After we all heard the National Chief (NC) of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Shawn Atleo give his speech at the Crown-First Nations Gathering (CFNG), it became readily apparent that the 2012 election campaign for the AFN NC had officially begun. Up to this point, Atleo had done little but sing the praises of the Harper Conservatives (Cons). It looked like Atleo and the AFN were following in the political footsteps of former President of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP) Patrick Brazeau and hedging their bets that sucking up to the bully would yield better results than standing on our inherent rights.
Two things about this "strategy" (if you can call it that): (1) it may have won Brazeau a cushy Senate seat (an immediate, individual gain), but it left the grass-roots off-reserve people with nothing but an indebted organization with a horrific reputation as being the mouth piece of the Cons with an anti-First Nation political slant (long-term, community pain); and (2) the organization itself never gained anything in terms of major budget increases, political concessions from the Cons; nor did it advance the rights and interests of off-reserve Aboriginal peoples in any measurable way.
I would have thought, that after all the criticism launched by the AFN at CAP for being so critical towards First Nations peoples, that the AFN itself would never walk down that same political path. Yet, it appears that Atleo, in an attempt to distance himself from former NC Phil Fontaine and make his own mark, decided that selling our souls to the devil would help him do that. It is a naive political strategy that demonstrates Atleo's inexperience in high-stakes politics. He decided to support the Cons as opposed to the Liberals & NDP and decided to follow Harper down his assimilation path instead of participating in concrete social action or stand in defense of our peoples and communities.
Atleo with all his "education" made it his mission to support education - but in a way which ignored the concerns of the treaty chiefs and the many concerns of the grass-roots First Nations peoples. This led to a major rift in the AFN and left regional First Nation organizations with no choice but to publicly denounce Atleo's process. The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN), the Chiefs of Ontario (COO), the Quebec First Nations and more recently the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs (AMC) all stand against Atleo's rogue politics.
To understand the significance of this rift, one must understand how important unity has been for the AFN. The National Indian Brotherhood (NIB) (now AFN) and First Nation politics in general were galvanized in the 1970's when First Nations all across the country were faced with the Liberal's 1969 White Paper which would have abolished the Indian Act, reserves, treaty rights and Indians. The First Nations united in their opposition and defeated the most brazen attempt to assimilate our peoples into oblivion. Since then, the power of unity has defeated the Meech Lake Accord, the First Nations Governance Act, and has also brought attention to our unresolved land issues and discrimination in various Canadian laws. The power of this unity is not to be underestimated.
Atleo, in a few short years has all but destroyed this unity and has, in essence, gone rogue. While Harper exercises fierce dictatorial control over his MPs and uses the politics of fear to control citizens, Atleo instead opts for a more Lone Ranger approach with similar results. Atleo is advancing his own agenda and according to many Chiefs, he is doing so without properly consulting them. This is a different claim than had Atleo been simply disagreeing with them. The political charge is that he is off making deals, cozying up to Harper, and agreeing to things like National Panels and CFNGs without consulting with the people he is supposed to represent.
This sort of politics is not only ineffective (look at the growing rift), but it seems to me, to be in direct conflict with the AFN's own Charter.
http://www.afn.ca/index.php/en/about-afn/charter-of-the-assembly-of-first-nations
Article 3(a) specifically states that the AFN is supposed to be in the business of "harmonising effective collective and co-operative measures". Agreeing to a national panel on education without consulting with First Nations is not conducive to harmonizing or unifying First Nations on education.
In case this is not clear enough, one need only refer to Article 21 (1) which specifically states that "The National Chief shall have no inherent political authority". So, what power does the NC have?
Any power he has is detailed in Article 21(2) "Any authority the National Chief may have shall derive exclusively and entirely from authority granted from time to time by the First Nations-in-Assembly".
It seems to me then, that Atleo agreeing to a national panel on education, and agreeing to a Joint Action Plan all before seeking the specific direction of the chiefs sounds like he has his own political agenda. The CFNG action plan read like the 1969 White Paper assimilation plan using modern words. Atleo has, in a few rogue steps, turned the Assembly of First Nations into the Assimilation of First Nations.
http://indigenousnationhood.blogspot.ca/2012/02/war-and-peace-illusions-of-partnership.html
If what a large number of chiefs are alleging is true, then Atleo has exceeded his political authority and it's time for him to be removed as NC. Even if what they are alleging is not true, the future of First Nations in Canada depends on removing Atleo from office and re-focusing our political strategies and priorities away from one based on federal control and our ultimate assimilation.
First Nations chiefs will have their chance to voice their concerns at the upcoming AFN AGM which will be held in Toronto this July 2012.
Here is the timeline:
- 10 weeks before the AGM, an electoral officer will be appointed.
- 8 weeks before the AGM, the electoral officer will assume office.
- 4 weeks before the election, the electoral officer must submit the names of the candidates for NC to all Chiefs;
- 1 night before the election, he/she must arrange an All Candidates Forum for the AGM;
- The election takes place on the 2nd day of the AGM starting at 9 am.
Here are some of the rules relating to the election for NC:
(1) Candidates must submit their nomination papers to the Electoral officer no earlier than 8 weeks prior to the election and no later than 5 weeks prior;
(2) Each nomination form must be signed by at least 15 Chiefs and at least 8 of them must not be from the same province as the candidate;
(3) In order to be eligible to be a candidate, you must be at least 18 years old, of First Nations ancestry and belong to a First Nation which is a member of the AFN.
(4) Candidates can not spend more than $35,000 for election purposes and must submit a statement of expenses and names of contributors;
NOTE - The Electoral officer can disqualify any candidate who does not participate in All Candidates Forum or does not file expenses;
(5) Chiefs can send proxies to vote in their place;
(6) Anyone who receives less than 15 votes is automatically eliminated;
The winner must receive 60% of the vote and if he/she does not, then the candidate with the lowest vote is automatically eliminated and another vote takes place. Chiefs can go through many rounds of voting to obtain the 60% majority.
So, what does all of this mean for the grass-roots community members? None of us get to vote in these elections. So, what are our options? I think the more we make ourselves aware of what the AFN is doing in our names, the better we will be able to put pressure on our own Chiefs on how to vote. For many years, in many First Nations, Chiefs have been deciding who he/she votes for as NC without ever consulting with the community. It is time for us to make a change and exercise our voices again.
While it is painfully obvious that I do NOT support Atleo in the upcoming election, it is important to note that I do not and will not be publicly supporting any candidate that chooses to put their name forward. I think candidates need to stand on their own past records, their ability to lead and inspire our peoples, and the quality of their election platforms. In other words, I do not believe we should support candidates based on who endorses them. This becomes a popularity contest instead of one which is based on traditional leadership virtues.
If we have learned anything from the Cons dictatorship-style politics, is that we do not want to mimic their politics.
That being said, I am always happy to talk to any candidate who wants to know what I think about their platforms. I think the candidates would be well-advised to talk to lots of people, from a variety of backgrounds, about their platforms and start getting their direction from the people again. If a candidate wants to make AFN relevant, their platforms will have to speak to us - the grass-roots people - as much as they speak to the Chiefs. Free hint: Any platform that is written to speak to the Cons will be as useless as Atleo's.
There are lots of rumours going around about who might put their name forward at this year's election, but we will all have to wait and see who is officially confirmed by the electoral officer. Doug Cuthand, a columnist for the Star Phoenix talks about a couple of these potential candidates:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Treaty+treaty+natives+must+work+together/6201621/story.html
At the end of the day, it is all just rumour and possibility until the candidates sign on the dotted line and get their nominations from their 15 chiefs.
As the candidates are announced, I will definitely keep track of their platforms and offer commentary on their strengths and weaknesses as they role out. I will also be trying to find out as much as I can about their past political experiences; their individual track records; their political stance and where they stand on specific issues that matter to me, my family, community and Nation. It is my belief that we as First Nations people should all have a vote as to who will be the AFN NC. However, even though I am not permitted to vote, I will still try to have an impact on the results. I think we all have the power to make this election different.
That is not to say that I promote the AFN as "the" vehicle or voice of First Nations, as that inherent authority rests with each Indigenous Nation. However, I do believe that the NIB used to serve a very powerful political and advocacy role in highlighting First Nation issues, bringing international attention to bear, and advocating at the national political level. There is no doubt that AFN has fallen off track in a major way and I don't blame individuals for thinking it is useless and even harmful. I think it is doing far more harm to us now than good. If it stays this way, I will continue to advocate against it.
I think the AFN has the potential to be a useful organization once again but so long as it caters to the will of its funders, it will be no more and no less than what Brazeau was for CAP - the mouthpiece of the Cons. In other words, the AFN will continue to be the First Nation enforcer of the Cons assimilation policies. There are those who think they have political savvy that believe we need to make concessions to make stave off mass budget cuts or further control over our communities. In case they forgot, treaties were our concessions and the Cons are bringing budget cuts and more legislation to control our communities. This political "strategy" based on fear is no plan at all.
Our people, our territories and our futures are not for sale and I am not willing to trade my inherent rights for ANY organization. AFN has a choice - it has to be relevant to First Nations or it will fade into oblivion like CAP did.
In case any of the 600+ Chiefs can't attend the AFN AGM and election, and they are looking for someone to be their voting proxy, try sending one of our million grass-roots folks.
Showing posts with label election platform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election platform. Show all posts
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Shiny New Beads and Trinkets: Old Assimilation Policies Repackaged
There has been a great deal of publicity lately related to all the great work the Conservatives are doing in relation to Aboriginal peoples. Some media outlets have called this a "historic shift" and even gone so far as to characterize the plan as a "sweeping overhaul of reserve life".
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-native-leaders-commit-to-sweeping-overhaul-of-reserve-life/article2053099/?service=mobile
While there may be some useful tidbits in the plan, to call it historic or sweeping is misrepresenting what is actually taking place. One must keep in mind that this announcement coincided with the Auditor General's damning report about Canada's gross failure to address conditions of extreme poverty on reserve. In fact, according to Fraser, conditions have even become much worse. INAC has knowingly failed to address "inequities" in funding for post-secondary education, child and family services, housing and many other programs.
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/docs/parl_oag_201106_04_e.pdf
Yet, all of this was overshadowed by a strategically-timed joint action plan - anything to take the public's focus off of the stark reality. The fact that the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) took part in this duck and avoid maneuver leaves me questioning the AFN"s ability to effectively advocate on behalf of First Nations. Some have even questioned whether the AFN had any REAL input into the plan given how quickly it came out.
Even if National Chief of AFN Shawn Atleo did have input, that begs the question as to why he would give his blessing to a plan that would leave out critical issues around funding, consultation, First Nation jurisdiction, treaty rights and land claims. All of these issues are significant to the grass roots people, yet nothing has been mentioned about any of them. Similarly, the planned First Nation - Crown Summit also excludes these critical issues - all with Atleo's stamp of approval.
Does any of this signal a significant shift by the Conservatives from their right-wing, pro-assimilation agenda? I would argue that all we are seeing are the same old deal - the exchange of shiny beads and trinkets for our acquiescence or agreement to forgo what makes us strong, independent Nations - our sovereignty, our land and our identity. What follows are some of the reasons why I believe this to be true:
Early Indian Policy:
Early Indian policy included various measures to control, divide and assimilate Indians to finally rid Canada of the "Indian problem". These included:
(1) Residential schools to remove culture, language and family and community ties from Indian children;
(2) Indian Act provisions which removed Indian rights from Indian women;
(3) Indian Act provisions which incorporated non-Indian women into communities;
(4) Enfranchisement provisions which encouraged Indian men to give up their identities in exchange for education, employment and individual title to reserve lands; and
(5) Indian Act provisions which prohibited lawyers from advocating for Indians in relation to their lands and treaties.
(See: The Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996) [RCAP]
White Paper 1969:
The plan argued that "Indian people must be persuaded" that this was the path to a better life:
(1) Abolish the Indian Act;
(2) End special recognition for First Nations;
(3) Give them individual title to their lands (fee simple);
(4) Funds for economic development;
(5) Full integration into the cultural, social, political and economic life of Canada; and
(6) Removal of constitutional responsibility of federal government for Indians.
http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/arp/ls/pubs/cp1969/cp1969-eng.pdf
We all know how First Nations across the country reacted to this policy - they forcefully rejected it and re-asserted their special status in Canada and their land and treaty rights. Harold Cardinal wrote what came to be known as the Red Paper outlining the special rights of Indians in Canada. While Canada backed off of this policy, very little changed in regards to addressing First Nation poverty and the resolution of their Aboriginal and treaty rights, land claims and self-government.
RCAP provides a detailed history of the development of Indian policy over time and the rights held by First Nations. Their overall recommendation was to move forward with the resolution of land claims, recognition and implementation of treaties and the negotiation of self-government agreements. Canada's delayed, non-committal response "Gathering Strength" came to be known as "Gathering Dust" for the lack of action on Canada's part.
Then along comes Tom Flanagan, who, in his book "First Nations? Second Thoughts" argued that since First Nations were "primitive", "wasteful" and "destructive" that they should not be entitled to self-governing rights, special tax exemptions or federal funding. In his view, First Nations need to "evolve" and become more like other Canadians. This was pretty much the same message that he provided in his second book: "Beyond the Indian Act: Restoring Aboriginal Property Rights".
His plan involved the following:
(1) "abandon" "primitive" "communist fantasies" about communal land;
(2) implement a system of individual property rights (i.e., mortgage or sell to non-Indians);
(2) repeal the Indian Act;
(4) shut down the reserves;
(3) encourage education and workforce participation; and
(4) assimilate into the larger Canadian population.
http://reviewcanada.ca/reviews/2010/04/01/opportunity-or-temptation/
This assimilation plan of Flanagan's raised a great deal of controversy, but was not unique. Others, like Alan Cairns had also advocated for assimilation, albeit less overtly. Since then, many right-wingers have joined the call for the assimilation of First Nations including people like Frances Widdowson and Dale Gibson, to name a few. In fact, Gibson wrote a report entitled "A New Look at Canadian Indian Policy: Respect the Collective, Promote the Individual" which focuses on individual success and material wealth over communal interests.
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/display.aspx?id=12783
Not surprising then, that Tom Flanagan became an advisor to Stephen Harper or that the Conservatives are now putting into place the gradual, assimilatory plan which focuses on individual wealth which has been advocated by folks like Flanagan and Gibson.
Has anything changed since the early years of Indian policy-making? Does what the Conservatives propose now amount to a significant departure from the assimilatory agenda of the 1969 White Paper? I would argue that it does not. The following overview of the Conservative agenda seems only to confirm my original assessment:
2011 Conservative Election Platform:
(1) Expand adult education in the north (no funding for k-12 or university);
(2) Increase accountability of First Nations through legislation (no funding or recognition of jurisdiction);
(3) Avoided dealing with reserve infrastructure like water and housing (but agreed to fix fuel tanks);
(4) Avoided dealing with Aboriginal and treaty rights (but First Nations can sit on hunting advisory panel);
(5) Avoided dealing with land claims (but will promote development of reserve lands through legislation).
http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf
Conservative - AFN Joint Action Plan:
(1) Education = Joint Process on k-12 education (expert panel that still has not produced any reports);
(2) Focus on "success of individuals" through education;
(2) Increase First Nation accountability and transparency;
(3) Task force to promote economic development to benefit "all Canadians";
(4) Improve relations.
http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/mr/nr/m-a2011/cfnjap-eng.asp
You will notice there are no funding commitments, measurables or key action words that commit to any specific action. It is important to note here that the AFN has publicly come out in support of this action plan.
First Nation - Crown Summit:
Then there is the promise of a First Nations-Crown Summit meeting that is supposed to take place this fall. I won't hold my breath given that Harper has promised such a meeting with First Nation leaders twice in his five years as Prime Minister to no avail.
What is being promised at this summit reads eerily like the election platform, joint action plan and other assimilatory policies of the past:
(1) The agenda is "deliberately narrow" and will not revisit the substantive commitments in Kelowna;
(2) The agenda includes education;
(3) governance and
(4) economic development.
There is to be no discussion about treaties, land claims, self-government or the funding inequities in essential social services.
http://www.stalbertgazette.com/article/GB/20110603/CP02/306039861/-1/sag0806/plans-for-first-nations-summit-with-harper-finally-begin-to-solidify&template=cpArt
So, if you go back and look at the fundamental aspects of assimilation - being educated, economic development and turning reserves into individual parcels of land, you will see that not much has changed from the 1800's to the 1969 White Paper, to what is now being advanced. The fact that the Conservatives have a majority in the House and Senate means that will be able to rush through any law or policy they choose. Having the AFN on side only helps the Conservatives legitimize the process.
All of this brings me back to my original concern that the AFN is now so far away from what it was originally intended to be when it was the National Indian Brotherhood, that I am left wondering whether it has the capacity to think beyond the organization's own priorities related to funding and staffing, and advocate on behalf of First Nations and their citizens.
It seems to me that far too many people are worrying about their own jobs and making deals than they are about taking the risks inherent in standing up for that which our ancestors died to protect - our sovereignty, lands and identities.
It's about time we called the Conservatives on their deplorable record and highlight the facts brought forward by their own auditor general - that chronic and inequitable funding has made conditions on First Nations worse. We need to stand behind our treaties, protect our territories from further encroachment and go back to focusing on the needs of our future generations instead of focusing on ourselves. Any future "joint" plans MUST engage First Nations as a third order of government and as true partners and reflect the fundamentals of the treaty relationship, First Nations jurisdiction and the integrity of our territories.
Don't be fooled by shiny new beads and trinkets - it is really the same old assimilation policy of control and division repackaged with new titles like "Joint Action Plans", "Expert Panels" and "Joint Processes" - other words for "we are buying into our assimilation".
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-native-leaders-commit-to-sweeping-overhaul-of-reserve-life/article2053099/?service=mobile
While there may be some useful tidbits in the plan, to call it historic or sweeping is misrepresenting what is actually taking place. One must keep in mind that this announcement coincided with the Auditor General's damning report about Canada's gross failure to address conditions of extreme poverty on reserve. In fact, according to Fraser, conditions have even become much worse. INAC has knowingly failed to address "inequities" in funding for post-secondary education, child and family services, housing and many other programs.
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/docs/parl_oag_201106_04_e.pdf
Yet, all of this was overshadowed by a strategically-timed joint action plan - anything to take the public's focus off of the stark reality. The fact that the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) took part in this duck and avoid maneuver leaves me questioning the AFN"s ability to effectively advocate on behalf of First Nations. Some have even questioned whether the AFN had any REAL input into the plan given how quickly it came out.
Even if National Chief of AFN Shawn Atleo did have input, that begs the question as to why he would give his blessing to a plan that would leave out critical issues around funding, consultation, First Nation jurisdiction, treaty rights and land claims. All of these issues are significant to the grass roots people, yet nothing has been mentioned about any of them. Similarly, the planned First Nation - Crown Summit also excludes these critical issues - all with Atleo's stamp of approval.
Does any of this signal a significant shift by the Conservatives from their right-wing, pro-assimilation agenda? I would argue that all we are seeing are the same old deal - the exchange of shiny beads and trinkets for our acquiescence or agreement to forgo what makes us strong, independent Nations - our sovereignty, our land and our identity. What follows are some of the reasons why I believe this to be true:
Early Indian Policy:
Early Indian policy included various measures to control, divide and assimilate Indians to finally rid Canada of the "Indian problem". These included:
(1) Residential schools to remove culture, language and family and community ties from Indian children;
(2) Indian Act provisions which removed Indian rights from Indian women;
(3) Indian Act provisions which incorporated non-Indian women into communities;
(4) Enfranchisement provisions which encouraged Indian men to give up their identities in exchange for education, employment and individual title to reserve lands; and
(5) Indian Act provisions which prohibited lawyers from advocating for Indians in relation to their lands and treaties.
(See: The Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996) [RCAP]
White Paper 1969:
The plan argued that "Indian people must be persuaded" that this was the path to a better life:
(1) Abolish the Indian Act;
(2) End special recognition for First Nations;
(3) Give them individual title to their lands (fee simple);
(4) Funds for economic development;
(5) Full integration into the cultural, social, political and economic life of Canada; and
(6) Removal of constitutional responsibility of federal government for Indians.
http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/arp/ls/pubs/cp1969/cp1969-eng.pdf
We all know how First Nations across the country reacted to this policy - they forcefully rejected it and re-asserted their special status in Canada and their land and treaty rights. Harold Cardinal wrote what came to be known as the Red Paper outlining the special rights of Indians in Canada. While Canada backed off of this policy, very little changed in regards to addressing First Nation poverty and the resolution of their Aboriginal and treaty rights, land claims and self-government.
RCAP provides a detailed history of the development of Indian policy over time and the rights held by First Nations. Their overall recommendation was to move forward with the resolution of land claims, recognition and implementation of treaties and the negotiation of self-government agreements. Canada's delayed, non-committal response "Gathering Strength" came to be known as "Gathering Dust" for the lack of action on Canada's part.
Then along comes Tom Flanagan, who, in his book "First Nations? Second Thoughts" argued that since First Nations were "primitive", "wasteful" and "destructive" that they should not be entitled to self-governing rights, special tax exemptions or federal funding. In his view, First Nations need to "evolve" and become more like other Canadians. This was pretty much the same message that he provided in his second book: "Beyond the Indian Act: Restoring Aboriginal Property Rights".
His plan involved the following:
(1) "abandon" "primitive" "communist fantasies" about communal land;
(2) implement a system of individual property rights (i.e., mortgage or sell to non-Indians);
(2) repeal the Indian Act;
(4) shut down the reserves;
(3) encourage education and workforce participation; and
(4) assimilate into the larger Canadian population.
http://reviewcanada.ca/reviews/2010/04/01/opportunity-or-temptation/
This assimilation plan of Flanagan's raised a great deal of controversy, but was not unique. Others, like Alan Cairns had also advocated for assimilation, albeit less overtly. Since then, many right-wingers have joined the call for the assimilation of First Nations including people like Frances Widdowson and Dale Gibson, to name a few. In fact, Gibson wrote a report entitled "A New Look at Canadian Indian Policy: Respect the Collective, Promote the Individual" which focuses on individual success and material wealth over communal interests.
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/display.aspx?id=12783
Not surprising then, that Tom Flanagan became an advisor to Stephen Harper or that the Conservatives are now putting into place the gradual, assimilatory plan which focuses on individual wealth which has been advocated by folks like Flanagan and Gibson.
Has anything changed since the early years of Indian policy-making? Does what the Conservatives propose now amount to a significant departure from the assimilatory agenda of the 1969 White Paper? I would argue that it does not. The following overview of the Conservative agenda seems only to confirm my original assessment:
2011 Conservative Election Platform:
(1) Expand adult education in the north (no funding for k-12 or university);
(2) Increase accountability of First Nations through legislation (no funding or recognition of jurisdiction);
(3) Avoided dealing with reserve infrastructure like water and housing (but agreed to fix fuel tanks);
(4) Avoided dealing with Aboriginal and treaty rights (but First Nations can sit on hunting advisory panel);
(5) Avoided dealing with land claims (but will promote development of reserve lands through legislation).
http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf
Conservative - AFN Joint Action Plan:
(1) Education = Joint Process on k-12 education (expert panel that still has not produced any reports);
(2) Focus on "success of individuals" through education;
(2) Increase First Nation accountability and transparency;
(3) Task force to promote economic development to benefit "all Canadians";
(4) Improve relations.
http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/mr/nr/m-a2011/cfnjap-eng.asp
You will notice there are no funding commitments, measurables or key action words that commit to any specific action. It is important to note here that the AFN has publicly come out in support of this action plan.
First Nation - Crown Summit:
Then there is the promise of a First Nations-Crown Summit meeting that is supposed to take place this fall. I won't hold my breath given that Harper has promised such a meeting with First Nation leaders twice in his five years as Prime Minister to no avail.
What is being promised at this summit reads eerily like the election platform, joint action plan and other assimilatory policies of the past:
(1) The agenda is "deliberately narrow" and will not revisit the substantive commitments in Kelowna;
(2) The agenda includes education;
(3) governance and
(4) economic development.
There is to be no discussion about treaties, land claims, self-government or the funding inequities in essential social services.
http://www.stalbertgazette.com/article/GB/20110603/CP02/306039861/-1/sag0806/plans-for-first-nations-summit-with-harper-finally-begin-to-solidify&template=cpArt
So, if you go back and look at the fundamental aspects of assimilation - being educated, economic development and turning reserves into individual parcels of land, you will see that not much has changed from the 1800's to the 1969 White Paper, to what is now being advanced. The fact that the Conservatives have a majority in the House and Senate means that will be able to rush through any law or policy they choose. Having the AFN on side only helps the Conservatives legitimize the process.
All of this brings me back to my original concern that the AFN is now so far away from what it was originally intended to be when it was the National Indian Brotherhood, that I am left wondering whether it has the capacity to think beyond the organization's own priorities related to funding and staffing, and advocate on behalf of First Nations and their citizens.
It seems to me that far too many people are worrying about their own jobs and making deals than they are about taking the risks inherent in standing up for that which our ancestors died to protect - our sovereignty, lands and identities.
It's about time we called the Conservatives on their deplorable record and highlight the facts brought forward by their own auditor general - that chronic and inequitable funding has made conditions on First Nations worse. We need to stand behind our treaties, protect our territories from further encroachment and go back to focusing on the needs of our future generations instead of focusing on ourselves. Any future "joint" plans MUST engage First Nations as a third order of government and as true partners and reflect the fundamentals of the treaty relationship, First Nations jurisdiction and the integrity of our territories.
Don't be fooled by shiny new beads and trinkets - it is really the same old assimilation policy of control and division repackaged with new titles like "Joint Action Plans", "Expert Panels" and "Joint Processes" - other words for "we are buying into our assimilation".
Thursday, April 14, 2011
2011 Federal Election Platforms and NAO Positions - Woefully Empty
Thanks for all your e-mails, texts, FB messages, and comments. I am encouraged to see so many people interested in the legal and political issues affecting our people. I know first hand that trying to sort out each political parties ACTUAL position on issues can be very overwhelming, confusing, and even impossible at times. There are so many political players out there saying one thing and doing another, or making promises that seem great but are not considered in the whole context, or even worse, saying things that have hidden meanings which are not so great.
How are any of us supposed to figure this out? I do am certainly no genie who can know anything for certain, but what I do know is that our issues have no priority in this election - which is a shameful situation given that we are the First Peoples of this land and that so many Canadians live off the prosperity gained from our lands and resources.
In my last blog, I provided a chart which compared how the platforms compared with my own list of important issues. I have now fully updated that chart with all the major parties' platforms.
http://indigenousnationhood.blogspot.com/2011/04/comparison-of-federal-parties-platforms.html
I admit that this chart is not the best as blogger has certain space limitations, so I will try to summarize the platforms here in a more concise way:
LIBERAL Election Platform:
http://cdn.liberal.ca/files/2011/04/liberal_platform.pdf
(1) a partial removal of the funding cap on First Nation post-secondary education with an extra $200M in the first 2 years;
(2) stable funding for First Nations University of Canada;
(3) $5M per year (for 3 years) for a Metis scholarship;
(4) $300M for k-12 education in year 2;
(5) Will continue support for Aboriginal Headstart;
(6) Will create a First Nation Auditor General;
(7) Will have an inquiry into the number of Murdered and Missing Aboriginal Women; and
(8) "Retain lessons and spirit of Kelowna process".
CONSERVATIVE Election Platform:
http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf
(1) New investment in First Nation Land Management to promote development of their land;
(2) Expand adult basic education in territories;
(3) Environmental safety upgrades to fuel tanks;
(4) Promote clean energy;
(5) Commemoration of War of 1812 celebrating First Nation veterans and others;
(6) Work with Aboriginal people and others to create National Conservation Plan;
(7) New national park in Rouge Valley and will try to talk to Aboriginal people and others;
(8) Hunting Advisory panel that will include some Aboriginal people;
(9) Will continue to work cooperatively with Aboriginal people, by enacting accountability legislation publishing salaries of chiefs;
NDP Election Platform:
http://xfer.ndp.ca/2011/2011-Platform/NDP-2011-Platform-En.pdf
(1) Increase Canada Student Grants by $200 million, with focus on Aboriginal people and others;
(2) Legislation to target poverty reduction in consultation with Aboriginal and other governments;
(3) Recruit Aboriginal and other medical students;
(4) Lower carbon future in partnership with Aboriginal governments and others;
(5) New partnership with Aboriginal people on nation-nation basis;
(6) End discrimination faced by Aboriginal people - access to capital, improve housing and drinking water, remove 2% funding cap and increase education budget by $1 billion a year over 4 years;
(7) Federal response to violence against Aboriginal women and support funding their organizations;
(8) Work with First Nations and provinces to add 2500 new police officers
BLOC Election Platform:
http://www.blocquebecois.org/dossiers/campagne-2011/documents/EnoncePolitique-Anglais.pdf
(1) Establish nation to nation relations with Aboriginal Nations.
GREEN PARTY Election Platform:
http://greenparty.ca/files/attachments/vision_green_april_2011.pdf
(1) Small scale project funding to restore wild fish stocks;
(2) Greater role of Aboriginal people and others in managing fishery;
(3) Encourage Aboriginal eco-tourism;
(4) Work with Aboriginal people and others to extend land and marine protected areas;
(5) End trophy hunting but protect Aboriginal and other hunters' subsistence hunting;
(6) Eliminate exposure of Aboriginal people and others to toxins;
(7) No commercial seal hunt, only subsistence hunting by Aboriginal people and others;
(8) No bowhead whale hunting for Aboriginal peoples or others;
(9) Honour intent of land claims agreements;
(10) Regulate all arctic activity, except traditional Aboriginal activity;
(11) Restore $5.1B in funding and Kelowna Accord;
(12) Create baselines for Aboriginal health;
(13) End to policies of assimilation and strong support for health and education;
(14) Will ensure governments and corporations respect 1990 Sparrow decision and that Aboriginal people be consulted and accommodated;
(15) Nation to nation relations and no more shameful events like Oka, Calendonia etc;
(16) Honour fiduciary duty and inherent right to self-government;
(17) Implement treaties and land tribunal, respect Douglas Treaties of Vancouver Island;
(18) Fully implement Royal Commission on Aboriginal People's 1996 recommendations;
(19) Promote Aboriginal culture, language and history as part of Canadian identity;
(20) Set up task forces on violence against Aboriginal women and over-representation of Aboriginal peoples in the justice system;
FIRST PEOPLES NATIONAL PARTY Election Platform:
http://www.fpnpoc.ca/cgi-bin/news1.cgi?search_for=1302757723&action='search'
There is no real platform contained on their website. However they have a two-pronged "vision" which includes:
(1) Make Native studies courses compulsory in high school and university;
(2) Abolish Senate and replace with elected First Nations House.
So that is the overview of the party platforms with regard to Aboriginal peoples in Canada. There is also the English leadership debate that can be viewed online at CBC:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/leaders-debate/#
While I had fully intended to do a thorough debrief of everything said by the party leaders with regards to Aboriginal peoples, it turns out that Aboriginal issues were not raised or discussed. The SOLITARY comment made about Aboriginal issues was made by Jack Layton of the NDP at 1 hour and 30 minutes into the 2 hour debate. Layton commented that violence against women needs specific attention by addressing underlying issues like those raised by Aboriginal leaders around housing. That's it - not a single word was raised by anyone else on any other issues specific to Aboriginal peoples. It was simply too brief to debrief.
What about information and positions from our own National Aboriginal Organizations (NAOs)? I reviewed the websites for the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), the Native Womens' Association of Canada (NWAC), the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP), the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK); the Metis National Council (MNC) and even included the National Association of Friendship Centres (NAFC) for good measure. While the AFN had the most information posted, CAP and NWAC's websites were embarrassingly empty.
The AFN provided information related to the AFN's election platforms, questions they asked of the parties, a survey asking for feedback on election priorities, news releases and statements about election issues and a summary of the party platforms.
http://www.afn.ca/index.php/en/news-media/current-issues/2011-federal-election-first-nations-count-our-communities-our-nations-our
They also provided an easy to read chart on how the party platforms measured up to the AFN's priorities:
http://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/summary_of_2011_election_platforms_final.pdf
The MNC has an "Election Page" which highlights the MNC election priorities, the questions they asked of the federal parties and the corresponding responses they received:
http://www.metisnation.ca/2011election/index.html
The ITK has one media release about the election questions it asked of the parties but no other information was posted.
http://www.itk.ca/media-centre/media-releases/national-inuit-leader-delivers-11-questions-election-2011
CAP and NWAC on the other hand had nothing posted on their websites. In fact, if their constituents relied solely on their organisations' websites for information, they'd be out of luck. CAP's homepage has outdated information from October of 2010 and NWAC's most recent announcement concerns the Joint Process for Bill C-3. These two organisations, which allegedly represent the majority of the Aboriginal population, and especially the urban Aboriginal population should be more "present" in the lives of their constituents.
Even the NAFC has information posted on their website for urban Aboriginal people and they are not even a political organization:
http://www.nafc.ca/nafc-federal-election-party-questions.htm
For all those Aboriginal people that want to vote and want to be informed about the party they may vote for, I think we all need to help inform each other. I hope you all find this summary useful and if not, please keep emailing me about what you would like to see. With regard to my own opinions, I will be offering my commentary on these platforms in the days to come, but for now I will try to highlight as many resources as possible based on the questions and comments I get in the interim.
How are any of us supposed to figure this out? I do am certainly no genie who can know anything for certain, but what I do know is that our issues have no priority in this election - which is a shameful situation given that we are the First Peoples of this land and that so many Canadians live off the prosperity gained from our lands and resources.
In my last blog, I provided a chart which compared how the platforms compared with my own list of important issues. I have now fully updated that chart with all the major parties' platforms.
http://indigenousnationhood.blogspot.com/2011/04/comparison-of-federal-parties-platforms.html
I admit that this chart is not the best as blogger has certain space limitations, so I will try to summarize the platforms here in a more concise way:
LIBERAL Election Platform:
http://cdn.liberal.ca/files/2011/04/liberal_platform.pdf
(1) a partial removal of the funding cap on First Nation post-secondary education with an extra $200M in the first 2 years;
(2) stable funding for First Nations University of Canada;
(3) $5M per year (for 3 years) for a Metis scholarship;
(4) $300M for k-12 education in year 2;
(5) Will continue support for Aboriginal Headstart;
(6) Will create a First Nation Auditor General;
(7) Will have an inquiry into the number of Murdered and Missing Aboriginal Women; and
(8) "Retain lessons and spirit of Kelowna process".
CONSERVATIVE Election Platform:
http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf
(1) New investment in First Nation Land Management to promote development of their land;
(2) Expand adult basic education in territories;
(3) Environmental safety upgrades to fuel tanks;
(4) Promote clean energy;
(5) Commemoration of War of 1812 celebrating First Nation veterans and others;
(6) Work with Aboriginal people and others to create National Conservation Plan;
(7) New national park in Rouge Valley and will try to talk to Aboriginal people and others;
(8) Hunting Advisory panel that will include some Aboriginal people;
(9) Will continue to work cooperatively with Aboriginal people, by enacting accountability legislation publishing salaries of chiefs;
NDP Election Platform:
http://xfer.ndp.ca/2011/2011-Platform/NDP-2011-Platform-En.pdf
(1) Increase Canada Student Grants by $200 million, with focus on Aboriginal people and others;
(2) Legislation to target poverty reduction in consultation with Aboriginal and other governments;
(3) Recruit Aboriginal and other medical students;
(4) Lower carbon future in partnership with Aboriginal governments and others;
(5) New partnership with Aboriginal people on nation-nation basis;
(6) End discrimination faced by Aboriginal people - access to capital, improve housing and drinking water, remove 2% funding cap and increase education budget by $1 billion a year over 4 years;
(7) Federal response to violence against Aboriginal women and support funding their organizations;
(8) Work with First Nations and provinces to add 2500 new police officers
BLOC Election Platform:
http://www.blocquebecois.org/dossiers/campagne-2011/documents/EnoncePolitique-Anglais.pdf
(1) Establish nation to nation relations with Aboriginal Nations.
GREEN PARTY Election Platform:
http://greenparty.ca/files/attachments/vision_green_april_2011.pdf
(1) Small scale project funding to restore wild fish stocks;
(2) Greater role of Aboriginal people and others in managing fishery;
(3) Encourage Aboriginal eco-tourism;
(4) Work with Aboriginal people and others to extend land and marine protected areas;
(5) End trophy hunting but protect Aboriginal and other hunters' subsistence hunting;
(6) Eliminate exposure of Aboriginal people and others to toxins;
(7) No commercial seal hunt, only subsistence hunting by Aboriginal people and others;
(8) No bowhead whale hunting for Aboriginal peoples or others;
(9) Honour intent of land claims agreements;
(10) Regulate all arctic activity, except traditional Aboriginal activity;
(11) Restore $5.1B in funding and Kelowna Accord;
(12) Create baselines for Aboriginal health;
(13) End to policies of assimilation and strong support for health and education;
(14) Will ensure governments and corporations respect 1990 Sparrow decision and that Aboriginal people be consulted and accommodated;
(15) Nation to nation relations and no more shameful events like Oka, Calendonia etc;
(16) Honour fiduciary duty and inherent right to self-government;
(17) Implement treaties and land tribunal, respect Douglas Treaties of Vancouver Island;
(18) Fully implement Royal Commission on Aboriginal People's 1996 recommendations;
(19) Promote Aboriginal culture, language and history as part of Canadian identity;
(20) Set up task forces on violence against Aboriginal women and over-representation of Aboriginal peoples in the justice system;
FIRST PEOPLES NATIONAL PARTY Election Platform:
http://www.fpnpoc.ca/cgi-bin/news1.cgi?search_for=1302757723&action='search'
There is no real platform contained on their website. However they have a two-pronged "vision" which includes:
(1) Make Native studies courses compulsory in high school and university;
(2) Abolish Senate and replace with elected First Nations House.
So that is the overview of the party platforms with regard to Aboriginal peoples in Canada. There is also the English leadership debate that can be viewed online at CBC:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/leaders-debate/#
While I had fully intended to do a thorough debrief of everything said by the party leaders with regards to Aboriginal peoples, it turns out that Aboriginal issues were not raised or discussed. The SOLITARY comment made about Aboriginal issues was made by Jack Layton of the NDP at 1 hour and 30 minutes into the 2 hour debate. Layton commented that violence against women needs specific attention by addressing underlying issues like those raised by Aboriginal leaders around housing. That's it - not a single word was raised by anyone else on any other issues specific to Aboriginal peoples. It was simply too brief to debrief.
What about information and positions from our own National Aboriginal Organizations (NAOs)? I reviewed the websites for the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), the Native Womens' Association of Canada (NWAC), the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP), the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK); the Metis National Council (MNC) and even included the National Association of Friendship Centres (NAFC) for good measure. While the AFN had the most information posted, CAP and NWAC's websites were embarrassingly empty.
The AFN provided information related to the AFN's election platforms, questions they asked of the parties, a survey asking for feedback on election priorities, news releases and statements about election issues and a summary of the party platforms.
http://www.afn.ca/index.php/en/news-media/current-issues/2011-federal-election-first-nations-count-our-communities-our-nations-our
They also provided an easy to read chart on how the party platforms measured up to the AFN's priorities:
http://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/summary_of_2011_election_platforms_final.pdf
The MNC has an "Election Page" which highlights the MNC election priorities, the questions they asked of the federal parties and the corresponding responses they received:
http://www.metisnation.ca/2011election/index.html
The ITK has one media release about the election questions it asked of the parties but no other information was posted.
http://www.itk.ca/media-centre/media-releases/national-inuit-leader-delivers-11-questions-election-2011
CAP and NWAC on the other hand had nothing posted on their websites. In fact, if their constituents relied solely on their organisations' websites for information, they'd be out of luck. CAP's homepage has outdated information from October of 2010 and NWAC's most recent announcement concerns the Joint Process for Bill C-3. These two organisations, which allegedly represent the majority of the Aboriginal population, and especially the urban Aboriginal population should be more "present" in the lives of their constituents.
Even the NAFC has information posted on their website for urban Aboriginal people and they are not even a political organization:
http://www.nafc.ca/nafc-federal-election-party-questions.htm
For all those Aboriginal people that want to vote and want to be informed about the party they may vote for, I think we all need to help inform each other. I hope you all find this summary useful and if not, please keep emailing me about what you would like to see. With regard to my own opinions, I will be offering my commentary on these platforms in the days to come, but for now I will try to highlight as many resources as possible based on the questions and comments I get in the interim.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Comparison of Federal Parties Platforms on Aboriginal Policy
Below you will find my chart of some of the election issues that are important to me and my family. What I did was compare what was important to us against the election platforms of the major federal parties.
The first three issues are fundamental to First Nation-Crown relations and the most important to me. After that, the issues I listed are in no particular order, but are all important.
If you are wondering why there are so many blank spaces in my chart -so am I. I have reviewed all the election platforms on all the parties websites and it is SLIM PICKENS when it comes to real meaningful promises or commitments for Aboriginal peoples.
I wonder if the parties think that because Harper was so bad with Aboriginal issues that we are so desperate as to accept any promise, no matter how small?
BLOC - The word "Aboriginal" only appears once in the Bloc's platform and simply says they will deal with First Nations on a Nation-to-Nation basis.
http://www.blocquebecois.org/dossiers/campagne-2011/documents/EnoncePolitique-Anglais.pdf
NDP - The NDP's platform outline on their website lacks any details yet and there is no mention of Aboriginal issues - more to come I am sure.
http://www.ndp.ca/platform
FIRST PEOPLES - Even the First Peoples National Party has next to nothing on their website except for a call to abolish Senate and replace it with elected Aboriginal people and to ensure all schools and universities teach Native Studies courses.
http://www.fpnpoc.ca/cgi-bin/news1.cgi?search_for=1301720468&action='search'
GREEN - The Green Party commits to add $800M a year to federal funding for education, housing, and water. They also promise to have Canada implement UNDRIP as well as Kelowna.
http://greenparty.ca/files/attachments/vision_green_april_2011.pdf
PC - The Conservatives do far more boasting than offering any real substantial commitments to Aboriginal peoples. It ends up being more assimilation with a side order of paternalism with their tiresome focus on chief's salaries.
http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf
LIBERAL - Then there is the Liberal Party, who has produced a detailed platform which does mention Aboriginal peoples. The Liberal promises are as follows:
(1) a partial removal of the funding cap on First Nation post-secondary education with an extra $200M in the first 2 years;
(2) stable funding for First Nations University of Canada;
(3) $5M per year (for 3 years) for a Metis scholarship;
(4) $300M for k-12 education in year 2;
(5) Will continue support for Aboriginal Headstart;
(6) Will create a First Nation Auditor General;
(7) Will have an inquiry into the number of Murdered and Missing Aboriginal Women; and
(8) "Retain lessons and spirit of Kelowna process".
http://cdn.liberal.ca/files/2011/04/liberal_platform.pdf
So, as the weeks go on and the parties speak more about their platforms and release more details, if they make any promises for Aboriginal peoples, I will add them to my chart. In the meantime, this chart should stand as a glaring reminder of how little attention our issues have received so far and to demand more from these parties.
What is being promised so far leaves something to be desired. Perhaps if any of the parties are reading my blog, they might want to consider either including or beefing up their sections on Aboriginal peoples. We are the First Peoples of this land and our rights are constitutionally enshrined. We have treaties signed between Nations that have yet to be recognized and implemented.
We also have a crisis in First Nation poverty caused by colonial policies of land and resource theft, denial of basic rights and freedoms and an active policy of assimilation. Until those issues are addressed, a few election promises won't make much of a difference in the everyday lives of Indigenous peoples.
The first three issues are fundamental to First Nation-Crown relations and the most important to me. After that, the issues I listed are in no particular order, but are all important.
If you are wondering why there are so many blank spaces in my chart -so am I. I have reviewed all the election platforms on all the parties websites and it is SLIM PICKENS when it comes to real meaningful promises or commitments for Aboriginal peoples.
I wonder if the parties think that because Harper was so bad with Aboriginal issues that we are so desperate as to accept any promise, no matter how small?
BLOC - The word "Aboriginal" only appears once in the Bloc's platform and simply says they will deal with First Nations on a Nation-to-Nation basis.
http://www.blocquebecois.org/dossiers/campagne-2011/documents/EnoncePolitique-Anglais.pdf
NDP - The NDP's platform outline on their website lacks any details yet and there is no mention of Aboriginal issues - more to come I am sure.
http://www.ndp.ca/platform
FIRST PEOPLES - Even the First Peoples National Party has next to nothing on their website except for a call to abolish Senate and replace it with elected Aboriginal people and to ensure all schools and universities teach Native Studies courses.
http://www.fpnpoc.ca/cgi-bin/news1.cgi?search_for=1301720468&action='search'
GREEN - The Green Party commits to add $800M a year to federal funding for education, housing, and water. They also promise to have Canada implement UNDRIP as well as Kelowna.
http://greenparty.ca/files/attachments/vision_green_april_2011.pdf
PC - The Conservatives do far more boasting than offering any real substantial commitments to Aboriginal peoples. It ends up being more assimilation with a side order of paternalism with their tiresome focus on chief's salaries.
http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf
LIBERAL - Then there is the Liberal Party, who has produced a detailed platform which does mention Aboriginal peoples. The Liberal promises are as follows:
(1) a partial removal of the funding cap on First Nation post-secondary education with an extra $200M in the first 2 years;
(2) stable funding for First Nations University of Canada;
(3) $5M per year (for 3 years) for a Metis scholarship;
(4) $300M for k-12 education in year 2;
(5) Will continue support for Aboriginal Headstart;
(6) Will create a First Nation Auditor General;
(7) Will have an inquiry into the number of Murdered and Missing Aboriginal Women; and
(8) "Retain lessons and spirit of Kelowna process".
http://cdn.liberal.ca/files/2011/04/liberal_platform.pdf
So, as the weeks go on and the parties speak more about their platforms and release more details, if they make any promises for Aboriginal peoples, I will add them to my chart. In the meantime, this chart should stand as a glaring reminder of how little attention our issues have received so far and to demand more from these parties.
What is being promised so far leaves something to be desired. Perhaps if any of the parties are reading my blog, they might want to consider either including or beefing up their sections on Aboriginal peoples. We are the First Peoples of this land and our rights are constitutionally enshrined. We have treaties signed between Nations that have yet to be recognized and implemented.
We also have a crisis in First Nation poverty caused by colonial policies of land and resource theft, denial of basic rights and freedoms and an active policy of assimilation. Until those issues are addressed, a few election promises won't make much of a difference in the everyday lives of Indigenous peoples.
Issue | Liberals | Conservatives | NDP | Bloc | Green | FPNP |
Nation-Nation Relations | Honour FN vets in War 1812 commem. | Yes | Yes | Yes | Remove Senate, elect Abs | |
Treaty Recog & Implementation | Priority funds to enhance fish stocks, greater FN role, Land & treaty tribunal, respect douglas treaty | |||||
Address Land Claims | Invest in FN land management | Eco-tourism for FNs, extend protect area, honour intent of land claims agrees, no extinguish | ||||
Remove 2% Funding Cap | Partial, $200M/2 yr | Yes plus capital $ for business | ||||
Implement Kelowna | “lessons & spirit” | Yes, restore $5.1B in funds | “fight poverty” | |||
Increase PSE Funding | FNUC stable $, $5M Metis scholarship | Adult education in north, skills training in north | Yes, $1B per yr for 4 years, grants for Ab students | Yes *$800M/yr | ||
Increase k-12 Funding | $300M in yr 2 | Yes *$800M, promote culture & language | No,Native courses | |||
Proper Funds for Housing | safety upgrades to fuel tanks in north | Yes | Yes *$800M | |||
Proper Funds for Water | promote clean technologies | Yes | Yes *$800M | |||
Child & Family Equal Funds | Reduce toxin exposure | |||||
Make all Laws s.35 Compliant | work in collab w FN re national conservation strategy, hunting advisory panel, respect economic groups | Respect s.35, but no commercial seal hunt, no whale hunt | ||||
Ab Headstart | Will “support” | |||||
Make all laws s.15 Compliant | recruit more Ab doctors | task force re Abs in justice system | ||||
Fund FN police, fire & EMS | No, but FN AG | |||||
Murdered & Missing Ab Wom. Inquiry | yes | federal response to violence, funds for Ab women orgs | ||||
FNs Lead Any Legislative Changes re FNs | accountability legislation re chiefs salaries | phase out Indian Act | ||||
Implement UNDRIP | Yes | |||||
Consult & Accommodate!!! | Consult with Abs in poverty legislation, lower carbon |
(c) Pamela D. Palmater
I welcome all comments and feedback on this chart as it gets filled out - well, at least I hope it gets filled out. For anyone who is interested, the following link provides details on all the Aboriginal people running as candidates in the federal election for the various parties:
http://www.mediaindigena.com/tim-fontaine/issues-and-politics/an-aboriginal-who%e2%80%99s-who-of-canadas-2011-federal-election
http://www.mediaindigena.com/tim-fontaine/issues-and-politics/an-aboriginal-who%e2%80%99s-who-of-canadas-2011-federal-election
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)