Harper's Gone, Now It's Time to Look Within

This is a blog I wish I didn’t have to write. I wish I could say that now that Canadians have changed their federal government that everything will be ok. But that is not a given. The decade-long reign of terror against First Nations, the environment and democratic rights and freedoms has worn on everyone. Yet there is still have a great deal of work to undo the harm that was done and prepare the path ahead for a safer, healthier and more just future for First Nations and Canadians alike. Nothing will change for us unless we address all the contributing factors to our current situation and that includes the many afflictions we suffer due to such extensive and prolonged colonization. The life-long work of so many Indigenous activists, defenders and natural leaders culminated in the Idle No More movement and helped empower our people to understand some of the very complex ways in which centuries of colonization has impacted our peoples. But understanding the sickness of colonization is only the first step. It’s time we finally got rid of what isn’t working for us – even if that means parting ways with long-established advocacy organizations or demanding better of our leaders.

I love our people. I am so proud to be L’nu – to be from the Mi’kmaw Nation and have many relations in other First Nations. I am so honoured to be able to stand on the same territories that our ancestors did. None of us ever want to be publically critical of our own people. We have a strong sense of solidarity and unity across Turtle Island. But we cannot ignore the tremendous power that Canada’s assimilatory laws, policies and programs have had on us. The extreme suffering of our people – scalpings, rapes, tortures, sterilizations, starvations, and prison can turn our best leaders from proud defenders of our sovereignty and identity to those who would settle for programs or contracts to try to bring relief to our people. This is not a matter of blame or judgment. How many Canadian politicians could stand before their constituencies and tell them to hang tough while their little girls go murdered and missing or their little boys hang themselves? Precious few I am sure. I don’t blame or judge any of our peoples and in fact I think we need to forgive ourselves for the many ways in which colonization has impacted us. It wasn’t our doing, and we have paid a dear price - but we can't let it continue to hurt our people.

One of the many prices we have paid for such extensive control over our peoples by the federal government is the way in which Canada has slowly gained control over our political and advocacy organizations. We have to remember that during this last decade, it wasn’t just Harper that was a problem for First Nations, but some of the National Aboriginal Organizations (NAOs) were as well. The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP) was the first to hitch itself to the Harper government and former President Patrick Brazeau gained himself a Senate seat for his outrageous anti-First Nation rhetoric. Aside from his offensive videos shot from the Chamber of the Senate, he was combative towards First Nation people who appeared before him at committees, especially women. CAP, the former Native Council of Canada, had been established to advocate for the rights of off-reserve Indians, non-status Indians, and Métis peoples and were included in the constitutional talks of the 1980’s and at the Kelowna Accord negotiations.

However, under Brazeau’s tenure, it quickly descended into an anti-Chief and anti-First Nation organization that betrayed its original purpose. At one regional meeting, President Brazeau was chanting – down with the Chiefs! We are all too familiar with the disgraceful conduct of Senator Brazeau which was followed by criminal charges and investigations. His successor, Betty-Ann Lavallee carried on in Brazeau’s path by hitching herself to Harper’s government and CAP literally dropped out of sight. Whenever CAP did make a statement, it was merely to echo Harper initiatives. An organization that was formed from the spirit and resistance of Indigenous peoples who were excluded by Canadians laws and policies became an organization of that same government. The organization has remained ineffectual and irrelevant ever since.

The much critiqued Assembly of First Nations (AFN) wasn’t always what it is today either. After WWI, the League of Indians was the first major attempt at national body which could represent First Nation interests nationally. Insiders explain that significant government interference with their activities prevented it from taking hold. After WWII, they tried again with the National American Indian Brotherhood, but again a lack of funding and government actions were cited as impediments to its success. The National Indian Council (NIC) was formed in 1961 to provide unity among all Indian people and represented Treaty, status, non-status and Métis people (the Inuit were excluded). Discord grew within the organization, so in the 1970’s, several key First Nation leaders like George Manuel and Harold Cardinal (and others) formed the National Indian Brotherhood (NIB) which focused on First Nation issues. Coinciding with the patriation of the Constitution, the organization later became the Assembly of First Nations (AFN).

While the NIC/NIB/AFN originally had good intentions and did a great deal of advocacy work, over the years, the original vision of those early leaders seems to have been lost. This last decade has seen a significant downturn for the AFN as it has lost legitimacy among many grassroots peoples and even some of the Chiefs. Despite the incredible opportunity with the massive Idle No Movement, the AFN instead propped up the Harper government and chose to ignore the obvious will of the people. When the Former National Chief, Shawn Atleo, chose to go against the demands of the grassroots people in Idle No More and Chief Spence and met with the Prime Minister, instead of hold out for a meeting which included the Governor-General, we knew the AFN had changed. Many Chiefs protested against this meeting and chose to march on Parliament with their grassroots citizens instead of support the AFN. Some Chiefs even officially withdrew from the AFN or wrote letters saying the AFN no longer represented them. But the AFN did not adjust their actions to account for this growing dissent.

Despite resolutions from Chiefs and the widespread criticism of AFN activities by grassroots citizens, the AFN continued its secret meetings with the Harper government. Many Treaty First Nations then organized as the National Treaty Alliance to ensure that their treaty rights were protected. They wanted to make clear that the AFN did not speak for them and could not make deals on their treaty rights. Even the Confederacy of Nations, provided for under the AFN Charter, was reinvigorated in an attempt to get control back over the AFN. The AFN stayed the course and sided with the government instead. The final straw was the surprise joint announcement by Atleo and Harper on an education “deal” that did not have the consent of First Nations. The outcry from Chiefs and grassroots citizens ultimately led to Atleo’s resignation. The AFN has never fully recovered.

I wish I could say that simply getting rid of these organizations would change everything – but that would not be true. Unlike with organizations like CAP, the power and influence of the AFN extends well beyond any term of office for its regional or National Chiefs. If we look at where some of the current and former regional and National Chiefs have ended up, this gives us a clearer picture of why we should be so concerned about what actually happens in those organizations and why we change is so desperately needed.

One of the worst examples is that of the current AFN Regional Chief for New Brunswick and PEI, Roger Augustine. While Regional Chief, he publically defended illegal vote buying in First Nations.

http://pampalmater.com/vote-buying-in-burnt-church-a-cultural-tradition/

Augustine’s “something is better than nothing” motto is why he was always in support of Atleo’s education deal – even in the face of opposition from so many Chiefs.

http://indigenousnationhood.blogspot.ca/2014/05/no-compromise-on-first-nation-control.html

Now, despite the fact that his is still a sitting AFN Regional Chief, he is also secretly part owner of a company called GITPO Storm Corporation in partnership with former National Chiefs Matthew Coon Come, Ovide Mercredi and Shawn Atleo. Their corporation is set up in New Brunswick at 8 Gitpo Road in Eel Ground First Nation.

https://www.ic.gc.ca/app/scr/cc/CorporationsCanada/fdrlCrpDtls.html?corpId=9061797

This is the exact same business address used by AFN Regional Chief Augustine as his AFN office.

http://www.afn.ca/en/about-afn/executive-committee

Does the AFN itself not see this as a gross conflict of interest? Where in the Charter of the AFN has their mandate changed so dramatically? The AFN Regional Chiefs are elected to bring the views and interests of their constituents (Chiefs in their region) to the AFN. The Regional Chiefs, as part of the AFN, are elected to advocate on behalf of First Nations rights and interests. More recently, Atleo explained that the AFN was allegedly there to “open doors” for First Nations within government. It was never set up nor provided with a mandate for individual Regional Chiefs to negotiate with corporations and businesses to see how much profit they can make personally within the territories of the Chiefs they serve. The inherent, Aboriginal and treaty rights of Mi’kmaw and Maliseet peoples in New Brunswick belong to the peoples within those two Nations. These rights do not belong to the AFN or their elected representatives. I am from Mi’kmaw territory in New Brunswick, as are my family and friends, and none of us were informed about this AFN company.

If this is a company that was set up on behalf of First Nations, then it begs the question as to why Mi’kmaw and Maliseet citizens were not informed. Why is it that this company has been in operation for a year without many knowing? We do not yet know why they are set up out of New Brunswick, or why the AFN is involved. Why would former National Chiefs be partnering in business ventures with the AFN? Some of the Chiefs worry that their company was set up to get contracts related to major natural resources projects in New Brunswick, including the Energy East Pipeline and/or Sisson Mining Project. We don’t know for sure because no one seems to much about this company or how much money its partners have made from it.

http://www.sissonpartnership.com/s/Home.asp

The information about this partnership is as much of a surprise as was the announcement by Atleo that took place only two hours after Perry Bellegarde was elected. Shawn Atleo announced that he had been appointed as the new Senior Advisor to Pacific Future Energy Corporation, one of the companies wanting to build an oil refinery in BC. His former AFN staffer, Jeffrey Copenace, is Senior Vice-President. It was further announced that former National Chief Ovide Mercredi would also be joining the team.

http://www.bcbusiness.ca/natural-resources/former-afn-chief-shawn-atleo-adds-starpower-to-pacific-future-energy

The Chair of Pacific Future Energy is none other than former Conservative Cabinet Minister Stockwell Day, who served as Minister of Public Safety and then Minister of International Trade in the Harper government. The former partnership between AFN and Conservatives manifested as a business deal after Atleo’s resignation from the AFN. Instead of advocating for Aboriginal and treaty rights, Atleo will now promote the oil industry.

Mercredi was one of the former National Chiefs who most vocally defended Atleo during Idle No More protests and the widespread criticisms from Chiefs, despite his former role as the Treaty 1-11 spokesperson. He is now not only affiliated with Atleo in Pacific Future Energy, but also GITPO in New Brunswick. Mercredi is not just a former AFN National Chief, he is now also the President of the Manitoba NDP – ironically one of the most conservative governments in Canada. Manitoba has the highest rates of murdered and missing Indigenous women and little girls, the highest rates of Indigenous children in care, some of the highest rates on incarceration, and possibly the worst government record on mining and other industry abuses on First Nation lands. So, have the AFN and Manitoba NDP have partnered to seek natural resource contracts in New Brunswick?

http://indigenousnationhood.blogspot.ca/2013/08/manitobas-epic-failure-manitoba-and.html

To make matters even more confusing, several months after the announcement of Atleo and Mercredi joining Pacific Future Energy, SNC Lavalin made their own announcement that they were teaming up with Atleo. Atleo’s company: A-in-Chut Business Group is set to do the pre-engineering studies for Pacific Future Energy with SNC. The overall plan is to transport Alberta tar sands oil to a refinery in BC for transport by tanker to Asia.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/first-nations-group-partners-with-snc-lavalin-for-bc-refinery-project/article25800248/

Aside from being surprised, I am very disappointed. These former National Chiefs and current Regional Chief were elected by the Chiefs and were given all of their power and influence from those Chiefs. Their ability to act as National Chief was a privilege and a great responsibility. The power and influence they have today is owed in part to that given to them when they were National Chief. They may no longer be National Chiefs, but many elders and traditional leaders have argued that they have an enduring responsibility to ensure that they use that power and influence in a good way. Some have even said that because of that incredible privilege bestowed on them, they have to conduct themselves to an even higher standard. I am not an elder, nor am I a traditional leader, so it is not for me to say whether or not this is the case. But it has always been my personal view, based on my Mi’kmaw upbringing, that a leader always carries that obligation for their people with them.

These are the same people who know the conditions of our people and know the causes. They know that the dispossession of our lands and resources is the root cause of our poverty. Some of these leaders have suffered personally at the hands of government policies designed to assimilate or eliminate us. Despite their own struggles, some of these men did some good work during their tenures as National Chiefs at the AFN. That is what makes situation all the more disappointing. How does one go from advocate for First Nations to advocate for industry? It is hard enough for First Nations to battle federal and provincial governments and the massive extractive industry, but it creates a near insurmountable task for us to try to counter our own people. This is especially true when many of our Nations have cultural protocols which discourage us from acting in a way which disrespects our former leaders or elected, traditional or hereditary. We prefer to be united and support one another.

The AFN and Manitoba NDP representatives have created a near impossible situation for Mi’kmaw and Maliseet people of New Brunswick. If these former National Chiefs sign contracts for infrastructure or projects related to natural resource extraction in our territory, it will impede on our ability to say no to the project. Imagine the optics of Mi’kmaw and Maliseet peoples deciding that no pipeline will come to New Brunswick, when a company of 3 former National Chiefs and one current AFN Regional Chief have already signed and benefitted from contracts related to those projects? Imagine the public’s confusion when former AFN Regional Chief Jodi Wilson Raybould, as Minister of Justice, appears in litigation against Mi’kmaw or Maliseet land defenders asserting our Aboriginal and treaty rights and Canada’s evidence will include affidavits from former AFN National Chiefs saying the pipeline is great business? I am wondering how much thought went into this company outside of financial and business considerations?

However, our elders have always told us that the core of sovereignty is acting in defence of our peoples, lands and cultures – even if this means challenging one of our own who may be taking us down the wrong path. I am disappointed in these business partners because it was kept a secret from the people. Part of what makes our resistance to colonization and ongoing dispossession of our rights so difficult is the lack of information. Our people are always the last to know about projects in our territory and we never get all the information. As the last to know, we rarely have enough time to research and provide our input. Government and industry take advantage of our lack of access to information and a lack of resources to mount a defense against violations of our rights. Imagine how much harder this will be with the AFN involved on the side of industry?

I am not suggesting that no Indigenous person ever open a business, work as a consultant, or sit on boards and committees. I think everyone benefits from the wisdom, experience, skills and perspectives of Indigenous peoples.  Nor am I suggesting that no Indigenous person should ever work with the extractive industry in certain capacities that try to help change how they do business. I admit that there is certainly no Canadian law against former AFN National Chiefs doing any of these things. But the first laws of our territories come from our sovereign Nations. While our laws are as diverse as our Nations, I think it’s pretty common knowledge that no one gets to hunt, fish or use our territories without our knowledge and consent. This has been the law since time immemorial. Even the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, quoted by AFN, says nothing happens without “free, informed and prior consent”. That applies not just to federal and provincial governments, and corporations, but also to other non-territorial First Nations. Setting up a company designed to get “Aboriginal” contracts from projects in our territory based on our Aboriginal and treaty rights is as offensive as hunting in our territory without consent.

We have a very unique situation in Mi’kmaw and Maliseet territory. Despite many attacks on our people, and even scalping bounty on our heads, we have never surrendered our lands. Our lands are unceded territory. Therefore we have original Aboriginal title to all the lands in the Atlantic region. We also have constitutionally-protected Aboriginal rights and numerous treaties as well. Our rights are very strong and the last thing we need is for some First Nation people from other territories coming into our territory and making deals. We have not even decided as Nations what projects we accept and which we don’t. As the landowners, these are our decisions to make. In our territory, it is the province and industry who must ask us for permission, not the other way around. The discussion with the province should no longer be consultation and impact benefits (low level jobs and contracts), it’s about ownership and jurisdiction. It is certainly not appropriate for the AFN, Manitoba NDP, or the current sitting Grand Chief of the Cree to act this way in our territory.

If we are truly to empower one another, let’s start by respecting the sovereignty and laws of our respective Nations.

Harper's Shell Game: Bill C-33 is on "Hold" - not Dead

 

                                          (photo from Facebook/Twitter images)

Today, only 3 days after Assembly of First Nations (AFN) National Chief Shawn Atleo resigned, Prime Minister Harper’s Conservative government has made its move. Contrary to Harper’s usual backroom politics and secret meetings with the National Chief, Harper has switched it up. He has decided to play this political game out in the open for all to see. Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) Minister Bernard Valcourt offered a statement to the press today saying that it will put consideration of Bill C-33 First Nation Control of First Nation Education Act on hold until the AFN clarifies their position.

“With the support of the Assembly of First Nations, our Government introduced historic legislation, the First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act (Bill C-33) in April. However, given the recent resignation of the National Chief, following today's second reading vote, any further consideration of this legislation will be put on hold until the AFN clarifies its position.

Our Government firmly believes that First Nations students deserve a quality education, like every other Canadian.

The First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act provides the structures and supports necessary to help First Nations students reach their potential and become full participants in the Canadian economy. It would entrench in law the five conditions for success identified by the Chiefs in Assembly last December.”

This is a very calculated move on the part of Harper’s government which serves a three-fold purpose. Firstly, this move serves as an indication to the AFN that Harper will give it another chance to get back in line. The carrot being offered is the promised funding attached to the bill (post-conservative-election funding). If the AFN confirms their support of the bill, they’ll all kiss, make up and move on as they were pre-Atleo. Atleo’s resignation would go down as a minor hiccup for Harper.

Secondly, this move could serve to cause internal chaos at AFN. Harper is essentially casting his line to see which member of the AFN executive will take the bait – i.e., who will step up to replace Atleo and maintain the status quo relationship between the AFN and Harper government. Saskatchewan Regional Chief Perry Bellegarde has been front and centre in the media supporting the Atleo-Harper education deal – at least until Atleo’s resignation. Then, there’s always New Brunswick Regional Chief Roger Augustine, who recently wrote an open letter trying to convince Chiefs to support Bill C-33 – so maybe it will be him? It’s hard to say at this point.

However either of these two scenarios turn out – they both miss the point. It simply doesn’t matter if the AFN Executive jointly issue a statement clarifying their support for the bill, or one of the Executive is appointed as interim National Chief and supports the bill. The AFN has no legal or political authority to allow, approve or in any way provide permission for this bill to proceed through the legislative process. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the AFN is not a rights-holder – it is an advocacy organization. To those with Aboriginal, treaty and inherent rights to education, it doesn’t matter what the AFN says, except in so far as the AFN has the power to negatively impact our struggle to preserve those rights. We are the rights holders and we are the only ones who can decide. Our strong opposition to this bill is what’s really scaring Harper and motivating this move.

Finally, and perhaps most ironically, what this recent move by the federal government does is focus attention away from the education bill and place it back on the AFN. Harper is hoping to reduce the building momentum against this bill by directing our attention to the AFN. Many people are now waiting to see what the AFN will say. The media is fixated on the AFN election and who the candidates might be. Some have even commented that AANDC’s announcement to put the bill on hold is a sort of victory.

But perhaps that’s the idea? Maybe in putting this legislation “on hold” Harper hopes this will be enough to snuff out the fire that has been lit in our communities to defeat this bill?  Keep in mind, First Nation leaders and citizens, together with Canadians, have organized major rallies for May 14 in Ottawa to voice their opposition to this bill. Maybe Harper is hoping we’ll see no need to rally, now that the bill is on hold – but they’d be wrong. We have to use every single day to our advantage to oppose this bill.

Bill C-33 is still in Parliament, still in Senate pre-study (though on hold) and could be re-animated and rammed through Parliament at a moment’s notice. We have to maintain our focus on killing this bill and worrying about the AFN later. We need to ensure that our voices are heard and that we do everything we can to ensure this bill does not pass. We all want to change the status quo and address the crisis in First Nation education – but giving up control over our education to the Minister is not the way to do that.

AANDC could start addressing the crisis by providing fair funding and addressing the cumulative deficit in education. AANDC could literally address the chronic underfunding TODAY. It’s a choice they make - against every study, domestic and international law, our treaties and even economic recommendations - not to do so. Look at the lengths Canada will go to in order to defer, deflect and deny the problem of purposeful, chronic underfunding of First Nation education. All of these many decades of studies, reports, and meetings, followed by more studies, reports and meetings are meant to delay the inevitable conclusion – First Nation education must be funded.

But if Harper has his way – this bill will pass and so too will our chance to protect our future generations from Harper’s assimilation plans.

We have to stay focused. We have the power to defeat this bill. Hopefully, AFN will have learned from all of this and stand behind the people. But, either way, as sovereign Nations, we have to stand up and defend our sovereignty and jurisdiction over the education of our children and give them hope for their future.

#KillBillC33  

#StayUnited against #FNCFNEA

#May14 in Ottawa!!!

 

 

#StayUnited against #FNCFNEA

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

#StayUnited against #FNCFNEA

#IMPEACH ATLEO - Response to AFN’s “Analysis” Of Its Own Education Deal With Harper

The National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Shawn Atleo made a “historic” deal with Prime Minister Stephen Harper on First Nation education. What makes this deal so historic? Well, it’s the deal that no First Nation asked for and its one that Atleo had no power to make. It’s historic because not only will Atleo go down in history as the worst National Chief, but he has taken the AFN down with him. For the most part, many Regional Chiefs sat by and watched him do it. Now, the AFN thinks that by analyzing its own deal, this will help make the bitter taste of assimilation wash down more easily. They are wrong.

It is important to understand that Atleo has absolutely no independent political power as National Chief. The AFN’s Charter is very specific about this. So, all of his deal-making with Canada is outside the legal scope of this authority. The Prime Minister, who is not a signatory to the treaties between First Nations and Her Majesty, is also acting outside the legal scope of his power. Harper has no power to unilaterally amend treaties or violate constitutionally-protected treaty rights. Yet, this political duo is taking matters into their own hands and changing the rules in education and treaty rights – just like they both promised at the Crown-First Nation Gathering.

The opposition to this deal is not new – it has been significant and consistent throughout the last few years. Three provinces of First Nations pulled out of the National Panel on Education – Saskatchewan, Quebec and Ontario – as a strong message to Atleo that he did NOT have the mandate to make a deal on First Nation education. Atleo did not listen. He forged ahead despite the growing opposition. The Chiefs in Assembly passed numerous resolutions AGAINST Atleo making any deals on First Nation education and specifically against education legislation. Atleo hung on tightly to Harper and forged ahead despite growing calls for his impeachment.

Then came the “deal” - the promise of adequate funding, First Nation control, and legislation that would recognize our Aboriginal and treaty rights to education. From the moment Atleo-Harper held their joint press conference, First Nations knew we were in trouble. Atleo sang songs about how he was saving our children from the status quo while Harper countered every point Atleo made – although with great tact. When Atleo realized that Harper wasn’t singing the same song, Atleo send a strongly worded letter asking whether or not any of the promises Atleo made to First Nations were in fact going to be kept by Harper. The answer was no. Instead of throwing away his pride, admitting to his colossal mistake and standing with First Nations against Harper’s assimilation agenda, Atleo stood by Harper.

What followed was political propaganda from Harper, Minister Valcourt and Atleo meant to save the deal from being challenged in the public arena. AFN’s open letters, statements, clarifications, and press releases were desperate acts of damage control. It was too late - Chief Gilbert Whiteduck filed a judicial review against Canada about the proposed legislation. First Nations spoke honestly and critically in the media about the damage this proposed Act would do. Lawyers, academics, analysts and political commentators all seem to come to the same conclusion: the Act did not reflect First Nations control or protect treaty rights, and even the funding was an illusion.

The proof is in the act – Bill C-33 which was supposed to be called First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act actually reads:

An Act to establish a framework to enable First Nations control of elementary and secondary education and to provide for related funding and to make related amendments to the Indian Act and consequential amendments to other acts

The Act establishes a “framework” and that framework is to “enable” First Nations control over elementary and secondary schools. But what does this mean exactly? First Nations have been very specific that they want recognition of their exclusive jurisdiction and control over all aspects of education in First Nations. The Summary portion of the Act provides more clarity:

 

This enactment provides for the control by First Nations of their elementary and secondary education systems. It establishes a framework to enable First Nations to exercise that control by administering schools situated on their reserves, by delegating the power to administer schools to a First Nation Education Authority or by entering into a tuition or administration agreement. (emphasis added)

First of all, any “control” by First Nations is limited only to elementary and secondary education. In addition, that control is limited to the administration of on reserve schools only. That administrative control is further limited to a power to delegate – i.e. that control MUST be exercised by giving up all control to First Nation Education Authorities – a new level of bureaucracy.

In simple terms, Canada is retaining all of its control over First Nation education – this is clear throughout the Act. At best, this Act outlines a complex process for how Canada will DEVOLVE limited ADMINISTRATIVE control over some, not all, education to First Nation organizations (not First Nations themselves). In case there was any doubt, the Summary goes on to explain that it is Canada that will set out the roles and responsibilities of First Nation educators and will create a National Organization, in addition to this Education Authorities as yet another layer of control over First Nations education.

This cumbersome new bureaucratic system will not be adequately funded, and the majority of the funds will be eaten up by this bureaucracy. The only people that will benefit are those waiting in the wings to gain favour from the Harper government and be appointed to one of these new boards. While newly appointed bureaucrats suck up the already inadequate funding that should be going to First Nations to operate their schools, a new financial burden is being placed them – the requirement to provide education to non-First Nation people.

One doesn’t even have to read the actual provisions contained inside the Act to know that this is not in the best interests of First Nations. Yet, Atleo continues to vehemently defend the deal he made with Harper. Atleo’s most recent “analysis” of the Act is a sign that the AFN stopped working for First Nations and is more concerned about gaining favour with Harper to the detriment of our children and future generations.

The analysis is not really an analysis so much as it is AFN’s spin on their colossal failure. A simple, plain language analysis could have been done in relatively few pages. However, their analysis does not even start until the 4^thpage of their document. The first three pages simply outline history – what we already know. What’s worse is that when the analysis does start, it begs us to read into the Act what isn’t there – legal recognition, implementation, enforcement and funding of First Nations controlled education systems according to First Nation laws, rights and priorities.

Highlights of AFN’s Analysis:

“Principle” of First Nation Control:

AFN uses the same weasel words that Justice Canada and Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) uses. Instead of a direct recognition of First Nation jurisdiction over all education systems, AFN and AANDC say that First Nation education should be “designed” based on a “guiding principle” of First Nation control. The design of First Nation education is being done by AANDC through this Act, and the guiding principles of First Nation control are not law – they are fluffy statements used to give the illusion of control without actually recognizes a legal right.

“Reference” to language and culture:

AFN argues that a mere reference to language and culture is significant, but fails to highlight how this is limited by the actual provisions within the Act that make provincial standards the norm and English and French the standard languages of instruction.

K-12 Education is part of life-long learning:

AFN highlights that this is an important statement in the preamble of the Act, yet ignores the fact that this Act is specifically limited to K-12 education. In an analysis, we would expect AFN to highlight the substantive promises, not the fluff.  This Act does not state that First Nations have jurisdiction over every level of education, thus the lifelong learning statement is just more fluff.

Protecting the Treaty Right to Education:

AFN claims that the preamble which states that Canada protects Aboriginal and treaty rights in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 should give comfort that this Act respects treaty rights. All the preamble actually says is that Canada protects treaty rights in section 35. It does not say this Act protects treaty rights. These weasel words are meant to distract our people and give them false comfort.

AFN asks us to believe that the non-derogation clause contained within the Act is further protection of our Aboriginal or treaty right to education. Yet, that is not what the clause says. The clause speaks to the non-derogation (to take away from) or abrogation (to end or cancel) of Aboriginal and treaty rights generally. There is no positive protection of the treaty right to education, no specific mention of the treaties which protect education being exempt from the Act, and no acknowledgment of Canada’s legal obligations to recognize and implement the treaty right to education. Instead, this Act purports to legislate that treaty right without our consent. The very act of introducing this Bill without the free, informed and prior consent of First Nations, violates the treaty right and/or Aboriginal to education. Further, the failure to fully fund education in First Nations violates the treaty provisions, which in turn violates the constitution.  AFN should be advocating and defending our rights – plain and simple.

Access to Education:

Instead of focusing on the necessary funding to ensure that First Nations can provide robust education (of their own design) to First Nations, this part of the Act is not focused on First Nations at all. This section speaks to forcing First Nations to provide education (as outlined by AANDC) to non-First Nation residents. This is an added burden and could impede the ability to direct their education system as per Indigenous values and traditions.

AANDC, as part of its assimilation agenda, is trying to transition the rights-based obligations of Canada to First Nations, to a discretionary one of programs and services to generic residents. This is the transition from First Nations to provincial municipalities. This is not the first Act to do this. Look at the Matrimonial Real Property Act which purports to give non-Indians property rights on reserve in contravention of treaties and the Indian Act itself. This will also create an administrative and financial burden on First Nations. The fact that AFN would not highlight this and defend First Nation rights shows they are no more than an arm of the federal government facilitating the assimilation agenda.

Joint Council of Education Professionals:

Again, this is another provision that First Nations did not ask for, but is a mandatory aspect of this Act. The very fact that this Council is created and governed by federal legislation speaks to the lack of independence. Either way, whether federally-controlled or jointly AFN-Harper controlled – this is not the vision of First Nations regarding jurisdiction over education. If the funding component was addressed, First Nations would be able to build their own capacity with whatever “expert” assistance they determine to be relevant.

Instead, this Act, like the Matrimonial Property Act, gives the illusion of control and independence, while mandating Centres of Excellence, National Joint Council, controlled by the federal government to oversee federal legislation. None of this speaks to First Nation control. All of AFN’s hopes with regards to this Joint Council are based on “anticipated” roles, not actual roles contained in the legislation.

Even after all of this, AFN still expects First Nations to follow blindly down this legislative path in “anticipation” of good results. The way I see it, once Canada lives up to its current legal and treaty obligations, I might be more inclined to have some faith in their intentions to live up to the hopes of AFN in this legislation. Until then, we owe our future generations a little more than pie in the sky false hopes.

First Nation Languages:

Nice try AFN, but the legislation is clear. The language of instruction in schools is French and English. There is no way you can interpret the law as written in any other manner. The First Nation “is to”, i.e. must offer French or English. They “may” “in addition” offer First Nation languages. This is an optional, permissible action, in addition to regular instruction. Given that First Nations are also being forced to adopt provincial standards and curriculum, there’ll be little room for English-French as core instruction to provincial standards, as well as First Nation immersion. The two are incompatible.

I don’t want the courts left to interpret our rights. We have domestic and international legal rights to speak our own languages and educate our children in our own languages and on our own standards. This is also an inherent right based on our sovereignty and jurisdiction over education. If Canada had intended that First Nations would be “allowed” to educate their children in First Nation languages in immersion, they would have written it that way. Justice Canada’s legislative drafters are skilled in writing the intentions of the instructing Minister. There was no mistake here.

First Nation Governance?

First Nation Education Authorities are the heart of this Act. It is intended that First Nation “control” is exercised through First Nation Authorities. These authorities are defined by Canada. They are agents of AANDC. Similarly, AANDC defines who is to be hired by these authorities, including Directors and Principles, and prescribes their roles. AANDC takes it a step further and includes a school inspector – modern day Indian agent to oversee and “verify” compliance with the Act. This Act goes even further and gives the power to AANDC to require that the First Nation Authority hire a Special Advisor, and can even appoint a third-party educator known as a “temporary administrator” against the will of the First Nation.

In comparison to the current Indian Act, this act gives AANDC much more detailed and expansive powers over First Nation education. The Act makes it mandatory for the Director, principal and staff of a First Nation school to comply with the third-party educator. Given the horrific outcomes of federally-run residential schools, First Nations have a right to fear such invasive control over their education systems – far more intrusive than now. The difference between residential schools and modern-day federally-controlled schools under this Act is that the federal government was liable for the damages they caused in residential schools. In this Act, they absolve themselves of any and all liability for any harm done to First Nations.

Other Issues with the Act:

The funding is inadequate and will be eaten up by new federal and regional education bureaucracies;

The Act limits First Nation “control” to on reserve schools and excludes First Nation control over their students within their territories but off reserve;

The Act mandates the provision of already-stretched education services to non-First Nations;

The Act mandates parents to register and force attendance of their children – not unlike residential schools, which could result in increased abductions of First Nation children by Child and Family Service agencies into already swollen foster care;

The functions and powers of the National Joint Council are unlimited and could be substantially expanded under the yet-to-be-written regulations;

There is no requirement that the regulations be approved by or jointly drafted by First Nations – Canada retains all the power to enact any regulation regarding this Act;

The provisions around the Joint Council membership seem to be more about saving the AFN as an organization, than of representing the views and choices of First Nations – although not defined in the Act, the regulations will determine who is the representative organization;

A First Nation is not permitted to charge tuition fees to any of its attendees (I’m thinking specifically non-First Nation attendees) which precludes the design of special schools or funding options for schools;

The Act prescribes who can and cannot act as a Director or Principal, which in very small communities could severely limit whether local people could apply for these jobs;

Methods of calculation for funding purposes have skewed comparators in “similarly-sized provincial” schools given that the treaty right is not comparable with those who do not have similarly-protected constitutional rights, histories, experiences, socio-economic conditions, governance capacity or catch-up to do from harms in residential schools;

Finally, the height of an undemocratic, irresponsible, unaccountable government:

Canada reserves all these powers to direct First Nation education, but will not allow itself to be held accountable if it causes harm – by insulating itself from liability.

This isn’t what First Nations meant by recognition of First Nations jurisdiction over their own education systems, nor does it recognize and implement the treaty right to education. The AFN’s continued defense of Atleo-Harper’s education deal. At any time the regional chiefs of the AFN could have stopped Atleo by impeaching him; they could have resigned in protest; they could have spoken up loud and clear.

While it’s true that some regional chiefs were ostracized and excluded from information and decision-making, staying silent about what is happening does not protect the people. I am a strong believer in unity, but not at the expense of unifying ourselves out of existence. Our ancestors were kind, respectful people who guarded their protocols to ensure good working relationships with other Nations. But our ancestors were also warriors and knew when to stand up and protect their people from harm.

Atleo’s three-piece suits, photo-ops, club speeches, international travel, and fancy dinners with Harper and his Ministers are an insult to the First Nations women who go murdered and missing, to our kids who die in foster care, to the children without hope who die of suicide; and the many people who die pre-mature deaths from purposeful, chronic federal underfunding.

The problem and the solution have been identified in hundreds of reports. Recognition of First Nation jurisdiction and adequate funding could change lives of First Nations and Canadians as we know it. Even the economic analysis says we’d all live much richer, fuller lives – First Nation and Canadian – if we invested in First Nation education. You don’t need legislation or any more studies to do this – it’s a simple choice by Canada. Not all pressing problems have such simple solutions, but it’s the solution itself – funding – that Canada has taken great pains to avoid.

It’s time to stop shaking hands with those who are trying to eliminate us and start defending the rights of our people.

Related blogs:

http://www.indigenousnationhood.blogspot.ca/2014/03/first-nations-controlled-first-nations.html

http://www.indigenousnationhood.blogspot.ca/2014/02/harpers-cons-and-fnea-would-you-want.html

http://www.indigenousnationhood.blogspot.ca/2014/02/first-nation-control-of-first-nation.html

 

 

 

First Nations Controlled, First Nations Education Act: Standardizing "the Indian in the child"

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

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

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

-        Is Canada committed to working with First Nations?;

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

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

-        Is the funding new funding?; and

-        Is the funding secure?

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

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

 

What AFN/Atleo Said	What Harper/Valcourt Said
Respects & recognizes rights, title & treaties	Not about rights, it’s about social development
Incorporates reciprocal accountability	Ensures transparent & accountable First Nations
No federal oversight	Feds will provide the standards, reporting and other oversight mechanisms to “ensure” First Nations meet “new” standards
Statutory guarantee of funding to address “real costs” of education	4.5% cap on funding (versus 6% pop growth)
Funding is guaranteed	Funding will be for “willing partners”
AFN will “inform” legislative process	Feds will draft legislation and regulations
Limited “enabling” legislation	Full “comprehensive” education legislation
New deal for First Nations	What’s best for Canada
Allows for diversity	Same standards for all First Nations

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

 

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

#NoFNEA

#NoFNCFNEA

#ImpeachAtleo