few undeveloped parcels adjoining the community's property.

Lockridge and other members of the band joined to oppose the plant. They asked biologist Michael Gilbertson to look at a binder full of technical information about air, water and soil contamination on the reserve.

In a conference call, he reported that the data showed elevated levels of dioxin, PCBs, pesticides and heavy metals including arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury.

Almost as an afterthought, he asked a question: Had anybody noticed a difference in the number of girls and boys in the community?

At the other end of the line, the Aamjiwnaang and their allies were suddenly abuzz.

"All of a sudden everybody in that room started talking," said Margaret Keith, a staffer for the Occupational Health Clinic for Ontario Workers, a public health agency.

Somebody pointed out that the reserve had fielded three girls' baseball teams in a recent year and only one boys' team. Lockridge thought about herself and her two sisters, with eight daughters among them and only one son.

The question was not as offhand as it seemed. "I had been interested in sex ratio as an indicator - a very sensitive indicator of effects going on as a result of exposure to chemicals," Gilbertson said in a recent interview.

Gilbertson explained that certain pollutants, including many found on the Aamjiwnaang reserve, could interfere with the sex ratio of newborns in a population. Heavy metals have been shown to affect sex ratio by causing the miscarriage of male fetuses. Other pollutants known as endocrine disrupters - including dioxin and PCBs - can wreak all sorts of havoc by interfering with the hormones that determine whether a couple will have a boy or a girl.

If some pollutant was skewing the distribution of girls and boys in her family and her community, Ada Lockridge thought, what else could it be doing?

Statistics indicate that one in four Aamjiwnaang children has behavioral or learning disabilities, and that they suffer from asthma at nearly three times the national rate. Four of 10 women on the reserve have had at least one miscarriage or stillbirth.

"I was throwing up thinking about what was in me," said Lockridge, who is 42. "I cried. And then I got angry."
She got a copy of the band membership list, and tallied the number of boys and girls born in each year since 1984. Sure enough, the percentage of boys started dropping below 50 percent around 1993. It is now approaching 30 percent, with no sign of leveling off.

The finding was significant enough to warrant a paper in Environmental Health Perspectives, a well-regarded scientific journal. Lockridge, who has worked as a home health aide and carpenter's assistant, was listed as an author.

On a recent autumn day, Lockridge stood in the Aamjiwnaang band's cemetery. The burial ground occupies a gently sloping patch of ground sandwiched between a petroleum storage tank farm and a low cinder-block building with half a dozen pipelines running through it.
Continue reading this important Article Here.

Aymara Indian wins Bolivia's presidential election Sunday

2005-12-20T16:16:00.000-05:00

For Bolivian Victor, A Powerful Mandate
Populist Faces Practical Constraints
By Pamela Constable
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, December 20, 2005

The sweeping if unofficial victory of Evo Morales in Bolivia's presidential election Sunday has made the former coca farmer and grass-roots activist the nation's strongest elected leader since the end of the last military dictatorship in 1982 and has given him an unprecedented opportunity to transform the impoverished Andean country.

The question, say both Bolivian and U.S. observers, is whether the socialist candidate will use that mandate to follow through on pledges for radical economic and political change -- pledges that won him support among indigenous and poor voters -- or whether he can demonstrate enough pragmatism to reassure foreign governments and investors, whose support he needs for economic development.

Morales, 46, is a fiery politician and an Aymara Indian who electrified Bolivia's poor but struck fear into the business elite and irritated officials in Washington by opposing U.S. anti-drug programs and spouting anti-imperialist rhetoric. Whichever path he chooses, his victory stands to resonate far beyond the small, landlocked nation with a history of military coups and wobbly civilian governments.

"Morales faces a very difficult balancing act," said Michael Shifter, an analyst with Inter-American Dialog, a nonprofit institute in Washington. "There is a lot of rage and resentment in Bolivia, and as a candidate he has capitalized on that. But now, in order to govern successfully and keep the country economically viable, he has to reach out to all sectors and show signs of moderation, while convincing his supporters he hasn't sold them out."

As Morales joins a growing list of elected Latin American presidents generally described as leftist or populist, he has two basic models from which to choose. One is that of Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, who has gleefully defied the Bush administration, formed a warm alliance with Cuba's Fidel Castro and cracked down on domestic opponents in the name of social change. The other is that of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil, who has developed disciplined fiscal policies, left democratic institutions intact and avoided alienating the United States, all while forwarding broad social programs to help the poor.

"The old threat in Latin America was that of military coups. The new threat is that of authoritarian democracies -- leaders who get elected and then use the state to repress opponents, push through social change and stay in power," said Bernard Aronson, an international consultant in Washington and a former State Department official. "That is what Chavez is doing, and what Lula is not doing," he said. "The big question is, which way will Evo Morales go?"

Morales defeated pro-business candidate Jorge Quiroga, a former president who conceded the election late Sunday after unofficial returns showed Morales with 45 percent of the vote. Officially he needed more than 50 percent to win, and the ultimate decision still rests with Congress, but Quiroga's concession appeared to cement the results.

Until now, Morales has cultivated an image that is far closer to Chavez than Lula. He has promised to nationalize Bolivia's largely untapped natural gas reserves, has ardently opposed U.S. drug eradication programs that have relied heavily on aerial herbicide-spraying, and invoked the populist rhetoric of anti-imperialism. During a recent economic conference in Argentina, he joined Chavez in a protest rally outside while President Bush met with other Latin American leaders inside.

On Sunday, he repeated some of his more provocative assertions, saying he would never accept a relationship of "submission" with Washington. Yesterday, he stepped up his criticism of U.S. anti-drug programs, telling reporters in the city of Cochabamba that "the fight against drug trafficking is a false pretext for the United States to install military bases, and we are not in agreement."

Morales, who gained recognition as an indigenous leader of coca farmers in Bolivia's Chapare region, has insisted on the distinction between the traditional farming and use of coca leaf, and the processing and trafficking of cocaine and other illegal drugs. American anti-drug officials seek to continue programs to destroy coca crops and have pushed for a closer relationship with security forces.

There was no immediate comment from the Bush administration on Morales's apparent victory, but one official who requested anonymity said: "We're keeping an open mind about it. We want to make it work, but it depends on what decisions they make, what policies they decide." A statement issued by the State Department Sunday said relations would depend on the "convergence of our interests, and that includes counter-narcotics issues."
In Venezuela, officials said yesterday that they were "very pleased and satisfied" with Morales's victory but would "not get involved" in Bolivian affairs. "We do not intend to manipulate Evo Morales or any other person" in Bolivia, said Jose Vicente Rangel, Venezuela's vice president.

Some observers said the Bush administration could serve U.S. and regional interests best by seeking compromise with Morales rather than responding harshly to his anti-U.S. pronouncements and inadvertently shoving him toward the embrace of Chavez and Castro. They noted that he will face demands from his grass-roots constituents to deliver on social promises, and that U.S. ostracism could make it harder for him to appease them.

One Bolivian business leader, Carlos Kempff, noted worriedly yesterday that some of Morales's radical supporters were already threatening to defect if he did not make major policy changes within 90 days. If that happens, the businessman said, Morales could face the same destabilizing pressures that have brought down Bolivia's past three elected presidents.

"Morales's major policies give the U.S. pause, but he has a tightrope to walk, and it would be unwise to isolate and push him," said John M. Walsh, an analyst with the Washington Office on Latin America, a nonprofit advocacy group. "If the U.S. wants to play rough, he has other options for aid and patronage." But if good relations develop, Walsh suggested, the United States could help Bolivia develop from a poor, coca-dependent economy to a gas-exporting one.

Several analysts said Morales will also come under pressure from such Latin American democracies as Brazil and Argentina to adopt more practical approaches to issues such as natural gas development. They noted that Bolivia is far poorer and has less infrastructure than Venezuela, where record oil revenues have allowed Chavez to fund social programs.

"Foreign investment in Bolivia has diminished significantly, and I suspect Morales's election will further deter it until the rules of the game have been established," said Aronson. "But he has already backed off a little on the rhetoric suggesting he would nationalize everything, and he will discover that without foreign investment, he won't be able to build the infrastructure to move the gas. This will really be a test of his pragmatism."

Staff writer Glenn Kessler in Washington and special correspondent Bill Faries in La Paz, Bolivia, contributed to this report.

Indigenous, Aboriginal, First Nation links in Canada

2005-12-19T12:44:00.000-05:00

From the Indigenous Spirit blog:

Looking for an excellent list of Indigenous, Aboriginal and First Nation links in Canada?
We've got our Canadian Indigenous links page up and running, check it out here:
http://www.indigenousspirit.com/indigenous/indigenous_Canada.htm

Wish to submit a link? Email us at the following email address, and we'll add it!
webmaster@indigenousspirit.com

Chi-Meegwetch!

ps. Don't forget to bookmark that page and send it to your friends!

Indigenous Spirit Blog

2005-12-19T12:41:00.000-05:00

IndigenousSpirit.Com now has its own blog!
Appropriately entitled: IndigenousSpirit.Com

Check it out here: http://indigenousspirit.blogspot.com/

Bill C-31: The Abocide Bill

2005-12-15T10:09:00.000-05:00

Conclusions & Footnotes
by Harry W. Daniels
Former President , Congress of Aboriginal Peoples

Bill C-31 was born of the necessity to amend those provisions of the Indian Act that offended the equality rights clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This it did, but in a manner that preserves the insidious integrationist bias of the Indian Act, so that, despite all the changes that it introduced, the fundamental goal of assimilating Indian peoples as indistinguishable members of the Canadian body politic remains intact. The Bill has three major failings:

1. it raised expectations that all Indians would be recognized as Indians and treated equally before the law and by the federal government, yet it merely reproduced in a new form the old disparities in the treatment accorded off-reserve Indians relative to Indians on reserve;

2. it eliminated the sexual discrimination inherent in the old patrilineal eligibility rules for Indian Status, only to impose new gender-neutral rules that are as detrimental in their own way to the Indian people of Canada as were the old rules that they replace; and

3. it allows for the reinstatement of C-31 Indians, but then laces their rights in jeopardy by enabling Bands to deny them membership.

The regime that Bill C-3 1 imposes must be changed. The Congress is prepared to discuss this matter with other Aboriginal groups and the federal government. But Indian people off-reserve will not long support a regime that raised so much hope yet has proved so ineffective in terms of promoting equality and that imposes new Status rules that they will soon come to despise. Though in the short run, Bill C-3 1 has led to a dramatic increase in the number of Status Indians there are in Canada, in the long run, it will actually act to disqualify the descendants of today's Status Indians from obtaining Status in their turn. This is equivalent to "abocide": the elimination of the Status Indian population.

Continue reading this Article Here.

Canadian Government Policy Goals

2005-12-15T10:00:00.000-05:00

Jean Chrètien’s Legacy of Betrayal and Deceit: An Overview of Federal Indian Policy 1968—2004

2005-12-15T09:44:00.000-05:00

By Russell Diabo

Many have called the Liberal Party the “natural governing party” of Canada, because the Liberals have formed most of the governments since Canadian Confederation. In fact, most of the current federal Aboriginal policies are Liberal sponsored and owe much of their origins to the influence and tenure of Jean Chrètien, who served as Minister of Indian Affairs from July 1968 until August 1974.

Since we are on the eve of the beginning of a minority Parliament, it is important to review the “legacy” of Jean Chrètien and the Liberal record, because Prime Minister Paul Martin, his advisors and the federal bureaucracy are essentially implementing Jean Chrètien’s “legacy” Aboriginal policies.

1968 Consultations
As Minister of Indian Affairs, Jean Chrétien conducted consultations with First Nation Leaders on changes to the Indian Act. Across the country a consistent message was delivered by First Nations Leadership to the Department of Indian Affairs, which was to recognize Aboriginal and Treaty Rights!

The federal response to the consultations was to introduce a “White Paper on Indian Policy”.

Key Elements of 1969 Policy
Eliminate the legislative and constitutional recognition of Indian status.
Abolish Indian Reserves & impose taxation.
Dismantling of Treaties.
Off-load federal Indian programs & services onto provinces, municipalities and First Nation communities.
Entrench economic underdevelopment.

1970’s – Trudeau & Chrètien
In response the “White Paper on Indian Policy” First Nations organized opposition by forming associations at regional and national levels. The National Indian Brotherhood was formed. First Nations organizations issued their own Position Papers in response to the “White Paper”, including the “Red Paper” prepared by the Indians of Alberta Association and these were presented to the federal government.

In 1973, the Supreme Court of Canada in the landmark Calder decision— regarding the Nisga’a in British Columbia— issued a split decision on whether Aboriginal Title existed in Canada or not, this caused legal uncertainty for the Crown governments in Canada.

The federal response of then Prime Minister Trudeau, and his Indian Affairs Minister Jean Chrètien, was to announce modern land claims policies for negotiations with First Nations. (‘Comprehensive & Specific Claims’)
Comprehensive Claims were deemed to be in regions of Canada where historic land Treaties weren’t ever made and Aboriginal Title claims by First Nations were being asserted (ie. NWT, Yukon, BC, Quebec and Atlantic region)

Specific Claims were deemed to be outstanding “lawful obligations” (ie. Breach of Treaties, illegal sale of Indian Reserve lands, mismanagement of Indian trust funds).

The 1970’s were a time of First Nations unrest and political activity:

A Joint NIB-Cabinet Committee was formed and then dissolved by NIB after Prime Minister Trudeau attempted to use it to rubber stamp federal Indian policy.

A “Native Peoples’ Caravan” marched on Ottawa to protest treaty & aboriginal rights violations.

Anishnawbe Park was occupied in Kenora, Ontario by Indians to protest racism against First Nation people.

The James Bay & Northern Quebec Agreement was signed in 1975 ,1st ‘Modern Treaty’ in Canada.

Throughout the 1970’s, DIAND proposed Indian Act amendments as a way to address First Nations demands for recognition of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

1980 – Trudeau & Chrètien
Then Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau, met in Ottawa with Chiefs from across Canada at an National Indian Brotherhood (NIB) meeting in Ottawa to announce his plans to amend the constitution and he called on their support. Trudeau implored the Chiefs to “treat Canada better than Canada has treated you”.

Prime Minister Trudeau appointed Jean Chrétien as federal Justice Minister and put him in charge of the constitutional negotiation process. Ron Irwin, who would later become Chrètien’s Minister of Indian Affairs in 1993, is named by Trudeau as Chrètien’s Parliamentary Secretary for Justice.

As a consequence of Trudeau’s actions, constitutional issues become the priority for NIB because of concerns about the impacts on Treaty and Aboriginal Rights of changing Canada’s legal status with England.

1980-81 – Trudeau & Chrètien
After Trudeau announced his constitutional plans, Indian, Inuit & Metis representatives begin meeting with federal & provincial representatives to discuss wording for recognition of aboriginal & treaty rights in the new constitution.

In 1981, a clause recognizing Aboriginal rights was first inserted and then removed at the insistence of Western Premiers from Alberta and Saskatchewan. Aboriginal peoples responded to the removal of the Aboriginal constitutional clause by mobilizing and literally camping in Ottawa to protest and lobby federal politicians.

A train dubbed the Constitutional Express left Vancouver, BC on route to Ottawa, picked up First Nations people along the way adding to the demonstrations in Ottawa. A group from the train went on to Europe to inform Europeans about Canada’s treachery in removing the Aboriginal clause from the draft constitution.

1981 Patriation Process
In the fall, some Aboriginal representatives reach agreement with the Premiers and Prime Minister Trudeau on wording for an ‘Aboriginal Clause’. This was the ‘section 35’ clause.

Another clause ‘section 37’ was also included, which provided for a First Ministers’ Conference to be held within 1 year of the ‘Canada Bill’—as it was called in the British Parliament—coming into force.

Several First Nation organizations joined forces to go to England to launch a court action and lobby British MP’s to vote against the ‘Canada Bill’ until First Nations legal, constitutional concerns were addressed by the Crown governments, including the “Crown in right of Great Britain”.

Constitution Act 1982
Canada’s new constitution was proclaimed into law on April 17, 1982, with a specific clause for protecting the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples’, section 35 provided: (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed. (2) In this Act, “aboriginal peoples of Canada” Includes the Indian, Inuit and Mètis peoples of Canada.

The Constitution Act 1982 (section 37) also provided for a First Ministers’ Conference on Aboriginal Matters to be held within one year of the new constitution becoming law.

Also in 1982, a Special Parliamentary Committee on Indian Self-Government was established to review legal and institutional issues related to the status, development and responsibilities of band governments on Reserves.

1983 Self-Government Report
In 1983, the all-party Special Parliamentary Committee on Indian Self-Government, issued the “Penner Report”, named after the Chairman, Keith Penner, the Committee recommended that the federal government recognize First Nations as a distinct order of government within the Canadian federation and pursue processes leading to self-government. The “Penner Report” proposed constitutional entrenchment of self-government and in the short-term, the introduction of legislation to facilitate it.

1983 FMC Trudeau & Chrètien
The 1983 First Ministers’ Conference (FMC) focused on sexual equality between Aboriginal men and women, self-government, as well as, need for further constitutional conferences.

A constitutional amendment was agreed to in accordance with the new constitutional amending formula. The 1983 constitutional amendment provided for amendments to section 35, regarding recognition of rights from land claims agreements set out an agenda and a schedule for 3 more FMC’s on Aboriginal Matters, while agreeing to include Aboriginal representatives.

The 1983 amendments to section 35 included these additional clauses:(3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) “treaty rights” includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired. (4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.

35.1 The government of Canada and the Provincial governments are committed to the principle that, before any amendment is made to Class 24 of section 91 f the “Constitution Act ,1867”, to section 25 of this Act, or to this Part, (a) a constitutional conference that includes in its agenda an item relating to the proposed amendment, composed of the Prime Minister of Canada and the first ministers of the provinces, will be convened by the Prime Minister of Canada, and (b) The Prime Minister of Canada will invite representatives of the aboriginal peoples of Canada to participate in the discussions on that item.

1984 FMC – Trudeau/Chrètien
Prior to the 1984 FMC Trudeau took his famous “walk in the snow” and announced his retirement from politics. This changed the federal-provincial dynamics of the FMC. The Premiers knew there was going to be a Liberal Leadership Convention to replace Trudeau as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

The main topic of discussion turned to whether the ‘right of self-government’ for Aboriginal peoples is ‘contingent’, meaning delegated versus ‘inherent’.

A federal-provincial proposed Constitutional Accord on the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples was rejected by the Four National Aboriginal Organizations.

1985 – The Mulroney Years
The 1985 FMC was chaired by a new Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney. In September 1984, the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada had won a massive majority in Parliament. The Mulroney government initiated a “two-track” (constitutional & legislative) approach to First Nations self-government. A “Community Based Self-Government” Policy was announced.

A federal-provincial Proposed Accord relating to delegated self-government for the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada was rejected by the Four National Aboriginal Organizations because the proposal failed to recognize that self-government is an “Inherent Right”.

1985 – Native Policy Revealed
In 1985, the membership sections of the Indian Act were amended by Bill C-31. The Bill C-31 Indian Act amendments allowed thousands of individuals to be reinstated as Status Indians”within the meaning of the Indian Act”. This was an attempt to eliminate discrimination against status Indian women, although many still criticize the Bill as insufficient.

Also in 1985, a secret federal Cabinet submission is leaked to the media by a DIAND employee. The Report is nicknamed the “Buffalo Jump of the 1980’s” by another federal official. The nickname referred to the effect of the recommendations in the secret Cabinet document, which if adopted, would lead Status Indians to a cultural death, hence the metaphor.

Buffalo Jump of the 1980’s
The “Buffalo Jump” Report proposed a ‘management approach’ for First Nations policy & programs, which had the following intent:
- Limiting & eventually terminating the federal trust obligations;
- Reducing federal expenditures for First Nations, under funding programs, and prohibiting deficit financing;
- Shifting responsibility and costs for First Nations services to provinces and “advanced bands” through co-management, tri-partite, and community self-government agreements;
- “Downsizing” of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND) through a devolution of program administration to “advanced bands” and transfer of programs to other federal departments;
- Negotiating municipal community self-government agreements with First Nations which would result in the First Nation government giving up their Constitutional status as a sovereign government and becoming a municipality subject to provincial or territorial laws;
- Extinguishing aboriginal title and rights in exchange for fee simple title under provincial or territorial law while giving the province or territory underlying title to First Nations lands.

1986 Sechelt Act
In 1986, the first “self-government” Act was passed, which came from the federal “Community-Based Self-Government” negotiations.

Jill Wherret, in a paper on Aboriginal Self- Government from the Library of Parliament describes the Sechelt Act as follows:
In May 1986, the Sechelt Indian Band Self- Government Act was passed after 15 years of negotiation and consultation. This was a specific piece of legislation that allowed the Sechelt Indian Band, located on the British Columbia coast about 50 kilometres north of Vancouver, to move toward self-government.
The Act granted authority to the Sechelt band to exercise delegated powers and negotiate agreements about specific issues. Under the legislation, the community was set up as a legal entity with the power to enter into contracts and agreements; acquire, sell and dispose of property; and spend, invest and borrow money.
The community was empowered to set up its own constitution establishing its government, membership code, legislative powers and system of financial accountability. The elected council has the power to pass laws on a range of matters, including access to and residence on Sechelt lands, administration and management of lands belonging to the band, education, social welfare and health services, and local taxation of reserve lands.
The legislation transferred fee-simple title of Sechelt lands to the band and contains a provision for the negotiation of funding agreements in the form of grants or transfer payments administered by the band council. The Sechelt Indian band has municipal status under provincial legislation.
The Sechelt Act was consistent with the recommendations of the secret “Buffalo Jump” objectives to change the legal and political status of Indian Bands and Indian Reserves into that of a municipality under provincial property and taxation systems.

This is more or less the template, or model of self-government that the federal government continues to peddle at negotiation table across the country.

1987 FMC – The Mulroney Era
The 1987 FMC was the last constitutionally required FMC on Aboriginal Matters. A federal-provincial Proposed Constitutional Accord on delegated self-government was once again rejected by the Four National Aboriginal Organizations.

Unknown to the Aboriginal FMC participants at the time, Prime Minister Mulroney had started secret discussions with Quebec Premier Bourassa, which would lead to the Meech Lake Accord.

1987 Meech Lake Accord
Following the final FMC on Aboriginal Matters, the Meech Lake Accord was struck over the opposition of Aboriginal representatives, signaling a side-lining of Aboriginal constitutional matters and introducing a broader constitutional agenda.
The Meech Lake Accord set into motion a three year constitutional amendment process requiring unanimous consent by the 10 provinces.

1990 The Watershed Year
In June 1990, the Liberals elected Jean Chrétien as their Leader in Calgary, Alberta. The Liberal Convention also created the Aboriginal Peoples’ Commission of the Liberal Party of Canada.

At the same time the Liberal Convention was held, Elijah Harper refused to give unanimous consent in the Manitoba Legislature causing the failure of Meech Lake Accord’s constitutional amendment.
The failure of the Meech Lake Accord led to anger among many Quebec citizens and politicians, including Premier Robert Bourassa.
On July 11, 1990, the Government of Quebec allowed a police SWAT Team to attack a Mohawk blockade, set up to stop an expansion of a golf course onto Mohawk lands, which included a burial site.
The attack on Mohawks left one policeman dead and lead to a 78 day stand-off between the Mohawks, police, and eventually the Canadian Army.
When Parliament resumed in September 1990, Brian Mulroney began the session by announcing his ‘Four Pillars’ of Native Policy.

1990 Mulroney’s ‘Four Pillars’
Land claims;
The economic and social conditions on Reserves;
The relationships between Aboriginal Peoples’ and governments;
Concerns of Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples’ in contemporary Canadian life.
In 1991, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney also announced: the establishment of a Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, which began its work later that year; the establishment of an Indian Claims Commission to review ‘Specific Claims’; the establishment of a BC Task Force on Claims, which would form the basis for the BC Treaty Commission Process.

1992 Charlottetown Accord
Aboriginal organizations and the federal government agreed, as part of the 1992 Charlottetown Accord, on amendments to the Constitution Act, 1982 that would have included recognition of the inherent right of self-government for Aboriginal people. For the first time, Aboriginal organizations had been full participants in the talks; however, the Accord was rejected in a national referendum.

1993 Liberal Aboriginal Platform
The 1993 Federal Election saw the Liberals, headed by Jean Chrétien, decimate the Progressive Conservatives.
The Liberals 1993 electoral promises on Aboriginal issues were included in two documents, Chapter 7 of the 1993 Red Book, and a longer Aboriginal Platform released in Saskatchewan on October 8, 1993, during the campaign. The Liberals made the following promises:
~ Act on the premise that the Inherent Right to Self-Government is an existing Aboriginal & Treaty Right within the meaning of section 35.
~ Create, in cooperation with aboriginal peoples, an independent claims commission. The government will engage the provinces in redressing the grievances of aboriginal peoples over land and resource rights, including negotiating agreements for resource revenue sharing.
~ Seek the advice of treaty First Nations on how to achieve a mutually acceptable process to interpret the treaties in contemporary terms, while still giving full recognition to their original spirit and intent.
~ Explore new fiscal arrangements with aboriginal people. It does not make sense for the federal government to be unilaterally making policy or budgetary decisions that affect the lives of aboriginal people without their consent.
~ A Liberal government will be committed to building a new partnership with aboriginal peoples that is based on trust, mutual respect and participation in the decision making process. It does not make sense for the federal government to be making policy decisions that affect the lives of aboriginal people without their involvement. A Liberal government will develop a more comprehensive process for consultation between federal ministers and aboriginal representatives with respect to decision making that directly affects first nations.
~ A Liberal government is committed to winding down the Department of Indian Affairs at a pace agreed upon by First Nations, while maintaining the federal fiduciary responsibility. We will work with aboriginal peoples to identify where existing federal expenditures can be redirected into more productive uses.
~ Initiate a comprehensive health policy, designed by and for aboriginal peoples, which supports an integrated approach to dealing with physical and mental health issues and incorporates traditional healing methods – perhaps most importantly aboriginal children will grow up in secure families and healthy communities, with the opportunity to take their full place in Canada.
~ Will remove the cap on Post Secondary education specifically to provide adequate funding for aboriginal students accepted at colleges, universities and vocational institutes and in adult education programs and professional degree programs. A review of the Post Secondary Education Program will also be undertaken with Aboriginal Peoples to determine fair criteria for eligibility and special needs including adequate child care for students in need of such a service.
~ Will establish an Aboriginal Education Institute to specialize in curriculum development, teacher orientation, distance education, standards development.
~ Will work with aboriginal peoples to develop an approach to housing that emphasizes community control, local resources, and flexibility in design and labour requirements.
~ We must define and undertake together creative initiatives designed to achieve fairness, mutual respect and recognition of rights. The role of the Liberal government will be to provide aboriginal people with the necessary tools to become self-sufficient and self-governing. Our priority will be to assist aboriginal communities in their efforts to address the obstacles and to their development and to help them marshall the human and physical resources necessary to build and sustain vibrant communities.

1995 ‘Inherent Right’ Policy
In 1995, the Chrétien government broke the promise to recognize the inherent right to self-government by adopting an ‘Aboriginal Self-Government’ Policy, which recognizes the right in an abstract sense but doesn’t recognize that any particular First Nation has the right on the ground.
David Nahwegahbow, former Co-Chair of the Liberal’s Aboriginal Peoples’ Commission describes the 1995 Self-Government policy as follows:
“In 1995, Irwin released the federal policy on self-government. Though it purported to fulfill the Aboriginal Platform commitment to recognize the inherent right of self-government, in fact, the policy was hollow. It recognized the existence of the inherent right in the abstract, but refused to recognize that First Nations actually possessed this right. The policy required First Nations to negotiate with the federal government before the right of self-government would be recognized or exercised. Moreover, the policy contained numerous conditions and restrictions on these negotiations.”
Contrary to the promises in the Aboriginal Platform, the federal self-government policy was developed without the consultation and cooperation of First Nations. Understandably, it was rejected by the Assembly of First Nations right after it was introduced.

1996 Indian Act Amendments
In 1996, Ron Irwin, then Minister of Indian Affairs, initiated a process to amend the Indian Act, even though it wasn’t part of the 1993 Liberal Aboriginal Platform.
In response, the Assembly of First Nations conducted a review of the amendment package and recommended to First Nations that they reject the Indian Act amendments as regressive and unconstitutional.

1996 RCAP Report Dismissed
In the Fall of 1996 the Final Report & Recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples’ was made public. The report involved 5 volumes with some 440 recommendations.
The Chrétien government dismissed the RCAP report and recommendations as too costly, and asserted that Liberal policies already addressed much of what was in the RCAP Report.

Burning the 1993 Red Book
David Nahwegahbow, former Liberal Aboriginal Commission Co-Chair, describes the reaction to Chrètien’s record of betrayal and broken promises as follows: “I, and several other members of the Aboriginal Commission – Marilyn Buffalo and Russell Diabo – finallycame to the conclusion that Mr. Chrétien did not intend to honor his promises in the Aboriginal Platform. So, we broke with the Liberal Party and denounced Chrétien for not honoring his election promises to First Nations. We joined Ovide Mercredi, then National Chief, in “burning the Redbook”. At the time, FinanceMinister Paul Martin did not escape our criticism either, though I acknowledge that Indian Affairs was not his portfolio, and as such there were limits on what he could do to implement the Platform.”

Bill C-79 – Indian Act II
In December of 1996, then Minister of Indian Affairs, Ron Irwin, introduced Bill C-79 into Parliament over the objections of First Nations. The Bill died on the order paper in June 1997, when a federal election was called.
By the fall of 1997, with a new Minister of Indian Affairs, Jane Stewart, and a new AFN National Chief, Phil Fontaine, a compromise deal was then struck between AFN and the federal government on a watered down federal response to the RCAP Report & recommendations.

1998 ‘Gathering Strength’ Policy
In January of 1998, the federal government issued a “Statement of Reconciliation” regarding the residential schools. All national Aboriginal organizations, except the Native Women’s Association of Canada, accepted the federal response on Residential Schools. Many Residential School Survivors also rejected the federal “Statement”.
The federal RCAP response was contained in the policy statement ‘Gathering Strength’ and another policy statement called ‘An Agenda for Action with First Nations’. The ‘Gathering Strength’ and ‘Agenda for Action’ statements merely built on existing federal policies and negotiation processes and didn’t fundamentally change the relationship between Aboriginal Peoples and the Crown governments as the RCAP report had recommended.

2003 – Suite of Legislation
In 2003, while ignoring the Liberal promises of 1993, and the 1996 RCAP recommendations, Robert Nault, Minister of Indian Affairs, proceeded to introduce three Bills into Parliament.
Þ Bill C-6: The Specific Claims Resolution Act;
Þ Bill C-7: The First Nations Governance Act;
Þ Bill C-19: The First Nations Fiscal & Statistical Management Act.
These Bills were called a “suite of legislation” by Nault, and were rejected by a majority of First Nations across Canada because they violated the Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty Rights of First Nations.
Bill C-6 – Specific Claims Act
^ Narrows the definition of claims;
^ Caps claims to $10 million to go to proposed claims tribunal, despite vast majority of claims are estimated to be over the cap;
^ Claims over $10 million will lose access to the independent inquiries and reports;
^ The federal government reneged on its commitment to the “Joint Task Force” Report and model mutually agreed upon by First Nations and the Department of Indian Affairs.
^ Claims Body will not be independent or impartial, because federal government unilaterally controls the appointment of Commissioners and members of Tribunal despite a Liberal Red Book promise to a joint First Nation-federal appointment process;
^ Will lead to more delays, not less, federal delays are authorized and rewarded.

Bill C-7 – FNGA
The First Nations Governance Act (FNGA): ~ Created with improper and deceptive consultations;
~ Imposed the exact opposite of “Self- Government”, which is continued federal domination and control over our lives;
~ Didn’t address the real needs of First Nations, such as health, housing, education, employment;
~ Would have terminated the existence of Indian “Bands”, “Chiefs” and “Councils” by imposing a corporate, municipal status;
~ Would have legislatively terminated the existence of “custom” First Nations;
~ Would have eroded and undermined collective rights by imposing the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms;
~ Would have been enforced by Canada’s police forces and/or the Canadian Army, in conjunction with Canada’s new security law, upon all First Nations (custom & elective systems);
~ Restricted First Nations “lawmaking” to delegated municipal powers on Indian Act Reserves only, not traditional/treaty territories;
~ Increased not decreased the powers of the federal Minister of Indian Affairs, federal officials and the federal Cabinet over all First Nations, by granting the federal government powers to develop and approve in secret, national regulations regarding leadership selection, and governance.

Bill C-19 – ‘Fiscal Institutions’ Act
Chief Roberta Jamieson, Portfolio Holder for the Chiefs of Ontario on the “Suite” of Legislation, and Chief of the Six Nations of the Grand River, summarizes the negative impacts of the proposed “First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act”, Bill C-23 (formerly C-19) as follows:
· Become like municipalities with property tax system.
· Gives rights to non-member taxpayers on reserve.
· Increased federal control over financial affairs with imposition of more rules & regulations.
· Promotes culture of compliance with increased accountability to outside governments & not to our people.
· Reduced federal liability.
· Reduced federal funding transfers.

1969 – 2003 Federal Objectives
From the 1969 White Paper, the ‘Buffalo Jump’ Report right up to the 2003 “Suite of Legislation”, the Liberal (and Conservative) government has maintained the following objectives:Þ Assimilation of First Nations. Þ Remove legislative recognition. Þ Neutralize constitutional status. Þ Impose taxation. Þ Encourage provincial encroachment. Þ Eliminate Reserve lands & extinguish Aboriginal Title. Þ Economic underdevelopment. Þ Dismantle Treaties.

Paul Martin Keeps Chrètien Policies
Since his swearing-in as Prime Minister on December 12, 2003, Paul Martin has used Aboriginal ceremonies and events in an attempt to create a public image of benevolence towards Aboriginal peoples’.
However, the actions of the Martin government to date indicate that Paul Martin’s ‘new relationship’ with Aboriginal Peoples is symbolic and not substantive.
Like Jean Chrètien, Paul Martin is ignoring the 1993 Liberal promises and most of the RCAP recommendations, in favour of maintaining Jean Chrètien’s ‘Aboriginal Legacy’ policies of assimilation and termination.
The so-called Canada-Aboriginal Roundtable of April 19, 2004, offered simply a process for tinkering with programs and services.
The federal objectives outlined above remain unchanged under Paul Martin’s government. As outlined in the last issue of the Bulletin, there is a federal ‘melting plot’ for ‘Aboriginal-Canadians’ being implemented by Paul Martin’s Liberals.

Source: First Nations Strategic Bulletin, Volume 2, Issue 1, August 29, 2004)

Starlight Tours in Saskatoon

2005-12-14T21:21:00.000-05:00

Aboriginal people dropped off by police on the outskirts of town to walk home sometimes in freezing temperatures

By Tom Edwards

In November 1990, Neil Stonechild, a 17-year old aboriginal youth from Saskatoon was found frozen to death in a field outside of Saskatoon. His cousin, Jason Roy, was the last person to see Neil alive in police custody, but the Saskatoon Police Service (SPS) closed the case and stopped the investigation. The SPS ruled his death was not suspicious, and they claimed he was likely walking to an adult correctional facility when he froze to death in -28°C temperatures.

On February 4, 2000, Darrell Night, a Saskatoon aboriginal man, came forward with testimony that he was driven to the outskirts of Saskatoon and left in -22°C temperatures by the Saskatoon Police Service. He narrowly avoided a freezing death when he found shelter in the nearby Queen Elizabeth Power Station. Around the same time, two other aboriginal men were also found frozen to death. Their deaths gave Darrell Night the courage to tell what happened.

The Starlight Tour: The Last Lonely Night of Neil Stonechild, co-authored by Susanne Reber and Robert Renaud, is presented in a journalistic narrative format which utilizes first-person dialogue they re-created with the help of Neil’s family members, court transcripts and news stories to write the book behind the Starlight Tours. This style of prose was surprising considering the heavy subject matter, and I commented to Susanne Reber that I had expected the book to be more investigative and be solely factual.

Reber said, “We worked really hard to achieve exactly that narrative. For us it was more important to utilize a literary journalistic treatment because what I find with the traditional journalistic books is that they are so full of facts that after a while, you shut it down, it sets up a barrier between real people and it allows the reader to back away from [the subject matter]. It was our goal, by making it more novelistic, by telling you more about the characters and what they faced, from the point of view of the characters, and not the journalist who knows everything; I think it allows you closer to their stories. And certainly people who are reading it, tell me that they are drawn into the characters and can’t put it down, and then they realize this story is real. They are allowing their emotions to pull them into the story. It was our goal to utilize this [story-telling technique] to draw in more readers.”

This literary journalistic device succeeds in touching the emotional side of this story through first-person accounts of what happened, which is something missing from the newspapers and TV reports, which only touched on parts of the story. From reading this book The Starlight Tour, the reader gets a sense of the whole story, not just a snippet from one time and place.

Some facts

After Darrell Night came forward, the SPS offered to conduct an internal investigation. The Saskatchewan Justice Minister called for an external inquiry. The RCMP was called into to investigate. In July 2002, the Justice Minister decides not to lay charges. In April 2003, the new Justice Minister reopens the case. In September 2003, the Stonechild case eventually opens to a full public inquiry under the direction of Justice Wright.
In October 2004, Wright concluded that Neil Stonechild was last known to be in police custody and that the Saskatoon Police Service investigators did a poor job in their investigation, and that the Saskatoon Police Service chiefs and deputy-chiefs repeatedly ignored or rejected reports from Stonechild family members or Saskatoon Star-Phoenix reporters that cast serious doubts on the conduct of the Stonechild inquiry, among other findings. The same day the report was released, the Saskatoon Police Service Chief Russell Sabo suspended the constables Hartwig and Senger, however, to date no criminal charges have been laid regarding Neil Stonechild’s death.

Moving forward

I also asked Stella Bignell if she has received any closure from contributing to this book’s publication. She answered, “Yes and No. I’ve always said there will be no closure until justice is served”.

While the book does not provide closure, she admits the book has allowed her to be able to discuss the events and share her story when she couldn’t before without breaking down emotionally. Now through experience of helping the authors finish the book and sharing her experiences, she can now discuss the events around her son’s death.

I asked Stella Bignell what kind of support she received from the Aboriginal community. She mentioned the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations telephone support line, local protests, and then said; “Phil Fontaine. At the end of the inquiry, he talked to Don [Don Worme was the lawyer for the Stonechild family] that ‘if you ever need my help, don’t be afraid to call me.’ She said he told her he acknowledged everything she was doing and said to her, ‘I’m standing behind you all the way’.

(The whole report from the Stonechild Inquiry is located at:
www.stonechildinquiry.ca/finalreport/ ).

Hard Facts

2005-12-11T16:49:00.000-05:00

A guide to recent key reports, speeches and studies.
Click Here.

WHO KILLED DUDLEY GEORGE?

2005-12-09T16:20:00.000-05:00

Fontaine: Liberals or NDP best bet for natives

2005-12-08T19:25:00.000-05:00

Dec. 8, 2005.

WINNIPEG—Aboriginals would be best served by voting Liberal or NDP, but not Conservative, the chief of the Assembly of First Nations is suggesting.

Just weeks after helping achieve a $5.1 billion funding commitment to aboriginals at the first ministers meeting in B.C., Phil Fontaine said his goal in the campaign is to ensure that work moves ahead.

While he insisted the AFN is apolitical, Fontaine hinted that aboriginals are not impressed with the Conservatives or their policies, the Winnipeg Free Press said in a report.

"We prefer political parties that are clearly supportive of First Nations issues and have demonstrated in the past their commitment to First Nations issues," Fontaine said,

Fontaine's comments came as the AFN heard representation from all the parties on their aboriginal platforms.

In the 2004 federal election, a number of aboriginal leaders urged their people to vote Liberal and went out of their way to criticize Stephen Harper's Conservatives.

CANADIAN PRESS

"fucking indians" - Mike Harris

2005-11-28T15:57:00.000-05:00

Former AG says Harris wanted "Indians out" of Ipperwash; Harris to deny

FOREST, Ont. (CP) - An angry Mike Harris told a meeting attended by police he wanted "the fucking Indians out" of Ipperwash provincial park hours before police moved in and shot protester Dudley George dead, the former Ontario premier's attorney general said Monday in explosive testimony.

Harris made the comment as Harnick walked into a meeting with two Ontario Provincial Police officers and two other cabinet ministers on the afternoon of Sept. 6, 1995, hours before police stormed Ipperwash Provincial Park, the former attorney general told a public inquiry into the killing.

"As I walked into the dining room the premier in a loud voice said, 'I want the fucking Indians out of the park,' " Harnick told the inquiry.

"I was at that point just taking my seat. I didn't hear who had spoken previously to evoke that comment, but then there was complete silence in the room."

In his cross-examination of Harnick, Harris's lawyer Peter Downard said his client will deny using those words when he is called to testify in January.

"You are the first to say that the inappropriate statement was made, does that give you any pause?" Downard said in challenging Harnick's testimony.

Harnick responded by saying "I heard what I heard."

"Do you know how difficult this has been for me? I have nothing but admiration for the premier. I've agonized over this."

Harnick said "he was stunned" by what he thought was a "wrong and inappropriate comment" by Harris at the meeting.

He said he believed that Harris made a mistake.

"Certainly, the premier is a human being. He made a mistake," said Harnick.

The former attorney general was adamant that at no time did Harris advocate the use of armed force to remove the occupiers.

He said the premier agreed by the end of the meeting the best course of action was to seek an injunction to end the standoff.

The premier's demeanour changed after his profane remark, Harnick said, something he took to be a recognition on Harris's part that the comments were inappropriate.

"Certainly my impression was that the premier had said something . . . in anger. He knew what he said was wrong," Harnick testified.

"The premier broke the silence in a very calm voice, indicating that once the occupiers were able to get into the park he didn't believe there was any way that they could be removed from the park. His demeanour changed, he became quiet."

The extent to which Harris interfered with the police handling of the standoff is the key issue at the judicial probe into George's death.

Police witnesses have told the inquiry that the force did not buckle to political pressure to remove the protesters.
Harnick supports that claim.

"I'm sure (the meeting) had no influence in terms of actions the OPP may have taken," said Harnick, who added he was unaware police were present at the meeting.

A splinter group of aboriginals from the nearby Kettle and Stony Point reserve had taken control of the park two days earlier, claiming they were protecting burial grounds. That claim was later supported by documents released by Ottawa a week after the fatal shooting.

George, 38, was shot by a police sniper the night provincial police marched on the park, which leads onto a beach on the shores of Lake Huron.

Harnick's shocking allegations Monday countered testimony from Harris's executive assistant last week.

Deb Hutton, who was also at the meeting attended by Harnick and Harris, told the inquiry she never heard the premier make the derogatory comments Harnick cited.

An inquiry lawyer noted that Hutton used a variation of the phrase "I do not recall" 134 times during her testimony and wondered if she was suffering from memory loss.

Former solicitor general Bob Runciman and Chris Hodgson, minister of natural resources at the time, were also present, as was Ontario Provincial Police Insp. Ron Fox and his assistant Insp. Scott Patrick.

Fox was a liaison between the Ontario government and provincial police. He was not in uniform at the meeting described by Harnick, and was acting as the liaison on aboriginal affairs at the time.

Fox has testified that after leaving the meeting with Harris he called his counterpart on the ground at Ipperwash and said the Harris government was "in love with guns."

Fox described Harris and the government as "barrel suckers."

"We're dealing with a real redneck government," Fox told Insp. John Carson, the incident commander at Ipperwash.

"There's no question. They don't give a shit less about Indians."

At another point, Fox told Carson, "the political people are really pushing . . . to get this done quick."
Harris has adamantly denied that he tried to influence police.

During a break in the inquiry, George family lawyer Murray Klippenstein said if Harnick's recollection of events was true it was a sad day for Canada.

"If this evidence is trustworthy, it looks like a contemptuous comment from the head of the province that is an attack on Indian people," he said. "It's a sad day."

Sam George, the victim's brother, said Harnick's words were shocking and gave him "goosebumps."

Canadian plan to tackle indigenous poverty

2005-11-28T14:23:00.000-05:00

November 26, 2005

Governments in Canada have pledged almost $6 billion to solve the serious social ills that plague native Indian communities in that country.

A two-day summit meeting brought together the Prime Minister, all 13 premiers and Canada's top native leaders.
Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin announced the 10-year plan to try to lift his country's indigenous communities out of poverty.

At the meetings conclusion, the various governments promised to address the serious shortcomings in education, health care and housing for almost one-million Indian and Inuit Canadians.

The conditions in many of those communities are abysmal, more akin to what is seen in the world's poorest countries.

The deal was welcomed by Phil Fontaine, the chief of Canada's leading aboriginal organisation, the Assembly of First Nations.

"The last two days have been just very encouraging," he said.

"I was most impressed with the goodwill in the room with the Prime Minister and the first ministers.

"There was no resistance to the plan that we had carefully developed, the 10-year plan to eradicate poverty."

Governments have been promising for decades to improve standards, but without much success.

Efforts towards more seriously changing the relationship between government and native peoples have stalled.

Conditions on native reserves have become a public issue, particularly after several remote reserves were recently evacuated because the water was undrinkable.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200511/s1517411.htm

quick facts on Canadian Aboriginal people

2005-11-24T20:17:00.000-05:00

Total population of Canada: 31,414,000

Total people of aboriginal origin: 1,319,890

Origin
North American Indian:957,650*
Métis:266,020*
Inuit:51,390*
More than one aboriginal origin: 44,835

Reserves
People of aboriginal origin living on reserve: 285,625
People of aboriginal origin living off reserve: 1,034,260
People of non-aboriginal origin living on reserve: 36,230

(Source: 2001 Census, Statistics Canada)
*includes people of a single aboriginal origin and those of a mix of one aboriginal origin with non-aboriginal origins

First ministers meeting on aboriginal issues

2005-11-24T20:10:00.000-05:00

CBC News Online Nov. 24, 2005

A loose agenda released by the government in the days before the First Ministers Conference on Aboriginal Affairs suggested the Nov. 24-25 meeting between Canada's first ministers and aboriginal leaders would focus on five critical areas: health, education, economic development, relationships between government and aboriginals, and housing, including incentives for private home ownership on reserves.

Ottawa said the initiatives would represent a 10-year commitment to raising the standard of living of aboriginal Canadians so that it would be equal to all other Canadians.

Native leaders across the country worried that the summit would focus on those five key areas at the expense of the implementation of treaty rights and self-government.

Bill Evans, who represents Manitoba's native leaders, said every chief is battling issues of water quality, poor housing and poverty. But those First Nations that have signed treaties must make sure the rights given by those treaties are not traded for money to solve social problems.

"We have a mandate ... to protect ... the treaties, to ensure that they're there and that we don't give up any of our rights from the treaties," Evans said.

The national chief of the Assembly of First Nations – Phil Fontaine – said all First Nations have inherent rights and he vowed to make sure the government doesn't forget it.

"The challenge is not to debate whether the right exists or not but how to get full effect of the right," Fontaine said.

The next step, Fontaine said, is to show Ottawa and the provinces how to work with First Nations as equals, and not as dependents of the state.

But on the eve of the conference, the AFN, the most influential of the five aboriginal groups invited to the summit, faced opposition from its own membership and from other aboriginal groups.

Weeks before the summit, chiefs representing nearly half of Canada's land mass said they would not allow the AFN to represent them at the meeting.

The chiefs represent Indians descended from those who signed the 11 numbered treaties between 1871 and 1921, covering Northern Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and portions of the Yukon, the Northwest Territories and British Columbia.

The chiefs argued the summit should have focused only on treaty rights. An official with the Tsuu T'ina First Nation, just outside Calgary, said the treaty chiefs argued that the government signed individual treaties with individual nations and that a "one size fits all approach" by the AFN could undermine those treaty rights.

In other words, rather than focus on the five areas outlined in the agenda, the chiefs wanted to see the AFN focus on implementing specific treaty rights. The issue of treaty rights is not going away anytime soon. A week before the November first ministers meeting, Fontaine and Indian and Northern Affairs Minister Andy Scott announced a conference on historic treaties for the spring of 2006.

Meanwhile, the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, which represents Indians and Métis who do not live on reserves, is also concerned about the AFN's approach to talks.

"History has taught us that the AFN's real agenda is to service status Indians on reserve. CAP wants to protect the rights of aboriginal Canadians in general, including off-reserve [Indians], Inuit and Métis," says Patrick Brazeau, vice-chief of CAP.

Status Indians qualify for registration on an official list maintained by Ottawa, entitling them to rights and payments not available to other Canadians. Those rights are often linked to their individual treaties, and can include tax exemptions and health services. There are rules that determine who qualifies as a status Indian, usually based on evidence of descent from people Ottawa recognizes as members of an Indian band.

Treaty rights that cover status Indians do not apply to Inuit and Métis.

"We want recognition of all our people," says Brazeau. "It shouldn't matter whether they are status or non-status, or where they live. They should have access to programs," says Brazeau. "The vast majority of aboriginals pay taxes. These taxes are being rerouted to people living on reserves and very little is coming back to us."

For their part, the Liberals have said they want to make aboriginal well-being a priority. Two months before the conference, Prime Minister Paul Martin pledged $700 million for aboriginal health.

A month later, the PM invited aboriginal leaders to meet federal and provincial heads at the first ministers meeting in Kelowna, B.C. The invite list included the Assembly of First Nations, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the Métis National Council, the Native Women's Association of Canada and the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples.

Federal officials have said they hope to emerge from the meeting with a plan to bring the standard of living of aboriginals up to the national average within 10 years.

The gap is glaring. Among aboriginal Canadians aged 20 to 24, 43 per cent have less than a high school education. Among non-aboriginal Canadians, the figure is 16 per cent.

The unemployment rate for aboriginals is 19.1 per cent, compared to 7.4 per cent for non-aboriginals.

But there is at least some hope that this may change. November's summit marks the first time aboriginal leaders have been invited to sit in on the top-level meeting.

Survival International

2005-11-21T12:01:00.000-05:00

Wonderful site on Indigenous people worldwide, check out Survival International!

ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS OF QUEBEC AND LABRADOR

2005-11-21T11:44:00.000-05:00

Transmitted by CNW Group on : November 17, 2005 11:46
Opposition to Bill 122 - The First Nations Chiefs Contest the Colonial Approach of the Quebec Government QUEBEC CITY, Nov. 17 /CNW Telbec/ -

The retrograde and colonial attitude of the government of Quebec was denounced today by several Chiefs of the First Nations of Quebec. Among other things, they indicate their dissatisfaction towards Bill 122 which perpetuates the colonial values in the management of public lands. "Colonialism is in the past. From now on, the government of Quebec must take into account the rights of Aboriginal peoples in themanagement of lands and resources" stated an Innu Chief, Raphael Picard.

These Chiefs are particularly outraged at Bill 122 which totally disregards the current state of right. In this bill, the government isproposing the following article: "In order to better reconcile the management of lands of the property of the State with the activities that the Aboriginal people exercise for living, ritual or social purposes, the government is authorized to conclude agreements with any aboriginal community represented by its band council, (...)".

"To restrain the rights of the First Nations to the sole activities exercised for living, ritual and social purposes, is to totally deny our titles and ancestral rights on the territory. This Bill is an insult to all First Nations of Quebec", states Ghislain Picard, Regional Chief of theAssembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador.

In a memoir submitted to the Commission d'Etude on Bill 122, the Chiefs of the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador stress that the bill minimizes the constitutional obligations of the government of Quebec towards the title and ancestral rights of the First Nations. Among other things, it totally disregards the obligation of accommodating the concerns of First Nations, and also, gives no consideration whatsoever to the obligation of getting their consent in certain cases when their rights are proven.

The Co-management The Chiefs of the First Nations underline that the ownership right and the legislative competence of Quebec on public lands are subordinate to the aboriginal title and to the ancestral rights, which are embedded in the Canadian Constitution. This means that the management of lands and natural resources in Quebec cannot be achieved without the collaboration of the aboriginal peoples who hold title over them. The future of the development of lands and resources in Quebec must be achieved through a co-management with the Aboriginal peoples.

These Chiefs denounce among other things, the retrograde attitude of the government in the management of forests. And if the government of Quebec does not change its way of doing things, the Aboriginal Chiefs are determined touse any and all recourses required to have their rights recognized and respected.

The Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador is the regional organization which represents the Chiefs of the First Nations of Quebec andLabrador.

-30-/

For further information:
Eric Cardinal, Communication Advisor,
(450) 638-5159 / cell. : (514) 258-2315;
Alain Garon, Information Officer, AFNQL,
(418) 842-5020/

FEDERAL MINISTERS AND NATIONAL ABORIGINAL LEADERS PARTICIPATE IN JOINT POLICY RETREAT

2005-11-21T11:36:00.000-05:00

2-02665 PRESS RELEASE

Ottawa, Ontario (May 31, 2005) -
The Prime Minister, members of the Cabinet Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and the leaders of five National Aboriginal Organizations met today for a Policy Retreat in a new spirit of cooperation and to address long-term challenges.

The leaders of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK), the Métis National Council (MNC), the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP) and the Native Women’s Association of Canada (NWAC) also signed joint accords with the Government of Canada that will ensure their direct involvement in Aboriginal policy development.

“Today marks an important step in building a stronger and more positive relationship between the Government of Canada and Aboriginal Canadians,” said the Prime Minister. “The Canada-Aboriginal Roundtable Process that we launched a year ago, and the work we have done today, moves us closer to our goal of closing the gap in the quality of life for Aboriginal peoples.”

Agreement was reached on directions for change in health, education/lifelong learning, housing, economic opportunities, negotiations/relationships and accountability for results.

“The Roundtable process and this Policy Retreat demonstrate new collaboration and partnership,” said the Honourable Andy Scott, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians and Vice-Chair of the Cabinet Committee of Aboriginal Affairs. “While there is still much work to be done and the issues will not be resolved overnight, this inclusive process will help ensure First Nations, Métis and Inuit people can take their place in the federation and exercise greater control over their social and economic aspirations. The accords signed today underline our shared commitment to continue working together.

The Prime Minister recognized the involvement and commitment of Ministers Dosanjh, Fontana, Emerson, Scott and Alcock, who were each responsible for leading one of the Policy Roundtables, as well as AFN National Chief Phil Fontaine, ITK President Jose Kusugak, MNC President Clément Chartier, CAP Chief Dwight Dorey and NWAC President Beverly Jacobs.

For more information of the Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable please visit www.aboriginalroundtable.ca , or contact::

Campbell Morrison
Press Secretary
Minister Andy Scott's Office
INAC (819) 997-0002
morrisonc@inac.gc.ca

Feds to commit up to $4B to natives:

2005-11-14T19:21:00.000-05:00

Canadian Press

OTTAWA — The federal government is set to announce a major cash injection to lift native living standards that most recently shamed it into rebuilding the Kashechewan First Nation.

Ottawa will commit between $3 billion and $4 billion when Prime Minister Paul Martin meets with the premiers and aboriginal leaders in Kelowna, The Canadian Press has learned.

The money will be promised over five years when the first ministers meet in British Columbia on Nov. 24. Sources say it will be used to improve education, housing, health and economic development programs.
Ottawa will also formalize its promise to draft rules to set standards for drinking-water quality on First Nations. Indian Affairs has documented contamination risks on three-quarters of more than 600 reserves, yet there are no related federal regulations.

Critics called the planned announcements damage control as residents of Kashechewan continue to evacuate their northern Ontario reserve.

The Liberals have endured two bruising weeks in the Commons for not moving sooner to help the James Bay community and others like it.

But insiders close to related talks say a major investment was planned long before outraged voters saw photos of Kashechewan toddlers riddled with skin infections.

"After nearly two years of ongoing work with the national aboriginal leadership, we're very excited about the prospects of long-term change," said a senior government source who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Ontario Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty knee-capped his federal cousins last week, saying Ottawa was "missing in action" as Kashechewan suffered.

Similar water troubles plague almost 100 other reserves across Canada, some of which have been under boil-water advisories for years.

The Assembly of First Nations urged Ottawa last week to commit at least $5 billion over 10 years to help wipe out native poverty.

Chiefs met Monday in Regina to discuss the much-anticipated first ministers gathering.

"We want to identify the four or five key areas that have been placed on the table to improve the quality of life on education, housing, economic development, health and relationships," said Chief Alphonse Bird of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations. "We also want to maximize the opportunity that is there to bring as much home as possible."

Conservative MP Jim Prentice, critic for aboriginal issues, says more cash isn't necessarily the answer.
"The elimination of aboriginal poverty is the most pressing social issue that we face as a nation," he said in an interview.

But Ottawa and the provinces must first figure out who should be paying for what - and who should be accountable when services break down, he added.

The federal government spends more than $8 billion a year to meet its historic obligations to aboriginal people. A mind-boggling cross-section of more than two dozen departments contribute.

New Democrat MP Charlie Angus, who led a media campaign that catapulted Kashechewan on to the Liberal agenda, says Ottawa is now trying to make up for "incredible federal neglect."

"Now they'll wave around the promises and talk about 'blueprints for change.' "

Angus says he's already hearing from chiefs who are being warned by Indian Affairs officials that Kashechewan's high profile will delay spending on their reserves.

"That's how Indian Affairs tries to frighten these communities into accepting less."

Don't derail B.C. meeting, aboriginal leaders urge

2005-11-14T19:18:00.000-05:00

CTV.ca News Staff
Aboriginal leaders are urging federal opposition parties not to defeat the government before a key first ministers meeting this month on aboriginal issues.

Assembly of First Nations national chief Phil Fontaine says "if the government falls, so does this first ministers meeting.

"We are calling today on all the parties in the House of Commons to pull back from the brink so that the ... meeting can take place in Kelowna, British Columbia on November 24th and 25th."

Joined by Jose Kusugak, president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Clement Chartier, president of the Metis National Council, Fontaine says leaders must move forward to address the pressing issues among Canada's aboriginal communities.

Fontaine calls the meeting an historic opportunity to make significant progress for his people, to turn "poverty into prosperity" and build a strong nation.

The well-being of his people, argues Fontaine, should be above partisan politics.

It is hoped the first ministers meeting will produce a concrete, 10-year action plan for First Nations, Inuit and Metis and an annual review to check on progress.

The meeting, the first of its kind, will ensure the government commits to spending money scheduled to be announced -- a figure expected to be at least $1 billion, an amount which could grow even larger if spread over several years.
Continue reading this Article Here.

... reality ...

2005-11-09T23:15:00.000-05:00

"I am tired of talk that comes to nothing It makes my heart sick when I remember all the good words and all the broken promises. There has been too much talking by men who had no right to talk. "

Chief Joseph - Hin-mah-too-yah-lat-kekt

Fontaine seeks 'transformative change'

2005-10-21T14:43:00.000-04:00

The Assembly of First Nations envisions a 10-year plan to eliminate poverty in native communities across Canada, Grand Chief Phil Fontaine told an assembly of B.C. native leaders Tuesday.

The program will require a major cash infusion from federal and provincial governments and the AFN is counting on favourable news at next month's First Minister's meeting in Kelowna.

How favourable?

"Five billion dollars is the bottom line," Fontaine told the B.C. Regional Chief's Special Assembly at Mount Paul Centre.

That is what we put to the government and our expectation is that all governments will respond favourably."

Fontaine said the AFN has an ambitious plan in place, based on the five pillars of housing, education, health, economic opportunity and the much-touted New Relationship with the provincial government.

"We propose to the prime minister and the council of first ministers (provincial premiers) that we want them to endorse the program . a 10-year plan to eliminate poverty in First Nations communities."

Fontaine did not offer a Plan B should the expected funding not win approval, although there has been some speculation in the media that the amount could range from $500 million to $2 billion, he said.

"We hope they are favourable. If they are not, of course, we will both wear this - the AFN and the federal government."

The national leader said he hopes for funding that will bring about transformative change, not the status quo.

"We're talking about First Nations having the authority . we're talking about training, we're talking about jobs, we're talking about First Nations having the ability to address housing themselves."

The need for social housing is acute across the country, with about 87,000 units needed, he said.

As well, the AFN hopes first ministers will meet at least every other year if not annually "to keep first ministers' feet to the fire."

Fontaine also gave an update on details of the residential schools resolution agreement he signed in May with the federal government.

The agreement promises financial compensation of $10,000 to every one of an estimated 87,000 survivors of the schools, a form of forced assimilation that operated across Canada for more than a century. Survivors would receive an additional $3,000 for every year they had to attend.

In addition, the federal government must offer a full public apology to victims and their families, set up a truth and reconciliation committee, provide commemorative funds, healing and counselling support, and early payment to the sick and elderly.

A final report on the issue is expected by March of next year.

A total of 19 class action suits on behalf of former residential school students are being held in abeyance pending the settlement.

Gathering of Nations 2006

2005-10-18T09:08:00.000-04:00

from Survival International

2005-09-30T09:40:00.000-04:00

BOTSWANA:
Bushmen leaders beaten in custodyBushman leaders arrested on 24 September were beaten in custody by policemen including the superintendent of the district police station, it has emerged today. They were arrested as they attempted to transport water and food to their relatives in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve.
Link: http://www.survival-international.org/news.php?id=1064

Papua:
Tribal village abandonedA village of the Lani tribe in Papua has been abandoned after Indonesian soldiers attacked in July, forcing the entire population into hiding in the jungle. One man was brutally tortured and another two men were shot during the raid.
Link: http://www.survival-international.org/news.php?id=994

Brazil:
Guarani Indians can keep their landA Brazilian appeals court ruled last week that the Guarani Ñandeva Indians of Yvy Katu can keep their land. This is a great victory for the Indians who returned to Yvy Katu in 2004, having been evicted by landowners about thirty years ago.
Link: http://www.survival-international.org/news.php?id=1053

Survival:
Help save the Bushmen - buy your Boycott De Beers t-shirt
Show your support for the Bushmen, thrown off their diamond-rich lands and dumped in resettlement camps. Buy your Boycott De Beers t-shirt at the link below. 'Boycott De Beers! Or have the destruction of the Bushmen on your conscience.' Oscar-winner Julie Christie.
Link: http://www.boycottdebeers.com/

29 September 2005 e-news from Survival International, supporting tribal peoplesFounded in 1969, registered charity (UK) no. 267444

2005-06-16T10:26:00.000-04:00

Message from Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson
Governor General of Canada on the occasion of Aboriginal Day, June 21, 2005

OTTAWA,
June 15 /CNW Telbec/ -

"Canada's Aboriginal roots have allowed us to flourish as a nation. Throughout our history, the First Nations, Inuit and Métis people have played an important role in shaping our future, in
bridging the gaps of understanding in society and in fostering a better understanding of the broad range of backgrounds that define Canada's diversity.

In addition to inviting us to join them in the vibrant nature of their culture, Aboriginal peoples in Canada continue to share their wisdom in key areas of leadership, sustainability, the arts, social justice and environmental awareness. They advocate not only on behalf of their own communities, but for the betterment of this country as a whole.

Today, as all Canadians celebrate National Aboriginal Day, we hold high regard for the peoples who first called this land home, and whose traditions, cultures and perspectives-still proudly carried on by new generations and thriving across the country-add a brilliant and remarkable facet to Canada's diversity."

Adrienne Clarkson

PROVINCE TO FAST-TRACK

2005-06-16T10:19:00.000-04:00

June 14, 2005
PROVINCE TO FAST-TRACK LAND SETTLEMENTS: LATHLIN- - -

Minister Compares Outstanding Land EntitlementsTo Overdue Accounts Receivable

THE PAS-

Speaking at the annual assembly of the Manitoba Keewatinook Ininew Okimowin (MKO) here today, Aboriginal and Northern Affairs Minister Oscar Lathlin compared outstanding treaty land entitlements (TLEs) to overdue accounts receivable and spoke about the need to fast-track land settlements."The provincial government is committed to creating better access to jobs and training for Aboriginal people along with promoting economic developmentand more opportunities to develop entrepreneurial initiatives," saidLathlin.

"However, one of the keys to creating economic development in Aboriginal communities is to resolve issues such as outstanding treaty land entitlements which have dragged on for over a hundred years in many cases.""We have many such accounts receivable that have been overdue over several generations," said Lathlin.

"In fact, right now, over 1,200,000 acres of real estate is owed by governments to these First Nations. This is not only harmful to bands, but it is harmful to general business development in this province."

Manitoba is constitutionally obligated under the 1930 Manitoba Natural Resource Transfer Agreement (MNRTA) to set aside unoccupied Crown land so that Canada can fulfill its outstanding treaty land entitlements to FirstNations.

Manitoba, under the TLE Framework Agreement, is required to provide Crown land.

Canada is responsible to cover the survey costs and toprovide funds for the acquisition of lands. In Manitoba there are seventreaties signed between Canada and First Nations.

Treaty #1 (1871), Treaty #2 (1871), Treaty #3 (1873), Treaty #4 (1874),Treaty #5 (1875), adhesion to Treaty #5 (1909), Treaty #6 (1898) and Treaty#10 (1906) all have outstanding land claims.

A total of 27 entitled First Nations in Manitoba can select up to 1,085,949 acres of Crown land and purchase land up to 170,368 acres for a total of 1,256,317 acres. To date, Manitoba has transferred to the federal government approximately 200,000 acres of which 94,000 have been set apart as reserveby Canada.

Lathlin noted the transfer of selected land to reserve status takes a long period of time, an issue which needs to be addressed. Prior to the development of an additions to reserve submission, lands must be deemed to be eligible for transfer by both Canada and Manitoba and acceptable to the TLE First Nation.

This process has proven to be very time-consuming. Approximately 500 selections are in various stages in the transfer process.Many TLE selections have numerous issues to resolve such as permitted or leased agricultural land, roads and highways, municipal considerations, lodges, parks and wildlife management areas, forestry interests, hydro and telephone permits and easements, justification for land selections less than1,000 acres, mineral exploration permits and staked claims, areas required for future hydro development and other encumbrances or interests.

Canada is required to conduct an environmental assessment of the property.

All of this must be addressed either through replacement interests that are acceptable to Canada under the federal Additions to Reserves policy or, if not resolved, boundary adjustments are made to exclude the interest, subjectto agreement of all parties.

"Given these challenges, we have made fast-tracking treaty land entitlementa departmental priority," said Lathlin.

"It was for this reason that in therecent provincial budget, our department received support for additional staff to deal directly with TLE implementation."Lathlin noted the Aboriginal Business Summit, hosted by the Premiers Economic Advisory Council last November, made a compelling business argument for fast-tracking TLEs."We are working with the federal government and TLE bands to address this challenge.

Upholding treaty land entitlement and the treaties is ineveryone's' interest. Manitoba cannot truly prosper if Aboriginal people do not prosper," Lathlin concluded.

news release re Lubicon Lake Nation

2005-06-10T11:55:00.000-04:00

What do you mean by "indigenous people"?

2005-05-16T21:33:00.000-04:00

The United Nations often uses a definition from the Martínez-Cobo report for the UN Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination of Minorities (1986):

Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems.

World population
6,301,463,000*

Indigenous peoples in the world
300,000,000**

Tribal peoples in the world
150,000,000***

Distinct indigenous groups
5,000**

Estimated number of tribal groups who have no contact with the wider world
70***

* UN figure for 2003.
** International Fund for Agricultural Development.
*** Survival International

Bill C-31: Discrimination continues 20 years later

2005-05-16T20:41:00.000-04:00

April 17th, 2005 is a significant day for First Nations peoples. It marks 20 years since amendments were made to the Indian Act, commonly known to First Nations as "Bill C-31". It was first introduced in Parliament on April 17, 1985 and it received Royal Assent on June 28, 1985.

To mark the 20th anniversary of the continued discrimination of Bill C-31, the Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) and the Quebec Native Women Inc. (QNW) are planning a protest on Parliament Hill on June 28, 2005. It is well known that Bill C-31 did not alleviate the discrimination within the Indian Act. In fact, the situation has worsened. First Nations children are losing Indian status at an alarming rate because one of their parents is non-status. If something is not done then there will be no more status Indians in the foreseeable future.

NWAC President, Beverley Jacobs, is very concerned over the effects of Bill C-31. "My office is receiving numerous calls related to Bill C-31. I am hearing about women being denied access to their communities as a result of who they married before 1985. I am also hearing about First Nations children being denied Indian status due to unstated paternity. This issue is important to First Nations women across the country. We will continue to advocate for these women until all discrimination is removed from the Indian Act."

Ellen Gabriel, President of the Quebec Native Women Inc. shares similar concerns related to Bill C-31. She states that "Although Bill C-31 was passed 20 years ago, the sexual discrimination that First Nations women have had to endure began with the creation of the 1876 Indian Act. The time to rectify this injustice is long over due. We, as Aboriginal women leaders, must continue to fight for equality of our rights to end this injustice that never should have happened in the first place!"

The discrimination within Bill C-31 is not only a First Nations' women's issue. It is an issue that affects all First Nations citizens. Both male and female children and grandchildren are losing Indian status because one of their parents is non-status.

Since its inception thirty-one years ago, the Native Women's Association of Canada has been the national organization that advocates on behalf of Aboriginal Women in Canada.

Bill C-31 Fact Sheet
On June 28, 1985, Bill C-31, An Act to Amend the Indian Act, received Royal Assent. Bill C-31's purpose was to eliminate sexual discrimination within the Indian Act to bring it in line with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and to respond to Sandra Lovelace's decision from the United Nations Human Rights Commission. The UN recognized that Canada was discriminating against First Nations as a result of the marriage provisions within the Indian Act.

Bill C-31 has many aspects to it. First, Bill C-31 abolished the concept of enfranchisement. It is no longer possible for First Nations to "sell" their Indian status. In addition, Bill C-31 provided for the return of Indian status to those who lost it plus one generation. This second-generation cut-off affects many First Nations.

Dr. Martin Cannon, Professor of Sociology at the University of Saskatchewan, finds that "the Indian Act is responsible for making gender discrimination the foremost of "Aboriginal issues" in the minds of both female and male descendants of women who acquired status under Bill C-31 and who lost it under the historic Indian Act. To me, there is no way to separate 'Aboriginal issues' - those that are of common concern to all Aboriginal people - from 'women's issues'; especially since the history of colonial policy injustices and processes of racialization in what is now called Canada have everything to do with the history of patriarchy and sex discrimination."

Second, First Nations have to apply to have their Indian status reinstated. Indian Affairs was not prepared for the hundreds of thousands of applications for re-instatement. It is now twenty years later and there are still approximately 10,000 people waiting to regain their Indian status.

Third, Bill C-31 created new definitions of status, which reflects the continued discrimination and sexual discrimination in the Indian Act. There are six subsections of Section 6(1). First Nations peoples who were registered prior to 1985 have Section 6(1)(a) status. For those women who regained status, they are registered under Section 6(1)(c). Her children are registered under Section 6(2).

As First Nations marry persons with no Indian status then their children have Section 6(2) status. If a person with Section 6(2) status has a child with a person with no Indian status then their child has no Indian status. Bill C-31 initially increased the First Nations population but as more First Nations have children with non-status people, Bill C-31 will eliminate Indian status in the foreseeable future.

Fourth, under the provisions of Bill C-31, First Nations women must state the status of the father when registering their children. Many First Nations women are having difficulties with having to register her children if she does not want to state the paternity of her children, especially if she is an abusive or violent relationship. According to Bill C-31, if the father of the child is not listed on the birth certificate then Indian Affairs assumes that the father is non-status. Unstated paternity means that the child will either have Section 6(2) status or no Indian status.

Fifth, Bill C-31 gave each First Nations community the right to develop their own membership code. However, each membership code had to be approved by the Minister of Indian Affairs.

All First Nations communities have issues with the lack of resources related to Bill C-31: financial, infrastructure, land and housing. There were concerns that increased First Nations populations would have detrimental effects on already limited lands and resources. The Federal Government should have provided additional lands and resources to offset the increase in First Nations populations.

Finally, since Bill C-31 was introduced, there have been hundreds of cases being litigated in the courts. These cases deal with membership issues, status issues and continued discrimination and sexual discrimination within Bill C-31.

For further information:
Charlene Beatty, Executive Assistant to the President of the Native Women's Association of Canada at (613) 722-3033 ext 225 or Ellen Gabriel, President of the Quebec Native Women Inc. at (450) 632-0088

Aboriginal Advancement

2005-05-12T09:44:00.000-04:00

CIS's New Deal of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders suggests existing deal has been a disaster.

This critique of welfare dependency is similar to Noel Pearson's. It overviews the political and cultural pre-conditions that led to existing situation - and re-evaluates policies developed by Coombs.

His paper A Certain Heritage was seen as a socialist experiment - involving communal land ownership sustained by welfare transfers to create hunter-gatherer utopias that would culminate in a nation independent of the rest of Australia.

Few spoke out against the effect this policy would have on an already vulnerable underclass.

This philosophy led to the creation of 12000 remote communities.

Communal land ownership never supports economic development. Attempting to create hunter-gatherer societies , resulted in remote, fragmented communities that can not sustain jobs and incomes.

64% of NT's indigenous people are now unemployed. The development of culturally sensitive and appropriate education initially in local dialects and only later in English led to function illiteracy. The suggested reform agenda involves winding back on community land title - in favour of leases and freehold. Paper also proposes a literacy corps.

The Coombs model of remote hunter-gatherer communities was reminiscent of Australia's only other utopian experiment (William Lane's venture in Paraguay). The idea of planning for anyone to live in an environment in which investment in basic services was impossible is incomprehensible - especially as the dangers of welfare dependency were becoming apparent in the 1970s.

Coombs (and others) may have confused land rights under a Western legislative model of communal ownership with aboriginal culture. It is a form of paternalistic slumming to suggest that a culture can only survive in a traditional and isolated environment.

All societies that want to develop need to have high living standards, and thus private property rights. There are perverse aspects of hunter-gatherer culture that are not likely to survive contact with modernity (eg ritual violence, witchcraft, necromancy, fatal curses and the belief that most misfortune is the result of malign human intervention requiring payback).

State laws should apply to everyone - and tribal law be discarded (Pearson C 'Slum total of a failed vision', WA, 5/3/05).

Hmm, Continue Reading This Article HERE.

Natives fear election may derail initiatives

2005-05-10T16:22:00.000-04:00

Conservatives prepared to follow through on policy negotiations, Calgary MP says

By BILL CURRY
Monday, May 9, 2005

OTTAWA -- Native leaders are worried that a year's worth of negotiations with Ottawa, set to culminate in a host of policy announcements on May 31, will fall by the wayside if an election is called soon.

"That's a great concern," said Grand Council Chief John Beaucage, president of the Union of Ontario Indians. "A lot of work has gone into this round-table process."

But Conservative MP Jim Prentice said his party would not only follow through with the talks, it would also go ahead with a first ministers meeting on native issues this fall.

In an interview at his Parliament Hill office, the Calgary MP offered assurances that the work would not be lost, although he said he could not commit to announcements that haven't been made.

The rookie MP spent 10 years as a commissioner of the Indian Claims Commission of Canada and has significantly reshaped his party's policies on native issues since taking on the critic's portfolio. Mr. Prentice wrote his party's native policy platform for the next campaign.

He argues that a Conservative government would benefit natives because the Liberals have repeatedly broken their promises to them.

"Frankly, it saddens me. If someone goes through the Throne Speeches and looks at the promises that have been made to aboriginal Canadians and compares it against what has happened, it will not leave you with a good feeling," he said.

During his 20 years as a land-claims negotiator and commissioner, Mr. Prentice said, he visited nearly half of the more than 600 native communities in Canada and is proposing a new system to settle land claims more quickly. The proposal calls for giving the Federal Court more power to settle claims while reducing the power of the Indian Affairs Department over the issue.

The Conservative platform also calls for new laws that would set out the federal government's spending responsibilities for natives.

Mr. Prentice noted that Ottawa currently spends billions for natives on programs normally handled by provinces, such as health care and education, yet there is no law spelling out what services natives should expect.

He pointed to Auditor-General Sheila Fraser's recent report on how Ottawa spends $1.4-billion on native education, noting: "She basically said that it's a complete mess because the government doesn't know why it is spending the money."

The Tory platform calls for more checks to prevent abuses of power by first nations governments, an issue Mr. Prentice acknowledges will need the support of the Assembly of First Nations to avoid a repeat of the protests faced when the Liberals attempted to pass the First Nations Governance Act in 2003.

Mr. Prentice said the Liberals have done nothing since the bill was defeated, although the problems persist.

"I was literally deluged, after I became the critic, with issues and concerns that were brought forward," he said.

"All of them in the vein of accountability and transparency and issues about first nations' finances, and so on."

Mr. Prentice argues that native policy has reached a critical juncture in Canadian history as more people accept that the current system is not working.

"The status quo I don't think is an option. I don't hear anybody saying, 'Let's just keep doing what we're doing, but put more money into it.' "

The Conservative Party, as well as the previous Canadian Alliance and Reform parties, has faced major objections before from native leaders at election time. Controversy has focused on the writings of University of Calgary professor Tom Flanagan, a long-time adviser to Tory Leader Stephen Harper.

Mr. Flanagan has written several books challenging proposals to pardon Louis Riel, and he opposes the extension of native programs to Métis. He has also argued that natives surrendered most of their rights in original land deals.

Clem Chartier, president of the Métis National Council, said Mr. Harper's decision to keep Mr. Flanagan as a senior campaign adviser "does not bode well" for the Métis if the Conservatives are elected.

"If he's going to have any influence in a Conservative government, which obviously he will given the position that he has, our chances of making any progress are slim to nothing," Mr. Chartier said.

Mr. Prentice said he has not discussed the party's native platform with Mr. Flanagan, although he has read Mr. Flanagan's controversial book First Nations? Second Thoughts.

"I recall at the time disagreeing quite profoundly with lots of it," he said. But he defended Mr. Harper's decision to keep the professor in a senior role, saying it is important to separate Mr. Flanagan's role as a political adviser and his views as an academic.

Mr. Beaucage, whose organization of 42 first nations took the unprecedented step of endorsing the Liberal Party in the last election, partly because of Mr. Flanagan's writings, said he was "very heartened" to hear Mr. Prentice distance himself from the professor's statements.

Quotes from a Research Text

2005-04-27T09:31:00.000-04:00

The Original People:
by Robert J. Surtees

(32) Germ Warfare. Re: Aboriginal peoples having no resistance to European diseases.

"Europeans noted this Indian weakness to disease and on occasion military officers deliberately spread disease among dissident tribes. It is difficult to assess the success of these early attempts at germ warfare; but we can note, for example, that a smallpox epidemic struck the Delawares shortly after some handkerchiefs and blanketss from the smallpox hospital at Fort Pitt were distributed by the officers among the Delwares of the region in 1763."

(33) "...considered obstacles in that they possessed land that could be used for settlement."

(34) "... Indians were seen as barriers to progress. Consequently, the British Crown operating through the Indian Department, which continued to exist, made arrangements whereby Indians surrendered land to the Crown, which in turn it sold to the settlers or to land speculators."

(36) "The Indians were to be separated from white society on reserved land."
"The ultimate goal, then, was the assimilation of the Indians into white society. The Indian language, religion, and way of life would be swept aside in favour of white values, religion, and language."

(43) "In the process of expansion Canada also cast off the shackles of British colonial rule and emerged as an independent nation in all respects of her domestic and foreign affairs. Urban and industrial growth coincided with agricultural improvements to produce a progressive, diversified economy, while transcontinental lines of communication, in the form of rail, road, and air transportation, have served both to develop the country and to link its several geographic and economic regions."

"The expansion of Canada’s frontiers meant that lands occupied by Indians in the new territories also came under the control of the Canadian government."

(70) "One basic assumption of Indian policy has always been that Indian society has no chance of survival; nor does it have anything to offer and should therefore be swept aside."

things to consider

2005-04-27T09:17:00.000-04:00

In 1928, a government official predicted Canada would end its "Indian problem" within two generations.

Church-run, government-funded residential schools for native children were supposed to prepare them for life in white society. But the aims of assimilation meant devastation for those who were subjected to physical, sexual and emotional abuse.

Decades later, aboriginal people began to share their stories and demand acknowledgement of – and compensation for – their stolen childhoods. http://archives.cbc.ca/IDD-1-70-692/disasters_tragedies%20/residential_schools/

~~~~~

Keeping in mind that United Nations Genocide Convention--to which Canada became a signatory on November 28, 1949--defines "Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group" as constituting a form of genocide, there can be no doubt that Canadian residential schools fall into this category.

Canadian leaders like Duncan Scott spoke openly about the "Indian problem" in terms similar to Hitler's "Jewish problem":

"I want to get rid of the Indian problem. I do not think as a matter of fact, that this country ought to continuously protect a class of people who are able to stand alone. That is my whole point. Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic, and there is no Indian question..." ...

What explains the cruelty of Canada's colonists?
As is so often the case, greed is a sufficient explanation.

In order to gain access to grazing land, timber and mineral riches, it was necessary to get rid of the native population.

Legal indigenous ownership of the land was undeniable. The only way to break their control was through war, treaty or termination of the legal line of descendants. http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/indian/chrisjohn.htm

2005-04-24T09:05:00.000-04:00

Auditor's Report
Highlights of a November, 2004 auditor's report from Sheila Fraser, a portion of which examined money spent on funding native education across Canada:

While the Indian and Northern Affairs Department did some studies and began a few new programs, it made little progress on a range of problems cited in 2000, including a large gap in the number of native vs. non-native high school graduates.

The time estimated to close that education gap had actually grown slightly, from 27 to 28 years.

The department couldn't say whether the more than $1 billion it spends funding native education is enough, and whether the results are acceptable.

There is a large young native population. About 40 per cent of the registered Indian population is under 19, compared with 25 per cent in the Canadian population.

Most native schools are in communities with fewer than 500 residents, making it difficult to offer a range of services.

The department should clarify its duties and goals, and better track funding.

Agenda 21, Chapter 26

2005-04-16T12:02:00.000-04:00

Recognizing And Strengthening The Role Of Indigenous People And Their Communities

Basis for action

26.1 Indigenous people and their communities have an historical relationship with their lands and are generally descendants of the original inhabitants of such lands. In the context of this chapter the term "lands" is understood to include the environment of the areas which the people concerned traditionally occupy. Indigenous people and their communities represent a significant percentage of the global population. They have developed over many generations a holistic traditional scientific knowledge of their lands, natural resources and environment. Indigenous people and their communities shall enjoy the full measure of human rights and fundamental freedoms without hindrance or discrimination. Their ability to participate fully in sustainable development practices on their lands has tended to be limited as a result of factors of an economic, social and historical nature. In view of the interrelationship between the natural environment and its sustainable development and the cultural, social, economic and physical well-being of indigenous people, national and international efforts to implement environmentally sound and sustainable development should recognize, accommodate, promote and strengthen the role of indigenous people and their communities.

26.2 Some of the goals inherent in the objectives and activities of this programme area are already contained in such international legal instruments as the ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (No. 169) and are being incorporated into the draft universal declaration on indigenous rights, being prepared by the United Nations working group on indigenous populations. The International Year for the World's Indigenous People (1993), proclaimed by the General Assembly in its resolution 45/164 of 18 December 1990, presents a timely opportunity to mobilize further international technical and financial cooperation.

Continue reading this Document Here.

Aborigine threat to sports event

2005-04-15T09:14:00.000-04:00

By Phil Mercer
BBC News, Sydney

Australian Aborigines have threatened to disrupt next year's Commonwealth Games unless Prime Minister John Howard is charged with genocide.

Indigenous elders have lodged a writ in the High Court calling for the federal government to be investigated for crimes against native Australians.

Aboriginal groups have said they will target the Commonwealth Games in Melbourne as part of their campaign.

They are also calling on other nations to consider boycotting the event.

Campaigners complain that Australia's conservative government has not only failed to address the suffering of the indigenous population, but has done so on purpose.

They want to bring Mr Howard, as well as the federal attorney general and the police commissioner, to account.

Aboriginal leaders have alleged that, in recent years, there has been a deliberate and systematic destruction of native people.

Aborigines suffer disproportionately high rates of early death, imprisonment and unemployment.

Poverty has caused many communities to self-destruct through the abuse of drugs and alcohol, as well as petrol-sniffing.

But the government says spending on indigenous healthcare is at record levels, and there are more black students entering further education.

Senior ministers have insisted that aboriginal issues are a priority.

Like Jews, natives know that racism hurts

2005-04-15T09:11:00.000-04:00

National Post
Thursday, April 14, 2005

Re: 'Jewish Media' Ignore Violence Against Natives, Chief
Alleges, April 12.

The Assembly of First Nations (AFN) and First Nations across the
country reject the comments made by Chief Terrance Nelson of Roseau
River First Nations regarding Jewish people and the Jewish community. We
completely disagree with the comments made about the potential for
increased violence due to media coverage and categorically reject any
suggestion that problems should be resolved through violent means. I have
spoken to Chief Nelson to convey our concerns and I am encouraging him to
do everything he can to foster constructive and positive relationships.

The controversy about Mr. Nelson's statements is particularly
disturbing because no group in Canadian society is more familiar with
racism, racial hatred and violence than the First Nations. Not only do our
people put up with individual acts of discrimination on a daily basis,
we continuously struggle with the effects of systemic discrimination
designed to wipe out our languages and culture. And according to the
Native Women's Association of Canada, more than 500 aboriginal women have
gone missing over the past decade, yet there is no national outcry. What
could be more violent and discriminating than that?

We constantly fight negative stereotyping in the mass media along
with unbalanced and ill-informed reporting. Our people suffer in Third
World conditions while our governments receive ever-diminishing
resources, yet politicians and editors call for "more accountability."

There is certainly a need for greater public education about
issues such as the Holocaust. As well, we need public education about the
history of First Peoples in Canada and the cultural genocide perpetrated
by the Indian Residential Schools. Our goal in learning about one
another, however, is to build bridges, not to burn them or to block them.
There is no place for over-the-top rhetoric or unacceptable statements.

First Nations, Jews, gays and lesbians, Muslims, people of colour
and others are targeted by hate mongers because of our differences. We
must support each other and in so doing we will send a strong message
to those who would discriminate against us.

Phil Fontaine, National Chief, Assembly of First Nations, Ottawa.

© National Post 2005

Paraguay tribe faces bleak future

2005-04-10T08:53:00.000-04:00

By Tom Gibb
BBC News, Sao Paulo

Lawmakers in Paraguay have refused to protect a forest which is home to
one of the last uncontacted Indian tribes in the region.

Conservationists condemned the decision by congress - and warned it could spell the end for the Ayoreo tribe.

They say the move opens the way for cattle-ranchers and loggers, who are already encroaching on the land.

They accused the government of ignoring constitutional guarantees of land rights for indigenous peoples.

Endangered habitat

The Ayoreo are one of South America's last uncontacted group of Indians living south of the Amazon.

Their word for white people means, literally, "people who do strange
things".

Looking at their recent history it is not hard to see why.

First, many were hunted out of the forest by Protestant missionaries who
argued this was necessary to save their souls.

More recently, cattle-ranchers and settlers have been bulldozing the
forest and fencing off land which the Paraguayan government sold them
for almost nothing.

Today, only six or seven family groups of Ayoreo are thought to still be
surviving in the forest, hunting wild pig and anteaters with spears.

The London-based group Survival International, which campaigns for
indigenous rights, said the latest decision by congress to reject the
creation of a reserve would spell the end for the Ayoreo - forcing them
to become day workers on ranches.

This is what has happened to most of those who have already left the
forest, many of whom live in camps in abject poverty.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/4426581.stm

Published: 2005/04/08 21:55:17 GMT

ALSO:
Paraguayan Indians fight for rights

07 Mar 01 | Americas
Desperate plight of Paraguayan Indians

11 Mar 01
Human Rights Commission worried about Paraguay

31 Jul 99 | Americas
Country profile: Paraguay

04 Feb 05 | Country profiles

RELATED INTERNET LINKS:
Survival International

Martin's chance to atone for native abuse

2005-04-02T18:05:00.000-05:00

Mar. 31, 2005. 01:00 AM

Martin's chance to atone for native abuse

JAMES TRAVERS

If they stop worrying about the next election for a couple of
minutes, federal Liberals could seize an unusually promising moment to
make amends for a mistake that ruined thousands of lives and now stalks
the nation's conscience.

Fresh from an Easter break, Parliament will be seized next week
with the issue of Indian residential schools and the well-intentioned
but fatally flawed process of compensating thousands of native students
who over 150 years were beaten, raped and sodomized.

A Prime Minister far more attuned to aboriginal issues than his
predecessors or, for that matter, most Canadians, will then face a
choice:

He can listen to one of his most powerful ministers and stay on
the course or bow to opposition pressure to steer policy in another,
more positive direction.

Here's how the arguments and opposing forces stack up:

On one side is the almost singular voice of Deputy Prime Minister
Anne McLellan insisting the increasingly controversial Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR) process is doing its job and, after a corrective
nip and tuck, should continue its work.

On the other are some 12,000 victims, the powerful Assembly of
First Nations and an unusual alignment of lawyers and opposition
politicians who agree the system is so costly, slow and adversarial that it
must be junked.

What makes this fight unfair is the evidence.

Along with survivors' stories that rip the smugness out of being
Canadian, a parliamentary committee scrutinizing ADR and the department
created to deliver compensation was told the greatest beneficiaries are
government lawyers, not those wrenched, sometimes by force, from their
homes in a savagely misguided attempt at cultural assimilation.

Instead of closing wounds, victims find themselves reopening them
to justify awards that are often so small they seem mean-spirited.
Worse still, 50 of the 87,500 remaining school survivors die each week
while only about 50 cases have been resolved since 2003.

The cumulative effect of that evidence was so compelling that a
compromise Conservative motion was adopted by the committee after a
determined filibuster by Pat Martin, the Winnipeg NDP MP who brought out
the histrionic worst in McLellan during her testimony.

If it passes a minority Parliament, as it should, that fix will
foist on Liberals and the bureaucracy a load of unpleasantness rich with
memories of the gun registry fiasco.

Among more than two dozen other things, it asks Auditor-General
Sheila Fraser to take an intrusive look at how Indian Resolution Schools
Canada spends its money.

Some witnesses told the committee that process so completely
dominates results that the sole-purpose department is spending about $4 on
administration for every $1 it pays victims.

Martin's way out of a mess that is also a national shame is
relatively painless.

As almost everyone with intimate knowledge of the system advises,
the solution lies not in wasting millions ensuring no one gets one cent
more than warranted but in righting a wrong, on healing and
reconciliation.

Negotiation is what's needed now to reach all-party agreement on
the solution to a problem largely created when lawyers and bureaucrats
hijacked a system originally designed to help some of this society's
most vulnerable people.

Its component parts include blanket compensation for the loss of
language and culture suffered by every student, an apology that would
cost nothing but mean a lot and recognition that the most egregious
abuse cases can only be resolved in the courts.

No solution is perfect and nothing will erase the harm that began
with individuals before infecting generations.

But the solution now missing only the courage of leadership is
immeasurably superior to a status quo that is grudging, hurtful and
results in more cases ending in death than in justice.

James Travers writes on national affairs. His column appears
Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. jtraver@thestar.ca.

Native land policy faces overhaul

2005-03-30T09:06:00.000-05:00

By BILL CURRY
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

Ottawa — Breaking with the traditional communal approach to first nations' lands, the federal government will endorse private ownership of land and housing on reserves as part of a package of new aboriginal policies to be unveiled this spring.

Federal and aboriginal officials are also expected to announce an overhaul of native education, including support for a national system of school boards and greater links between native schools and provincial education ministries.

The new land policy likely will include rules barring non-natives from buying on-reserve properties.

Introducing private housing markets for reserves would mark a significant policy change for the federal government.

Ottawa intends to set up a new entity, expected to be called a first nations housing authority, that would handle mortgages and assist band councils in creating real estate markets on reserves.

Advocates argue that property ownership would allow aboriginals to accumulate personal equity that could then be used to help finance business ventures or higher education. It is also expected it would encourage individuals to voluntarily make repairs to their on-reserve houses, rather than rely on band councils or Ottawa for such work.

The Auditor-General has warned the lack of quality housing on reserves has reached "crisis" levels.

Some of Canada's 633 reserves allow private ownership of property, but most continue to operate on a communal system in which the federal government owns the land and the band council manages the housing supply with money from Ottawa.

Former Indian affairs minister Andy Mitchell rejected private ownership last year as contrary to aboriginal tradition, but his successor, Andy Scott, has embraced the notion.

The Assembly of First Nations has recently come to support the move — as long as some form of first nations' housing authority run by aboriginals will make the rules and mortgage decisions. The AFN also wants the federal government to continue funding social housing for aboriginals, both on reserves and off.

Phil Fontaine, national chief of the AFN, said chiefs had traditionally opposed private ownership because they saw it as undermining Ottawa's treaty obligations to provide shelter for aboriginals.

"People have been conditioned to consider [communal ownership] as the only option," he said. "Private ownership is not something that was ever central to the government's housing strategy as it relates to first nations. That can be achieved, in our view, without alienating first nations' [concepts of] land."

Mr. Fontaine said he is urging the government to set up a native-run agency that would replace existing federal housing programs and oversee a move toward private ownership and improved social housing.

Private ownership would diminish divisions on reserves over housing, he added. "We need to de-politicize this as much as we can. Chief and council are expected to determine who gets a house, and that's not something chiefs and councils ever wanted."

The private ownership idea is currently included in discussions and draft documents by senior officials working on a series of announcements for a special cabinet retreat on aboriginal issues, sources say.

At the retreat, set for May 31, federal officials and aboriginal groups are also expected to outline their plans for native education. Further details involving links with the provinces would be announced in the fall at a special first ministers' meeting on aboriginal issues between Prime Minister Paul Martin and the premiers.

Currently, the more than 500 on-reserve schools operate in a legal vacuum with no national standards or curriculum. While some reserves have bodies similar to school boards and links with provincial education ministries, most do not.

But, privately, government officials are confirming that no new money will be announced at the retreat to go along with the new policies.

Instead, aboriginals will be asked to wait until the fall first ministers meeting — or even the next budget — for funding commitments.

Still, Mr. Fontaine said he has taken recent comments by federal officials to mean money would be announced at the cabinet retreat.

"We're pressing very hard to have some spending announcements, because that was the understanding . . . that we were to expect positive decisions would be taken at the cabinet retreat and then further positive decisions at the first ministers' meeting," he said.

Until recently, mainly conservative groups, such as the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, had advocated private ownership on reserves.

Tanis Fiss, director of the CTF's centre for aboriginal policy change, praised the news that the government is open to promoting market forces on reserves.

"We'd really like to see them go down that path, because, obviously, it gives native Canadians more control within their community," she said, pointing to Ontario's Six Nations reserve west of Toronto as having successfully created its own real estate market.

"It provides far more options and flexibility within the communities as well as more stability, because under the current system, it's often the chief and council who decides who lives where and who gets the home renovations."

Government insiders say issues to be discussed at the cabinet retreat have been complicated by the AFN's insistence that the retreat also include a final resolution to the question of residential schools compensation. Mr. Fontaine has put blanket compensation for all former students of residential schools at the top of his priority list, a plan that would cost nearly $6-billion.

Media Advisory - Assembly of First Nations to Hold Special Chiefs Assembly

2005-03-29T10:41:00.000-05:00

Media Advisory - Assembly of First Nations to Hold Special Chiefs
Assembly on the Recognition and Implementation of First Nations Governments
from March 29-31, 2005

OTTAWA, March 28 /CNW Telbec/ - The Assembly of First Nations will
hold a
Special Chiefs Assembly in Vancouver, British Columbia from March
29-31, 2005.
The Assembly will deal with the Recognition and Implementation of First Nations Governments, creating the critical path and concrete action plan that will lead to real self-government and self-determination for First Nations.

This process was undertaken by the AFN under the direction of Chiefs in Assembly, and is fundamental to the AFN's activities in follow-up to the Prime Minister's Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Round Table held last April. This activity is leading to a Cabinet Retreat between the Paul Martin government and First Nations leaders later this spring, as well as a full First Ministers Meeting, expected to take place in the Fall of 2005.

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Phil Fontaine will address the Chiefs in Assembly at 2 pm on Tuesday, March 29th.

Dates: Tuesday March 29, 2005 - Thursday March 31, 2005
Location: Renaissance Vancouver Hotel Harbourside (1133 West Hastings Street, Vancouver, BC)

Media does not have to register in advance, but will need to present credentials/identification at the Assembly.

Further information on the Special Chiefs Assembly is available on the Assembly of First Nations' website at http://www.afn.ca/article.asp?id=354.
The Assembly of First Nations is the national organization representing First Nations citizens in Canada.

For further information: on Kelly, AFN Communications Director,
613-241-6789 ext. 320 or cell 613-292-2787; Ian McLeod, AFN Bilingual
Communications Officer, 613-241-6789 ext. 336 or cell 613-859-4335;
Nancy
Pine, Communications Advisor, Office of the National Chief,
613-241-6789 ext.
243 or cell 613-298-6382

humor?

2005-03-24T15:29:00.000-05:00

Yes, Chief
By James Wastasecoot

Somewhere in the bush
Chief:
Good morning.

Band Mgr:
Good morning, Chief.

Chief:
What's on the agenda this week?

BM:
It's a light agenda. The bottled water problem, and your aunt who wants compensation for her dog.

Chief:
Her dog? I'm the Chief, I deal with matters relating to the nation, our relations with Canada. Not goddam dog problems for cripes sake.

BM:
Well, she's your aunt Chief. Remember what happened last time.

Chief:
That happened because I was out of town. Because I can't trust you people to handle the simplest things. All you had to do was tell her the goddam truck would be fixed.

BM:
It was totalled Chief. And she had no insurance. And the council members wouldn't review it and she called the band meeting.

Chief:
Yeah, I know the story. And the band meeting turned into an election and I had to go out and spend a goddam fortune to get my job back. Plus buy her a new truck. And for what? So I can solve dog problems? Anyway, what's wrong with her dog then?

BM:
It died chief.

Chief:
And???

BM:
Well, her note states the dog was out in the yard with other dogs, uh, it was in heat. And it states: "that dogs need to have a piece of tail once in awhile too, just like people." Anyway the constable shot the dogs and she wants compensation of $100.00.

Chief:
Good grief, man. Why did the constable have to shoot them anyway?

BM:
Your memo of last month, Chief. It was pretty clear. "Shoot any stray dog that you see that is not leashed or tied up."

Chief:
Right. Did you draft that?

BM:
No Chief. You dictated it to the receptionist and she sent it on.

Chief:
Well in future, don't allow me to do that. If it happens again, you will be held responsible. You got that?

BM:
Yes, chief. She's sent the note to the newspaper.

Chief:
Yeah, well, the newspaper won't have the balls to print it…

BM:
They printed it this morning, Chief.

Chief:
What?

BM:
It's in the letters section.

Chief:
Okay, let's call the council in and pass a policy on this today.

BM:
What about the bottled water shortage chief?

Chief:
Let them drink tap water this week.

BM:
Yes, chief.

Quotes

2005-02-27T01:27:00.000-05:00

When you wonder what your purpose in life is, or what your work is....
consider this:
No matter what else you may choose to do with your life ...
if in all or most of your waking moments you are experiencing joy, then you have fulfilled your purpose for coming to this lifetime.
And you are making a HUGE and positive difference to the planet and all living creatures upon it.
- Chief Joseph

When the Earth is sick, the animals will begin to disappear, when that happens, The
Warriors of the Rainbow will come to save them.
~Chief Seattle ~

"Lose your temper and you lose a friend; lie and you lose yourself."
~Hopi

As I walk, as I walk
The universe is walking with me
In beauty it walks before me
In beauty it walks behind me
In beauty it walks below me
In beauty it walks above me
Beauty is on every side
As I walk, I walk with Beauty.
- Traditional Navajo Prayer

If you talk to the animals they will talk with you and you will know each other. If you do not talk to them you will not know them, and what you do not know you will fear. What one fears one destroys.
- Chief Dan George

PHILIPPINES : Subanen families face eviction

2005-02-25T21:13:00.000-05:00

Feb 24 2005

Eighty-six families of the Subanen tribe are being threatened with eviction from their ancestral land by the Canadian mining company TVI.

The families have all received letters from the company saying, ‘we demand that you leave the company premises' or face court action.

The Subanen have been campaigning for many years to have TVI removed from their land; the company operates an open-pit gold mine. Under Philippine law it is illegal for anyone to enter the Subanen's land without their permission.

These latest threats come after a series of violent attacks on the Subanen, including the shooting of four picketers in March 2004.

In a statement in 1997 the Subanen Timu-ays (leaders) said, ‘Our land is sacred. It is the source of our daily needs, and most of all our ancestors have been buried here. Land is the source of life for all creatures and things.'

The Subanen, or people of the river, are the most numerous of the Philippines' tribal peoples, numbering 300,000. They are scattered across the mountains of the Zamboanga peninsula, which they believe was the land given to them by God. They live in small agricultural communities and practice shifting cultivation.

Over the last century their land has been settled by outsiders; more recently, there has been a second invasion of logging and mining companies.

The Subanen's protests have been brutally suppressed by the Philippine army, and many Subanen have been forced to leave their homes to escape the army presence.

"Didn't We Get Rid of Those People Years Ago?"

2005-02-11T13:40:00.000-05:00

"Just when you thought we'd killed all the Indians, one pops up talkin' some shit like this, and reminds you that we didn't finish the job after all."

Reflections on Empire and Uppity Indians
By TIM WISE
February 9, 2005.

I should have known better than to listen in to the conversation immediately to my left, sitting as I was in the Northwest Airlines World Club, in Detroit.

Unlike most of the folks who have paid their $450 for an annual membership--which entitles one to little more than some free booze, cheese, crackers and coffee, along with a comfy chair between flights--I am hardly, after all, the typical "business traveler."

I usually spend my time in such places, hastily composing one or another radical screed (like this one), while waiting to fly somewhere to deliver a speech that will, in some small way, move forward the cause of social transformation.

This is not the purpose for which the guy talking about mutual funds in the cubicle next to me, is here.

But this time, I couldn't avoid hearing the discussion between the two men, appropriately white and with matching blue suits and red power ties, whose familiarity with a bottle of scotch had apparently reached intimate proportions.

They were ruminating on the recent goings on at the University of Colorado, where Ethnic Studies professor, Ward Churchill is under siege for an article he composed back in the immediate aftermath of 9/11; an essay in which Churchill sought to explain that a nation really ought not be surprised when its policies abroad--which have resulted in the slaughter of millions of innocent civilians--cause some in those nations to "push back" and seek to exact a similar collective death upon the people of that first country.

While Churchill's essay was indelicate in places, it was hardly more so than any of the bloodthirsty things said by representatives of the state or the denizens of talk radio around that same time--folks who were itching to level Afghanistan, turn the Arab world into a parking lot, or, as Bill O'Reilly put it, put a bullet to the heads of any Afghans who weren't sufficiently supportive of our ousting the Taliban for them.

I remember reading Ward's missive at the time, and being bothered by the "little Eichmanns" reference (for those who worked in the World Trade Center), not because I thought Churchill actually believed these folks deserved to die, but because I knew the statement would be taken out of context and used to smear not only him, but the larger left of which we are both a part. In other words, Ward was perhaps guilty of naiveté, assuming that people are far more capable of discerning nuance and irony than they really are.

But to the two men in the World Club, he was guilty of a lot more than that. To them, Churchill's most egregious crime was not having died, "like all the other Indians."

I shit you not. One of the men, fuming about the article that now has Ward facing down the barrel of a Board of Trustees looking for any reason to fire him, despite tenure, turned to the other and said: "Just when you thought we'd killed all the Indians, one pops up talkin' some shit like this, and reminds you that we didn't finish the job after all."

White guy number two laughs, in fact, damn near spits Dewar's and soda all over the leather barca lounger he's plopped down in, finding this affable romanticizing of genocide to be the funniest fucking thing he has apparently had the luxury of hearing, at least since the last time he and his buddies sat around in a sports bar, farting, and trading jokes about fags, or some such thing.

I was stunned, because just one day before, I had speculated, only half-seriously, during an interview with KPFK in Los Angeles, that this anti-Indian sentiment might lay beneath some of the vitriol aimed Ward's way. After all, the attacks on him have seemed so personal, so vicious, so much worse than even the histrionics normally leveled at white leftists like Chomsky, or Parenti, or Zinn, who said much the same thing about 9/11 after that fateful day. The bombast has seemed to include an unhealthy dose of racial resentment--absolute rage--at the notion that a person of color and an Indian no less, should dare to condemn the American empire.

"Didn't we get rid of those people years ago?" One can almost hear the refrain, as if broadcast from a loudspeaker.

"Goddamit, be silent," comes the stare from others, or the words themselves.

"Don't make us go all Trail of Tears on your ass. Don't make us send out those smallpox-infected blankets again. Remember, we still got some of that stuff in a vial at the Centers for Disease Control. Do NOT make us break that shit out, 'cuz we'll do it."

"Oh the ingratitude! Here we are, honoring your ancestors by naming sports mascots after your people, and this is how one of yours repays us? Oh, hell no, not today Chief!"

Even having concluded that racism was part of the reason for the overwrought reaction to Churchill, I was utterly unprepared to hear my suspicions confirmed in such a manner; probably because I've grown so accustomed to white people lying about their racist views, going out of their way in fact to deny them, at least around others. As such, I couldn't even think of what to say.

My inclination was to ask for the guy's business card, pretending to have liked his comment, and then send his address and phone number to the American Indian Movement, so they could harass his pretty white ass for a few months.

But in the end, all I did was glare, a gesture the meaning of which I'm sure was lost on them both, lubricated as they were on second-rate blended whiskey.

And while these two guys might not be representative of the masses of people so driven to distraction by Churchill's commentary, I have little doubt but that, like the rest of the teeming hordes out to see him fired, they regularly shrug off comments about civilian deaths being justified, when made by representatives of their own side.

More to the point, they glibly accept, as a consequence of war, the deaths themselves (not merely talk about them) as justified, as in Iraq, where even the lowest of low-ball estimates places the numbers of these around 15,000, and where the highest reach above 100,000.

So what? they might say, in a tone and manner little different from that echoed in the caves of Afghanistan that have served as a home for bin Laden all these years.

They surely are not bothered by pundit Ann Coulter's recent comments, to the effect that we should "nuke North Korea," so as to "send a message" to the rest of the world, and because it would be, in her words, "fun."
Continue reading this Article HERE.

Canada Launches Attack to Deny Indigenous Rights

2005-02-11T13:31:00.000-05:00

February 10, 2005

The Canadian government launched a shameless attack on the mention of the rights of Indigenous peoples in international documents under discussion at the Convention on Biological Diversity's (CBD) SBSTTA meeting.

The SBSTTA is the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice to the Conference of the Parties of the CBD.

In the parties discussion of the program of work on Island biodiversity related to access to genetic resources and benefit sharing, Canada proposed to remove any reference to the rights of Indigenous peoples over their traditional knowledge stating they "cannot accept any requirementsto establish legal rights."

Canada is attempting to remove the contact group's recommendation that a priority action for the Convention is to"develop and implement legislation for the respect and protection of Indigenous and local communities rights."

The Canadian delegate proposed alternative language to minimally "develop and implement mechanisms to share equitably with Indigenous and local communities the benefits arising from the use of their knowledge."

This action contradicts an existing decision of the COP that binds member states to meet a target goal that states, "By 2010, to protect traditional knowledge, innovations and practices and the rights of indigenous and local communities over their traditional knowledge, innovations, and practices, including their rights to benefit sharing."

Indigenous peoples' organizations in attendance were outraged by yet another attempt by Canada to deny their rights.

Debra Harry, director ofthe Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism recalls Canada pulled a similar tactic at the COP discussion on access and benefit sharing in Kuala Lumpur last year. "They refused our proposal that parties "shall recognize and respect the rights of Indigenous peoples" in the elaboration of an international regime on access and benefit sharing.

Despite broad support from the other delegations, Canada blocked consensus."

In the end,the COP approved watered-down language that "the international regime should recognize and shall respect the rights of indigenous and local communities."Final discussions will conclude tomorrow and recommendations will be forwarded to the next COP meeting in Brazil in 2006.

Nevertheless, Indigenous peoples are preparing for similar attacks on the same subject during discussions next week during the Working Group on Access and Benefit Sharing.

Le`a Kanehe, an Indigenous participant from Hawai`isaid, "Some governments would like free and open access to the genetic resources and traditional knowledge of Indigenous peoples. We have to be prepared to defend our territories and right of self-determination in these international forums."

For further information, contact:
Debra Harry by email at dharry@ipcb.org
Le`a Kanehe by email at lkanehe@aol.com

"Responsibility & Jurisdiction" In Aboriginal Education

2005-02-03T20:38:00.000-05:00

“Responsibility & Jurisdiction” In Aboriginal Education
By Irene Goodwin

The Privy Council Office made the following statement in a document entitled: Urban Aboriginal Strategy: An Analysis

“Urban Aboriginal people, for the most part have been left behind in term’s of benefiting from Canada’s economic prosperity, and sadly, they have been neglected too often by governments that argue the semantics of responsibility.”

Interesting statement, isn’t it?
- neglected by governments that argue the semantics of responsibility~

In treaty negotiations First Nations agreed to share an immense and rich land with European immigrants – in return, the Crown committed itself to major responsibilities in the areas of health, economic development and education.

With respect to education, the Crowns responsibility included 3 key provisions:

1) establishment of schools
2) equal educational outcomes
3) choice

So… #1:
In the treaties Canada is obligated to fund First Nation institutions…

Instead of carrying out this responsibility, the Canadian government did what?

- They used churches and established residential schools.
- Later, they paid schools – under Provincial Jurisdiction to accept First Nation students… and we are still here today.

In the 70s, the push for Indian Control of Indian Education began.
(Let’s not forget that Canada has a moral and legal obligation to fund First Nations educational institutes.)

Now… #2.
Equal educational outcomes…
The standard for educational outcome is higher then equal access or equal resources for education. It requires both – as well as Institutions, structures, curriculum, and pedagogy that are educationally effective for who we are.

Equal educational outcome means that the proportion of First Nation university graduates match that of the general population…
It’s easy to see, this has not been achieved.

#3.Choice.
Choice is by definition a key ingredient in self-determination, and First Nations have made it clear from the beginning that they reserve the right to adopt and adapt education on their own terms.

~
So what’s the problem?

Well, the Canadian government interpretation of its treaty obligations was based on an assumption that education would be used as a tool for assimilation.

But First Nations saw and continue to see education as a tool of self-determination.

~Obviously, very differing view points.~

Ok, let’s explore this…

Apparently the question of who is constitutionally responsible for handling “Aboriginal issues” depends on where Aboriginal people live and what their status is…

There is a nice big debate about this between the federal, provincial, territorial and Aboriginal governments. It’s all about jurisdiction.

For First Nation people residing off reserve and Metis and non-status Indians, jurisdiction becomes crucial.

Federal responsibility for off reserve Status Indians is unclear.

The Penner Report in 1983 concluded that the “continuing responsibilities” of the federal government should be extended to Indians living off-reserve.

Over 20 years later, jurisdiction and status issues are still unresolved.

Section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982 defines Aboriginal peoples as the “Indian, Inuit and Metis peoples of Canada,”.

Yet the federal government’s policy, is that its responsibility, with a few exceptions, extends only to Indian people resident on reserve, while provincial governments have a general responsibility for Aboriginal people living off-reserve.

Aboriginal peoples believe that the federal government has a responsibility to all Aboriginal people, including non-status Indians and Metis.

The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Report called this failure of federal and provincial governments to accept, clarify and coordinate their jurisdictional roles and responsibility a “policy vacuum”.

Why?

The Department of Indian and Northern Affairs has a responsibility to meet the federal governments constitutional, legal, treaty and political responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Northerners.

Yet, does not acknowledge a legal or constitutional responsibility to off-reserve, non-status Indians and Metis.

Most provinces maintain a policy that it is the federal government who has primary jurisdiction – and financial responsibility over all of Canada’s Aboriginal peoples – including those that are off-reserve, the non-status and Metis.

It’s as clear as mud… Or is it?

In 1999, there was a ruling in the Supreme Court of Canada that extended the right of band members living off reserve to vote in band elections in provisions of the Indian Act.

Does anyone remember that one?It was the Corbiere decision.

This ruling was simple.
Discrimination based on residency violated section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

At the time, the office of the Federal Interlocutor for the Metis and Non-Status Indians commented that this ruling:
“is going to change the face of Aboriginal politics significantly.”

First Nation governments have always maintained that Aboriginal and Treaty rights are not confined to the reserve. We believe rights are portable and First Nations government authority extends beyond reserve boundaries.

~Responsibility & jurisdiction – and Aboriginal education.~

That mud kinda feels like clay, now doesn’t it?

This little “policy vacuum”.

Does anyone suffer from this?
Anyone???

Does anyone know how many Aboriginal people live off-reserve – the people like me, who live among you, in urban centres like Thunder Bay, right across this country?

According to the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, (Oct 2003) there are just under 1 million Aboriginal people in Canada (census 2001) with almost 2/3rds of them living off-reserve and in urban centres.

That’s a pretty big policy vacuum to me…

There was a program recently on the Passionate Eye. Did anyone catch it? It was an Anti-Racism workshop by Jane Elliot?

She makes a very simple observation in saying that:

“Even Nice Canadians Are Racist”. - Jane Elliot

I hear a lot of people counter the argument about “the past” as something they had nothing to do with – and are therefore not responsible for.

“If an injustice was done back then, who cares? We are living in the here and now – why don’t you people just give it up?”

But guess what?

Those policies that allow injustices and inequalities continue to exist.

If you call yourself Canadians – then you are responsible for the continued existence of those policies, as well as the problems they create.

Now let me ask you, are you “nice Canadians”?

I’m hoping you are not nice Canadians, because nice Canadians would sit back and do nothing.

My Indigenous Hero

2005-01-31T13:20:00.000-05:00

Dr. Taiaiake Alfred
"A man to be honored for upholding his beliefs." -- Astral Wolf
Visit his website: http://www.taiaiake.com/

Please read the following article:

February 2005
First renewals of Canada Research Chairs stir up gender issue
by Rosanna Tamburri

As appointments to the Canada Research Chairs program come up for renewal for the first time since its inception four years ago, universities are being urged to use this as an opportunity to appoint more women to the program. And one male chair holder is urging his university to appoint a woman to the chair, instead of renewing him in the position.

In December the CRC secretariat began accepting nominations to renew Tier 2 positions that are nearing the end of their first five-year term. Universities are expected to submit more renewal nominations in 2005. “We have impressed upon universities that this could in fact be an opportunity to look at submitting women candidates for positions that might open up,” said Julie Dompierre, CRC’s senior program manager.

As of early January, universities had submitted 10 nominations for renewal out of a possible 57, and all were men.

The Canadian Association of University Teachers asked the CRC secretariat to delay renewals until the chairs secretariat has had a chance to investigate some of the grievances already raised about the program. A group of women professors filed a complaint two years ago with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, alleging the program discriminates against women and possibly some minority groups. The commission has appointed an investigator to review the complaint and determine whether the case should be referred to a tribunal.

Although the number of women awarded Canada Research Chairs has started to increase, in earlier rounds of appointments the proportion of women appointees was below that of women in academia. The complaint blamed the inequity in part on the two-tiered structure of the program. Tier 1 chairs are awarded to experienced researchers while Tier 2 positions are intended for promising junior faculty members. In some cases, though, universities appointed full professors to Tier 2 chairs, edging out potential women nominees.

Women account for about 27 percent of all faculty members but they make up a greater proportion of junior faculty; they account for about 30 percent of associate professors and more than 40 percent of assistant professors.

In the most recent round of appointments announced in November 2004, women were named to a record 35 percent of the 194 chairs awarded. Of the 1,348 chairs awarded since the program began four years ago, 270 chairs, or 20 percent, have gone to women.

Wendy Robbins, visiting scholar at CAUT and one of eight professors who filed the complaint, cheered the progress but urged the CRC and universities not to perpetuate existing inequities.

“We think that renewing the chairs presents an opportunity to get it right,” she said. “We’re hoping that some of those [Tier 2 chairs] that went to full professors, who were men, would certainly be scrutinized carefully before they are renewed.”

At least one male professor has offered to give up his Tier 2 chair to make way for a woman nominee. “Given the objectives of the program it would make more sense to have a younger indigenous woman scholar have this position,” said Taiaiake Alfred, a Canada Research Chair in the Studies of Indigenous Peoples at the University of Victoria. Dr. Alfred said UVic has two First Nations scholars, both male, while the majority of their students are women. He added that as a tenured full professor, he no longer is suited for a Tier 2 position, but he acknowledged that this would also mean an extra position in First Nations studies at the university.

“We need a woman scholar here,” he said, adding that he hopes his actions will set an example for others to follow.

The CRC secretariat has changed the nomination rules to discourage universities from nominating senior professors to Tier 2 chairs, but it doesn’t intend to remove those appointees who don’t meet the revised criteria, said Ms. Dompierre. “I think it would be unfair . . . to penalize those people at this point.”

She noted that a few universities have already taken steps to correct some of these appointments. The secretariat is urging all universities to take advantage of the renewal process to do the same.
www.universityaffairs.ca/issues/2005/feb/_print/crc_renewals.html

Tribes Gather to Talk Indigenous Rights

2005-01-16T13:59:00.000-05:00

LESLIE HOFFMAN , Associated Press

ST. MICHAELS, Ariz. -

Carlos Chex knows well the struggle of indigenous tribes to control their land, resources and destiny - a battle his fellow Mayans in Guatemala have fought for years.

"Unfortunately, up to now, there have been few advances," Chex, a lawyer, said in Spanish.

Chex hopes a three-day gathering of tribal representatives from across the Western Hemisphere may begin to change that, and help guide governments in their dealings with indigenous people.

The meeting, which was held on the Navajo Nation, ended Thursday. The proposals will be presented next month in Washington, where the Organization of American States holds its next round of negotiations on a draft declaration on the rights of indigenous people.

"We're trying to get countries to change the way they treat Indian people and other indigenous people," said Robert Coulter, executive director of the Indian Law Resource Center in Helena, Mont., and a member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation. "We're trying to make this new international law so that it will push ... countries to do better."

Tribal representatives have worked for years to incorporate their perspectives into the declaration, which was first released for public comment in 1995. They hope for adoption by the 34 member countries of the OAS within the next two to three years.

Tribes are also participating in the United Nations' effort to draft a global declaration.

The discussions this week focused on the heart of indigenous concerns - from the recognition of the individual rights of indigenous people to their collective rights to land and resources.

Joining Navajo leaders from the United States were representatives of the Blackfeet Indian Tribe in Montana and members of the Iroquois Confederacy from the Northeast, among others. Tribal representatives from Canada, Mexico, Panama, Nicaragua, Brazil and Argentina also attended.

"Indigenous people are being dealt with as serious actors, effective actors, in the world community," Coulter said.

Yet much complicated work lays ahead, said Lottie Cunningham, a Miskito Indian and attorney for the Center for Justice and Human Rights of the Atlantic Coast in Nicaragua. She said states historically have lacked understanding of indigenous rights.

Putting into "one voice" the various indigenous perspectives on core issues such as self-determination also is a challenge, said Navajo Nation Council delegate Rex Lee Jim of Rock Point, Ariz.

For South American tribes, self-determination can mean guaranteeing the right to participate in national systems. "We already have that, so for us it means having our own government," Jim said.

Self-determination among Navajos and other North American tribes often involves questions of jurisdictional control over tribal issues and those who travel across tribal lands, he said.

What unites all the tribes was a main agenda item - land, said Costa Rican indigenous leader Jose Carlos Morales. "A community without land dies; it disappears," he said in Spanish.

There is also the question of history when discussing indigenous rights to land and resources since many modern tribal reservations are not on their tribes' traditional land because of government relocation.

"We have to talk about the past, present and future," said Navajo Nation Council delegate Ervin Keeswood Sr. of Hogback, N.M.

Exhibit portrays shameful legacy

2005-01-16T13:54:00.000-05:00

A child's ghostly face smiles out from a timeworn black-and-white photograph. She sits nestled with her family, seemingly happy. But hidden behind the picture is a life of pain and sadness.

Hundreds of photos of children just like her bring into sharp focus the harsh reality of life in residential schools in the Manitoba Musuem exhibit Where are the Children?, opening in Alloway Hall today at 2 p.m.

According to exhibit curator Jeff Thomas, many of the photos were taken by church and government officials as propaganda pieces, during a time in the not-so-distant past when native children were routinely plucked from their homes and sent to residential schools across Canada to be integrated into English-speaking, Christian society.

"I didn't find one photo of a traumatized child," Thomas says. "It's their instinct to smile for the camera."

Assembly of First Nations Chief Phil Fontaine says the schools were created to erase traditional Aboriginal culture.

"My people are in jails and in poverty as a direct result of these experiences," he says. "The government was determined to eradicate the peoples' Indian-ness."

But he hopes the exhibit shines a new light on a dark past and nurtures understanding in visitors.

"I hope they'll see that these were real people, that it was a part of history, and begin to ask questions," he says.

The Aboriginal Healing Foundation, founded in 1998 by former residential school inmates, initiated the exhibit two years ago. At its centre sits a poplar tree, surrounded by four flags that represent a connection between the races of mankind.

"This is not a museum story, it's a community story," says Katherine Pettipas, museum curator of native ethnology.

"The experiences of people in these residential schools have an impact on all of us as Canadians."

But that's something many people don't yet realize, says Mike DeGagne, director of the Aboriginal Healing Foundation, "In our schools, there is no understanding of this phenomenon in 100 years of Canadian history," he says.

"I hope there will come to be a mutual respect between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people."

The exhibit is open until March 13. Aboriginal elders will lead tours from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. on weekdays, and 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. on weekends. Admission is free

Negotiations roundtable wraps up in Calgary

2005-01-16T13:38:00.000-05:00

Transmitted by Canada NewsWire on : January 14, 2005

Negotiations roundtable wraps up in Calgary

CALGARY, Jan. 14 /CNW/ - A two-day gathering that brought together over100 representatives of federal, provincial and territorial governments, Aboriginal organizations and communities from across the country, drew to aclose today in Calgary.

At the session, participants shared their views and discussed options for establishing more effective policies and processes for addressing Aboriginal and treaty rights, including the resolution of land claims and the implementation of self-government.

"The important discussions undertaken over the last two days will inform the renewal of policies and processes to facilitate progress at negotiation tables across the country," said the Honourable Andy Scott, Minister of IndianAffairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians.

"Settling outstanding land claims and implementing Aboriginal self-government through negotiated agreements is key to achieving reconciliation with and renewing relationships between the Crown andAboriginal peoples. Negotiated resolutions build new partnerships and promote economic opportunities for Aboriginal people that help to improve their quality of life and strengthen the self-sufficiency of their communities."

This session is the fifth of six follow-up sectoral sessions to the Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable held on April 19, 2004. The Roundtable was an unprecedented gathering of Ministers, Parliamentarians and Aboriginal leaders where new ideas to develop stronger, healthier and economically self-reliant Aboriginal peoples and communities were discussed. The focus of thesectoral follow-up sessions is on the themes of life-long learning, housing, economic opportunities, negotiations and accounting for results. The sessions have been jointly planned by the federal, provincial and territorial governments, along with the five national Aboriginal organizations and willconclude at the end of January.

The desired outcomes identified by the roundtable process are expected to be discussed at a policy retreat with the Prime Minister, Ministers, national Aboriginal leaders and provincial/territorial governments in the spring. With its Aboriginal, provincial, and territorial partners, the federal governmentis committed to finding ways to improve its existing policies and processesand to ensuring that all Canadians live harmoniously in healthy, prosperouscommunities.

This news release and the attached backgrounder are also available on theInternet at: www.inac.gc.ca

Fraud in New Mexico

2004-12-09T14:47:00.000-05:00

By Scott Patterson
Published: December 3, 2004

An investigation by SmartMoney.com has found that officials in the Bush administration had detailed knowledge of fraudulent practices that allowed energy companies to cheat impoverished Native American Indians out of vast sums over dozens of years. These officials were aware that employees of the federal government were helping oil and gas companies underpay to operate on Indian lands in the state of New Mexico — and did nothing to stop it. This is the first in a two-part series.

ON A FRIDAY AFTERNOON IN August, Air Force One ascended above the town of Farmington, N.M. Enthusiastic supporters of the president fanned out of Rickets Park in the center of town waving Bush-Cheney placards. The police cars and motorcycles blocking the streets from traffic during George W. Bush's brief visit switched off their lights and drove away. Normalcy returned to Farmington.

For Ervin Chavez, president of the Shii Shi Keyah Allottee Association (shii shi keyah is Navajo for "this is my land"), normalcy means another day fighting against the federal government and big industry for Native American rights. In his darker moods, he despairs that it's a fight he'll never win.

"You think it would get better someday, and it only gets worse," Chavez says from behind his gold square-framed glasses in a near-empty Farmington restaurant a few hours after the president's plane had taken off.

Just beyond this small city in the northwest corner of New Mexico, normalcy means bitter poverty for the tens of thousands of Native Americans who live in a barren desert region known as the Checkerboard. Many of these Navajos — referred to as "allottees" because they reside on individual Indian allotments separate from the large Navajo Nation to the west — live in abject poverty, can't read or speak English and have no convenient access to telephones, schools or health-care facilities.

In the face of such stark facts are recent allegations that oil and gas companies have cheated these people out of enormous sums over the years, while the federal government has stood idly by.

The Department of the Interior is the subject of a $100 billion class-action suit brought by the allegedly injured parties.

Cobell v. Norton, originally filed in 1996 when Bruce Babbitt was Interior Secretary (current secretary Gail Norton is the defendant now), is the largest class-action lawsuit in U.S. history in dollar terms.

Chavez, a Navajo from the Checkerboard, doesn't seem surprised by the charges. A member of a class-action suit that led to several reforms concerning energy companies' use of Indian land in the 1990s, Chavez has battled industry and government for most of his life.
Continue reading this Article Here.

Canada - Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable

2004-12-09T14:37:00.000-05:00

Background Paper on First Nations Health

Article on Aboriginal issues from Let's Talk Taxes

2004-12-09T14:21:00.000-05:00

November 23, 2004

Aboriginal Level of Law

It makes sense for all citizens of a country to be treated equally under the laws of the country.

Yet, Federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler recently proposed creating an aboriginal tradition of justice or aboriginal level of law be recognized alongside English common law and French civil law.

Currently, the Canadian justice system compels Judges to consider a criminals aboriginal ancestry during sentencing.

In 1996, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples called Canada's justice system a "crushing failure" when it comes to aboriginals.

That year, politicians amended Canada's Criminal Code (cc. ss. 718.2(e)), allowing judges to find alternatives to jail for all offenders when it is reasonable to do so, paying "particular attention to the circumstances of aboriginal offenders" and to consider a criminal's "Indianness".

In other words, Justice had her blindfold removed, and she must now consider race in sentencing.

The blunt fact is that a wide variety of societal ills are part of what leads some individuals to commit crimes. If those ills are given prominence in assessing personal culpability, an individual's responsibility for his or her actions will be lost.

Minister Cotler also wants to address the under-representation of aboriginal workers in the justice system.

This would include increasing the number of aboriginal judges, lawyers, court workers and police officers.

In other words, Minister Cotler is suggesting a broader affirmative action policy be applied to the justice system. For example, the RCMP presently has an affirmative action policy as do many other police forces, and the federal and provincial governments which employ individuals in the justice system.

The last several decades have seen a growth in high school graduation and post-secondary enrolment by visible minorities - including aboriginals.

It is only a matter of time before visible minorities are adequately represented in the justice system. Therefore, a more expansive affirmative action policy is not needed.

Under Canada's current system it is relatively easy to determine when French civil law or English common law is used.

If a third level or aboriginal tradition of law is established, who or what would determine when the aboriginal law was applied? Would it be up to the victim, the accused or were the alleged crime occurred? More likely, lawyers would determine which law would be used in a "pre-trial".

This new idea of Minister Cotler could delay the process of justice and cost taxpayers dearly.

In an attempt to right past wrongs, Canadians have created policies that harm the very people they have been designed to benefit.

By adding a separate justice system for native Canadian offenders would only further segregate native Canadians from the rest of Canada.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms mandates equality for all Canadians.

Consequently, the laws of a country must apply to all citizens equally.

To do otherwise would undermine the very foundation of our justice system.

For further information contact:
Tanis Fiss, Director, Centre for Aboriginal Policy Change
Ph: 1-403-263-1202

Let's Talk Taxes is a weekly commentary provided to media outlets by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. The CTF is a non-profit, non-partisan, educational and advocacy organization funded by free-will contributions.
Permission is granted to reprint or broadcast this material with appropriate attribution. Canadian Taxpayers Federation: Varette Building, Suite 512, 130 Albert Street, Ottawa, ON K1P 5G4 Phone: (613) 234-6554 Fax: (613) 234-7748 Website: www.taxpayer.com

Canada is headed for a genuine cultural mess

2004-12-04T18:52:00.000-05:00

The Hill Times, November 29th, 2004

COLUMNS By Angelo Persichilli

Canada is headed for a genuine cultural mess:

TORONTO--"In the beginning the disease is easy to cure but hard to diagnose; with the passage of time, having gone unrecognized and unmedicated, it becomes easy to diagnose but hard to cure."

So said political master Niccolò Machiavelli in his celebrated book, The Prince.

Our Canadian federal politicians like to talk an awful lot about Machiavelli, but, I'm not sure how many have actually read it.

Canada is known around the world as a country of big opportunities. That's what our politicians brag about at home and abroad. And they're right.

But what they don't say is that Canada is also a country of big contradictions. And there are pressing questions that our leaders, too overly concerned about their immediate political futures, are afraid of answering questions such as: where is Canada headed culturally and who are Canadians?

Those questions beg urgent answers from our federal public office holders at a time when technology is crushing our borders from outside and demography is redesigning the chart of power from within.

Americans are accomplishing what they failed to achieve in 1812 when British general Isaac Brock secured the Canadian borders at Niagara defeating the Yankees' attempts to conquer Upper Canada.

Yep, the annexation war, finished in 1815, is now raging through Canada's airwaves.

Canadian culture and Canadian identity is under attack, again.

Meanwhile, Canada's native peoples want back what they once owned: land, power and respect.

And, the "immigrants" want what they never had: power and influence.

But good or bad, this "attack" is not the problem. The lack of an alternative vision for Canadian culture is. And Canada is now moving from an artificial cultural balance, to a genuine cultural mess. Who are we?

Take a look at our relationship with U.S. culture. It's like a relationship between a drug addict and a drug dealer: you hate the dealer, but you're addicted. We criticize broadcasters because they give us American shows on prime time. They answer back, "That's what Canadians want." It's true, conveniently true for them: look at the ratings and look at their chequebooks! But the question is, do they broadcast American programs because that's what Canadians want, or is it that Canadians like American shows because the broadcasters and cable companies, are giving them to us because it's cheap to produce and easy to sell? Is this really all about business or are Canadian heroes trying to emulate General Brock?

Or, more likely, are these big business ventures waving the Canadian flag only when it's convenient for them?

In the middle of all of this there is the CRTC, the federal regulator, which is starting to appear more and more like a drug rehabilitation centre selling cocaine, with the excuse that "at least is pure."

And while we're trying to define ourselves, thousands of future Canadians are knocking at our doors. We say it's our duty to accept people who need us. That's right.

The question is: are we opening the doors to needy people because we are "compassionate and tolerant," or are we keeping the doors open only because there is nobody at the gate? In my opinion, the two most important departments right now are Immigration and Heritage.

Immigration chooses who future Canadians will be and Heritage decides who we're going to be in the years to come. In the last two weeks, I have interviewed both ministers responsible for these two important departments; Judy Sgro and Liza Frulla. I went looking for answers, but, instead, I was confronted by more pressing questions from both ministers.

Frulla asked how Canada is going to defend Canadian content and how Canada will defend the diversity of opinion. Sgro asked whether it's right to keep "celebrating our differences instead of celebrating what we have in common."

Both ministers are facing Herculean tasks because there is a lack of regulations and a lack of financial and political support behind them. The only thing they receive, in large supply, is rhetoric and, most of the time, hypocrisy.

Before entertaining some ideas, let's talk about a few, crude facts.

In order to have a country economically viable, Canada needs a population of almost 50 million people by the middle of the century; the alternative is to be absorbed by United States. First question: do we want that?

If the answer is "yes," I suggest stopping reading this column because we are doing just fine: we are going soon to be the 51st star in the American flag.

If the answer is no, we move to the second question: where will the other 20 million people come from? There are two answers: more children or more immigrants, or both.

Canada's birth rate is close to zero, so that takes care of that answer: Canada, in order to survive as a country, needs more immigrants. Who is Canada now? Who are the Canadians? Yes, our politicians tell us that we are a compassionate country with many opportunities for all citizens, regardless of their origin, religion colour and we are opening our arms to the needy people from around the world and blah, blah blah.

Yes it's true: we're an open country helping people who need help.

The question is: are we doing it because that is our policy, or, because we have no policy? Are people coming here because "we are the best country in the world," or because we are the country with no policy, opening the doors to whoever knocks and taking six years before we decide what to do with them? Or maybe, just maybe, aren't we the country with the knack to be fair but unable to be right? We definitely are a country that needs people, and there are also people that need Canada: can we work something out that can bring those two needs together? Letting people in for the sake of letting them in, is only half of the job. The other half is to provide them a place to live, to give them work and to let them be part of this society.

In order to do that, however, we first must know who we are and where we want to go. But the debate is mutilated by our obsession to be politically correct (even at the cost of being factually wrong).

Our support is conditional to political and partisan interests that don't reach beyond the next election, and it prevails over the long-term interest of the country. So, here we go. Who can fight for Canada? We have a Parliament that has created a political environment that sent us four times to the polls in the last 10 years and most likely one more time in the next six months. All of it, compliments of the internal feuds within the Conservative and the Liberal Parties that has nothing to do with the future of this country. They ask Canadians to give them power but, when they have it, they don't know what to do with it. But, if you believe the two major parties are bad, look at the alternatives. The Bloc Québécois has made it party policy to tear apart the country, while the NDP looks like the official opposition party in the American Congress, with Jack Layton the Representative of the riding of Washington-South, more than the representative of Toronto-Danforth, Ont.

Meanwhile, half of the country is pissing all over the American administration trying to reduce its influence, the other half is seeking to increase trade and the number of U.S. TV channels in our cable system.

We have a policy of letting 250,000 new immigrants every year (and 700,000 applications sit in our embassies around the world), but we are not able to get people, legally, into the country that houses almost 200,000 illegal immigrants: "We have sectors of our economy," a former minister told me, "that keep running only because of the presence of illegal workers."

The unions and builders ask for more people to build houses, and our policies care only if the new immigrants speak French or English. We say we want more educated immigrants in Canada, and yet when they're finally let in we have engineers driving taxis and doctors working as butchers.

Two weeks ago, Finance Minister Ralph Goodale told us that, after years of a fiscal mess, now the house is back in financial order. We don't have a deficit any longer; we have surpluses. That's good, but now that we have money, what are we going to do with it? Or are they just going to split it up evenly at election time to the provinces so they can provide us all with suppositories for free?
Angelo Persichilli is political editor of Corriere Canadese, Toronto's Italian-language daily newspaper. The Hill Times http://ca.f539.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Persichilli@corriere.com&YY=60990&order=down&sort=date&pos=0

Native education losing ground

2004-12-04T18:37:00.000-05:00

By SUE BAILEY
OTTAWA (CP) -

It will take native high school students 28 years to match non-native graduation rates - and the gap is growing, says the auditor general.

Indian Affairs has done little to fix a troubling range of old problems, Sheila Fraser said in a grim assessment Tuesday.

These include jurisdictional squabbles, low teacher salaries, poor training and lax tracking of public dollars.

Ottawa can't even say whether more than $1 billion spent each year on native education is too much or too little to meet standards, Fraser said. That's because related data isn't routinely compiled.

Moreover, Indian Affairs officials don't agree on whether they're responsible for programs or merely fund them, Fraser found.

She also blasted the department for not tracing another $273 million spent on college and university funding.

"As a result, the department does not know whether program funds are sufficient to support all eligible students, and it has no assurance that only (those) taking eligible courses are receiving funding," Fraser said.

She used the most recent census data to estimate that the time needed for natives to mirror non-native education rates is now 28 years, up from 27 gauged four years earlier.

Just over 40 per cent of reserve residents had a high school diploma compared to almost 70 per cent of the general population, the 2001 census reported.

"Despite a commitment made in 2000, the department has still not clarified its role and responsibilities in improving the educational achievements of First Nations," Fraser said.

This is a vital first step as a young native population grows at about twice the Canadian birth rate, she stressed

Indian Affairs Minister Andy Scott must "get his house in order," said Jim Prentice, the Conservative native affairs critic.

"It's a really shocking situation."

The answer is not to take control of education back from First Nations, Prentice said.

"The problem is that this particular department has not agreed on what it's doing or why it's spending money or what the standards are - or whether they're simply a funding agent to pass money through to First Nations."

Either way, there must be more accountability of a whopping annual budget, Prentice said.

The one bright light Fraser noted in an otherwise dim performance was improved programs for special education.

In an official response, Indian Affairs accepted the criticism and said it's working with First Nations as they demand increasing control over schooling. The department says it's crafting a new reporting scheme to clarify its duties, goals and better track tax dollars.

Native bands manage all but seven of 503 schools on reserves.

The $1 billion spent each year on education eats up 20 per cent of the Indian Affairs budget and is the department's largest program.

In 2002-03, the money funded about 120,000 students of which some 60 per cent went to school on reserves.

First Nations get education funding from Ottawa but must follow provincial standards. Jurisdictional disputes are still causing confusion as federal and provincial officials battle over which government is responsible for students who leave reserves. For example, it's still unclear who should pay when native parents move away to attend college or university and take their children with them, Fraser says.

The Assembly of First Nations, representing more than 600 bands across Canada, says education is a treaty right that covers all levels, including university.

National Chief Phil Fontaine said 10,000 native students are on waiting lists for funding to help them go to college or university. Ottawa helped enrol 25,075 aboriginal students in 2002-03 - down from 27,157 in 1998-99.

That decline and the snail's pace of improvements at lower levels are "alarming," Fontaine said.
"It is true that we need more resources dedicated to education, but we can also make better and more efficient use of the available resources."

John Richards' Howlers on Aboriginal Policy

2004-12-04T18:04:00.000-05:00

by Boyce Richardson
March/April 2004

As I have had occasion to remark before, "God save me from intellectuals!" especially right-wing Canadian intellectuals, when they take unto themselves the impulse to discourse on Aboriginal policy.

In recent years, these people have perpetrated some real howlers, whose only use has been to indicate how deep the gap remains between the beliefs and posture of Aboriginal people in Canada, and what could at a pinch be described as the thinking of many influential, fuzzy-minded, well- intentioned, ill-informed Canadians of European background. From Thomas Flanagon to John Richards

A couple of years ago the leader of the right-wing pack was Thomas Flanagan, the intellectual powerhouse of the Reform, aka the Alliance, aka the Conservative, party. Mr. Flanagan wrote a book, highly regarded and widely reviewed in the media, apparently before he had ever set foot in an Aboriginal community. I never read the book, but so far as I remember, it was stern stuff, calling on the Aboriginals to shape up, and espousing the line that the cure to all problems was for them to assimilate in Canadian society.

This was welcomed by the press as a bold new policy.

At around the same time Jonathan Kay, the neanderthal right-wing editor of the editorial page of the National Post, (incidentally, he's a favourite commentator for CBC television), took an active interest in Aboriginal policy, recommending the same bold policy.

And now John Richards, professor at Simon Fraser University, who has turned dramatically right and become an acolyte of the C.D. Howe Institute, has been getting a lot of attention for an article that recently appeared in the magazine Policy Options in which he recommends that Paul Martin must "rethink Aboriginal policy independently of the premises of tribal chiefs and their organizations such as the Assembly of First Nations."

In other words, Aboriginal policy should ignore what the Indians and their leaders say they want, and instead hand over delivery of most Indian services to the provinces, which are, for the most part, regarded by Aboriginal people as unfriendly to Indians.

What alarms Richards the most, apparently, is the insistence of Aboriginal leaders that their people should be governed by the treaties signed with them as Europeans marched westward to take over their lands.

There is a great deal of emphasis in Richards' article on the $7 billion paid to (or for) Indians every year: but no recognition that this is a bargain price for what Europeans have gained from the exchange.

The most recent of these exchanges, for example, that between the Crees of James Bay and the Quebec and Canadian governments, saw the Crees initially paid $139 million for privileges which now allow the governments and their corporate hangers-on to take $5 billion worth of electrical, mineral and forestry production every year from the lands they "bought" from the Indians.

Since many of the provisions of the original agreement were not fulfilled (for example, those covering economic development, under which the Crees were supposed to benefit in training and jobs), the Crees have recently made a new agreement which pays them $70 million a year -- still a great bargain for the $5 billion wealth exchange.

To get even this, the Crees have had to sell to Hydro-Quebec their central river, the Rupert, which they had spent 25 years defending, and agree that it should become part of the huge James Bay hydro scheme, a humiliation which is leading to increasing anger in the Cree communities, and has sullied the Cree reputation outside Quebec.

Richards also worries that under current policies, which provide free health care to Aboriginals, including dental care, a second tier of health insurance is created in Canada that "invites resentment among non-Aboriginals who pay taxes and yet receive fewer insured health services."

There are a number of wonders about all these learned prescriptions for Indians by Canadian intellectuals.

First, I suppose, is the naked assumption that Indians have proven themselves incapable of making decisions about their own lives: what else is to be assumed from Richards' prescription, that the very bases of Aboriginal policy must be rethought by government without any reference to Indian chiefs or organizations?

Second, and perhaps more important, is the blind ignorance of these people, who apparently have never heard that it has been Canadian policy since before the nation was founded to assimilate Indians into "the body politic," and that pursuit of this policy led to monstrous legislation whose aim was to strip Indians of everything that might mean anything to them <- their languages, their beliefs, their religions, their rituals, their economies <- you name it, and Canadian policy in the past has tried to abolish or forbid or destroy it.

What are they teaching these professors? (Leaving aside that these guys are themselves actually teaching this stuff to people!)

Casual reference to diseases like diabetes omit to mention that the epidemic of this disease among Canada's Aboriginals can be directly traced to the Euro success in destroying the Indian economies, leaving the native people bereft and at a loss to know what to do.

In hardly any part of the country was a serious effort ever made to build a viable life around the remarkable skills of the native occupants of the land.

More likely, they were just swept aside ruthlessly to make way for roads, railways, airports, farms, mines and all the paraphernalia of modern, industrialized life, including even parks and protected areas.

Establishment of Canada's first National Park at Banff resulted in bands of Indians wandering the countryside in a desperate effort to find enough food to live on. They were unwanted either in the reserves that were set up for them (where they quickly became dependent on government food handouts), or in the countryside where they normally operated, because there they were constantly getting in the way of Western development.

Anyone who arrived from Europe with any money-making scheme was given priority in land use over the original occupants of the land. I'm not making this up. That is a fact.

In the most recent such takeover, which I am familiar with, the Crees of James Bay were not even consulted before the Quebec government announced its plan to inundate their hunting territories and build one of the continent's biggest hydro-electric generating schemes.

The ignorance of the proponents of this scheme was so vast that when the natives protested the likely effects on the moose and caribou on which they depended for food, the engineers on the other side of the table said this was of no concern, because the Manitoba port of Churchill was open in the summer, and cattle could be shipped across Hudson's Bay to the hungry Crees. (Remember, I am not making this up).

If Mr. Richards has any doubt about any of this having happened, he could consult Sarah Carter's remarkable book, Lost Harvests, in which she proves without a doubt that even when Indians accepted the bases of Euro policy, and tried to become farmers, as they were intended to do, suddenly, in response to pressure from neighbouring white farmers, measures were taken by government to prevent the Indian farmers from selling their produce.

In other words, successful Indians were never part of the Euro plan (an assertion supported by the fact that any Indian who attained a university degree was "deemed to be no longer an Indian".)

Is this relevant to John Richards' prescriptions for the Aboriginal future? One would think that any intellectual would be able to grasp the fact that the policy of integrating Aboriginals into the Canadian society has been the main determinant of their present desperate conditions.

And that, the policy having failed, a more promising policy might rest in the rebuilding of Aboriginal confidence and pride in their heritage, the transfer to them of the resources on which alone they can build a promising economic future, and the establishment of mechanisms by which they can govern themselves, make their own decisions, within the Canadian polity.

What Richards is proposing.

1. Government should adopt new policies without bothering about Aboriginal perceptions.

2. Aboriginals should not be treated as separate from other Canadians, either in payments for welfare (social assistance), or for health and education benefits.

3. Possibly, payments to Aboriginals should be cut in half by the payment of $2,500 a year to every adult Aboriginal, which would then be taxed by their local reserve authorities, putting Aboriginals on a par with other Canadians.

4. Aboriginals should be subject, as other Canadians have been, to the modern trend towards making welfare dependent on "more meaningful work or training obligations for those seeking benefits." This is standard right-wing stuff, designed to cut to the minimum payments to those who have been left behind in this competitive society.

5. Aboriginals have apparently failed as administrators of social assistance. "Arguably the rules for government access to social assistance should be equal among all, independent of race." Social assistance could be integrated with provincial social assistance programs, which "would entail professional social workers, most of them non-Aboriginal, determining eligibility for social assistance."

6. A compromise would be to withdraw from individual bands the authority to distribute welfare and entrust the function and budget to an intertribal social assistance agency for each province.

7. Government should work to improve conditions for off-reserve Indians, which in turn would improve education.

8. Finally, Paul Martin should insist that Aboriginal problems cannot be solved by "an exaggerated stress of otherness." Concentration on treaties "is no substitute for better social policy." These Indians! They can't govern themselves! They are savages! Everything they touch, they create a mess! And they are, these days, demanding too much!

This seems to be the thinking lying behind the prescriptions of this professor, which, so the media says, are now being treated with the greatest respect by thinkers in the government.

One gets a feeling that Mr. Richards is not familiar with reserves or Aboriginal communities.

If he had spent 25 years, as I have, wandering the country from one Aboriginal community to the next, he would have gathered a sense of the really impressive effort that Aboriginal people are making all across the country to pull themselves out of their desperate situation by their boot-straps.

Everywhere, they are trying to build a viable economy (although hampered in that by the miserable resources left to them); trying to overcome the many pathologies with which their communities have been saddled after their 200 years of history as whipping boys for Euro arrogance; trying to re-establish the importance of their own languages, beliefs, and rituals, their profound understanding of the relationship between people and the Earth.

In my view, the future of Aboriginals in Canada depends on generous recognition by both government and public opinion of Aboriginal rights and title as the bedrock of relationship between our two peoples. And we not only need to recognize these rights, but to fulfil the deals we have made with them.

Surely our intellectuals can come up with something better, as a prescription for the future, than this melancholy right-wing stuff.

Boyce Richardson is a former journalist and filmmaker and a Member of the Order of Canada. This article and many others of interest may be found on BR's website at www.boycespaper.com.

Hopi Prophecy

2004-11-16T21:04:00.000-05:00

"The Fourth World shall end soon, and the Fifth World will begin. This the elders everywhere know. The Signs over many years have been fulfilled, and so few are left.

"This is the First Sign: We are told of the coming of the white-skinned men, like Pahana, but not living like Pahana men who took the land that was not theirs. And men who struck their enemies with thunder.

"This is the Second Sign: Our lands will see the coming of spinning wheels filled with voices. In his youth, my father saw this prophecy come true with his eyes -- the white men bringing their families in wagons across the prairies."

"This is the Third Sign: A strange beast like a buffalo but with great long horns, will overrun the land in large numbers. These White Feather saw with his eyes -- the coming of the white men's cattle."

"This is the Fourth Sign: The land will be crossed by snakes of iron."

"This is the Fifth Sign: The land shall be criss-crossed by a giant spider's web."

"This is the Sixth sign: The land shall be criss-crossed with rivers of stone that make pictures in the sun."

"This is the Seventh Sign: You will hear of the sea turning black, and many living things dying because of it."

"This is the Eight Sign: You will see many youth, who wear their hair long like my people, come and join the tribal nations, to learn their ways and wisdom.

"And this is the Ninth and Last Sign: You will hear of a dwelling-place in the heavens, above the earth, that shall fall with a great crash. It will appear as a blue star. Very soon after this, the ceremonies of my people will cease.

"These are the Signs that great destruction is coming. The world shall rock to and fro. The white man will battle against other people in other lands -- with those who possessed the first light of wisdom. There will be many columns of smoke and fire such as White Feather has seen the white man make in the deserts not far from here. Only those which come will cause disease and a great dying. Many of my people, understanding the prophecies, shall be safe. Those who stay and live in the places of my people also shall be safe. Then there will be much to rebuild. And soon -- very soon afterward -- Pahana will return. He shall bring with him the dawn of the Fifth World. He shall plant the seeds of his wisdom in their hearts. Even now the seeds are being planted. These shall smooth the way to the Emergence into the Fifth World.

"But White Feather shall not see it. I am old and dying. You -- perhaps will see it. In time, in time..."

The old Indian fell silent.

Read the entire hopi prophecy here.

Aboriginal talks key to energy push

2004-11-11T23:58:00.000-05:00

No consultation, no development, warn First Nations representatives
By Mark Lowey - Business Edge

Energy firms risk losing their operating permits, cancellation of projects and paying millions of dollars in compensation unless provincial governments consult properly with aboriginal groups, lawyers and First Nations leaders warn.

Recent decisions by the B.C. Court of Appeal - which an impending Supreme Court of Canada ruling could uphold, overturn or modify - have put equal responsibility on resource-development companies as on provincial governments to consult with and accommodate aboriginal peoples' interests before any resources are developed, they say.

In fact, the B.C. Court of Appeal decisions hold energy and other resource companies responsible even if it is the provincial government that hasn't adequately consulted with aboriginal groups, says lawyer Tony Fogarassy at Clark, Wilson in Vancouver.

The situation is especially precarious for companies operating in B.C. (which unlike Alberta isn't covered by treaties with First Nations) "if you don't do your homework and if you don't have a strategy in place," he said.

“This is something that can’t be done after the fact,” Fogarassy said. “You can’t go in and consult after you’ve created an open-pit mine, for example. That eviscerates the whole notion of what an aboriginal right is all about.”

Although the B.C. government is still in the process of negotiating treaties with dozens of aboriginal groups, First Nations leaders say that Premier Gordon Campbell’s Liberals are pushing ahead with oil and gas development without doing meaningful consultation or addressing aboriginal concerns.
Continue reading this Article HERE.

Resources worth hundreds of millions for natives

2004-11-10T22:13:00.000-05:00

Resources worth hundreds of millions for nativesAboriginal groups can benefit from oil, gas exploration, conference told
Brian Morton
Vancouver Sun

B.C.'s aboriginal communities stand to make hundreds of millions of dollars from resource extraction deals over the next decade, according to the head of a native investment association.

"In Alberta, for example, aboriginal groups have received over $400 million in revenues in the last year," Calvin Helin, president and CEO of the Native Investment & Trade Association (NITA), said in an interview Monday.

"Their target is half a billion dollars. I think there will be lots of posturing [in B.C.] because of treaties, but aboriginal people need to start generating revenues. It's been done very successfully in other places."

Helin made the comments during Resource Expo '04, a conference on aboriginal energy and resource development issues hosted by NITA in Vancouver.

He said aboriginal communities will be big players over the next 10 years in the fields of energy development -- including offshore oil and gas exploration, minerals and mining, forestry and the 2010 Olympics. "You'll see the crystallization of a lot of major deals, and aboriginal people won't be token participants."Regarding offshore oil and gas exploration, he said aboriginal input is essential because it is controversial. "I think it will be developed and developed safely. And I think there will be fair and equitable partnerships."

Helin called the Olympics a huge opportunity for native groups, especially in construction, telecommunications and tourism. "The Squamish and Mount Currie bands have already made a lot of deals. What makes B.C. different is the huge wealth of aboriginal culture."

Chief Garry Oker of the Doig River First Nation in northeastern B.C. told about 100 delegates that aboriginal communities will require much more substantive business deals in B.C. than what they've been offered so far.

He said that in the field of oil and gas exploration, "there's a lot of money being thrown around, but the truth of the matter is it's not sustainable.

As soon as production stops, where are we? And that's the problem.

Certainly money is important, but it's not the key to our survival."Oker said their traditional land is a target for resource exploitation and his band wants to move from its traditional history as "hunters and gatherers." "But these guys [industry] are pros. They can get anything they want. And that puts us at a disadvantage. We want meaningful consultation, which doesn't mean just a token thing. We want to be full partners, not just 'we have to consult the natives'."

Oker said environmental considerations are important for first nations communities.

"It's not only about money. We want a lot of say in wildlife management."

Earlier Monday, B.C. energy and mines minister Richard Neufeld said there are huge opportunities for first nations communities in the resource field.

Citing coal bed methane and offshore oil and gas exploration, Neufeld said the government plans to make first nations full partners.

He said first nations in Fort Nelson, for example, are already taking a lead in construction activity supporting industry.

Akita Drilling Ltd. vice-president Rob Hunt, whose company has already entered into a deal with the Kaska First Nation in northeastern B.C., said Akita, based in Calgary, wants to expand its partnerships with first nations in B.C."I think the whole process will evolve whereby the companies will better understand the value of consulting with first nations. And as first nations better understand the business, you'll end up finding a balance in cultures that move at very different speeds. I think you'll see more cooperation in the future, but it's most important to get first nations involved in the process at a very early stage."Hunt believes the greatest opportunities for first nations is "in catering, construction, water trucks, all the services that support the oil and gas operations."

(really...)

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Releases Major Report Detailing Myths and Facts about Federal Government Funding to First Nations

2004-11-10T22:09:00.000-05:00

November 5, 2004.

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Phil Fontaine released a new AFN report today called Federal Government Funding to First Nations: The Facts, The Myths and the Way Forward. The National Chief released the report during his speech today to the Canadian Club in Winnipeg.

“The purpose of this report is to untangle the myths and misconceptions surrounding the funds First Nations receive – and don’t receive – from the federal government and provide the facts and the reality,” said National Chief Fontaine. “The report tackles head-on important issues like accountability, extravagant spending, sustainability and self-government. The report challenges and confronts a lot of peoples’ preconceptions about the current situation.”

Federal Government Funding to First Nations: The Facts, The Myths and the Way Forward provides a comprehensive analysis of funding realities, drawing on the latest leading-edge research and analysis, as well as work by Canada’s Auditor-General, Harvard University and other expert sources. Equally important, the report points a way forward that will bring sense to the current federal approach.

The report includes findings that many may find surprising, such as:

The average Canadian gets services from the federal, provincial and municipal governments at an amount that is almost two-and-a-half times greater than that received by First Nations citizens.
Out of 557 financial management audits filed by First Nations in 2002-2003, the Department of Indian Affairs found only 16 (3%) that required remedial action.
In 2001, the federal government estimated that its “contingent liabilities” – the debt it owes to First Nations through lawful obligations stemming from land claims, Treaties and litigation – was almost $11 Billion dollars. This debt would wipe out the current federal budget surplus of $9.1 Billion. After 2001, the government stopped reporting on its contingent liabilities.
In 1996, the federal government capped funding increases for Indian Affairs’ core programs at 2% a year, which does not keep pace with inflation or the growing First Nations population. A recent Indian Affairs study found that the gap in “quality of life” between First Nations and Canadians stopped narrowing…in 1996.

National Chief Fontaine stated: “If the government and Canadian citizens are serious about working with us to close the gap in the quality of life between First Nations and Canadians then we need to identify the real problems to ensure we’re arriving at the right solutions. Our report clears away the fog of myth and misunderstanding and illuminates a path forward that will benefit First Nations, the Government of Canada and all Canadians. I hope all Canadians who are interested in the political, social and economic life of this country will read this report.”

Federal Government Funding to First Nations: The Facts, The Myths and the Way Forward is available at the Assembly of First Nations’ website at www.afn.ca.

The Assembly of First Nations is the national organization representing First Nations citizens in Canada.

‘What would happen if 500 white women went missing?’

2004-11-07T11:01:00.000-05:00

Trauma conference hears that hundreds of native women are missing in Canada, but nobody is talking about it

By Carol Mulligan/The Sudbury Star
Local News - Friday, October 29, 2004 @ 11:00

When it comes to suffering the effects of trauma, no one understands it better than families whose loved ones are missing. Five hundred aboriginal women are missing in Canada and nobody cares, charged a participant at a conference in Sudbury on the link between trauma and mental health.

Isabelle Meawasige, a traditional healer from Nipissing First Nation near North Bay, was a member of a panel that closed the first day of the two-day conference. At first, she said she didn’t know what to talk about, so she “prayed really, really hard to the First Family of Creation and they said, ‘Talk about those women, talk about those women. Seek help.’”

No one else is talking about those women, said Meawasige, who recited missing person advisories about a couple of them before saying, “and the list goes on and on. .” One was missing since 1988, but it wasn’t reported until 1999.

A social worker who has worked with residential school survivors and their families, Meawasige said some aboriginals have asked: “What would happen if 500 white women went missing?”

Meawasige said she prayed to the “Great Mystery” to ask what would help end the anguish of families whose members are missing and she said she was told that building a bridge between aboriginals would help.

“This is where the bridge is,” a participant from Timmins shouted out as she spoke of the search of a landfill site in her community in connection with the disappearance of Pamela Holopainen. “You are not alone in this one,” the participant commented, and was applauded by the audience.

Meawasige said traditional healers are using “old stories, old ways” to first help themselves recover from trauma and then give young people a “sense of wholeness and balance.”

Panelist Theresa Laurentis of Espanola spoke about how the body suffers the effects of trauma. “

“The body gives us messages all the time,” she said. We experience lumps in our throat, pains in our stomachs and pounding hearts. “The body is very intelligent in getting our attention.”

Joan Elliott, a social worker from Whitefish Lake First Nation, also uses tools such as the medicine wheel in traditional healing. The wheel is divided into four areas — the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual. Survivors often need spiritual help to heal, she said.

She, too, emphasized the need for front-line workers to be aware of the effects of vicarious trauma. “You need to have dealt with your own trauma and you need to have a support system.”

Pamela Holopainen, 22, was last seen leaving a house party the morning of Dec. 14, 2003. Family members have not heard from her since. She is five-foot-two, weighs 126 pounds and has brown hair and blue eyes. She is of French and Inuit descent.

Anyone with information is asked to call the OPP at 235-3345 or Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-8477.