Federal Budget 2012 - The Battle Lines Have Been Drawn

The Conservative budget was released today with most mainstream political commentators wiping their brows, saying "Phewf, we thought it would be much worse!" People like Kevin O'Leary were asking why the Conservative government didn't go further to open up Canada for international investment. Others were relieved that only 19,200 federal public service jobs would be lost as opposed to the 60,000 that were predicted. Still others were wondering what the streamlined environmental review processes might mean.

http://www.budget.gc.ca/2012/plan/toc-tdm-eng.html

The area with which I am most concerned relates to what was and was not in the budget for Indigenous Peoples. I am not surprised by this budget, in fact, it is just about exactly what I predicted it would be. What I am surprised about is how the Assembly of First Nations' National Chief Shawn Atleo could possibly think this was a good budget.

http://www.afn.ca/index.php/en/news-media/latest-news/afn-national-chief-responds-to-federal-budget-calls-for-continued-work

Atleo says: "The investments in education in today's budget indicate that the voices of our youth are perhaps beginning to be heard...". Well, let's look what was and was not provided for First Nation education:

For elementary and secondary education (k-12), approximately $1.5B in extra funding is needed this year to have an education system almost on par with the provinces. This budget only provided $100M for this year, most of which will go to early literacy (and not in our languages).

For post-secondary education (PSE), we have an estimated need of half a billion dollars for this year as we have no less than 10,000 First Nation students on a waiting list to go to university. This budget appears to provide $0 for PSE.

Atleo says that "First Nations will seize this momentum to move forward to real reform and reconciliation". What momentum? According to the documents the AFN provided, over $6.7B is required this year to properly fund k-12 education and address the cumulative shortfall. The Cons provided only 4% of what is actually needed. I fail to see how this is momentum. The current cap on funding is at 2% - this is but a fraction more.

Let's put these numbers into proper perspective. INAC estimates that it will add approximately 45,000 people as status Indians as a result of the Bill C-3 amendment to the Indian Act. It has also estimated that upwards of 50,000 new status Indians will be added because of the new Qalipu band. This is a total of 95,000 new status Indians to be added to the 704,851 INAC's website claims are currently registered. This is an increase in the registered population of approximately 14% through registration alone. Offering an additional 4% of what is actually needed for the current population for education is an insult, but considering the new population, it is no increase at all.

Given that education is a treaty right, this amounts to an overt violation of First Nations treaties and very clear signal that there will be no future of increased, flexible, permanent funding set aside for First Nations education. The fact that no money was set aside for an increase in PSE is a further sign of things to come. The Cons have drawn their line in the sand and NC Atleo continues as if oblivious to the impending battle.

I don't see any "real reform and reconciliation" in a budget that offers $330M for water infrastructure over 2 years when the actual need is $6.578B. This amounts to approximately 5% of what is actually needed. If it cost your family $20,000 to install plumbing in your house to run water and have proper sanitation, what good would $1,000 do if you didn't have the other $19,000? What kind of reform is that? Again, the Conservatives are laughing in the face of the current crisis of poverty in First Nations while NC Atleo praises them for "real reconciliation".

This year the whole world saw first hand what the crisis in First Nation housing looks like. The pictures from Attawapiskat First Nation showed people living in unheated sheds with no running water. The media frenzy which followed shamed Harper into having a Crown-First Nation Gathering that had been promised several times over his years in office, but which never came to fruition. It was Attawapiskat that brought about that "historic" meeting and not NC Atleo, despite claims otherwise.

Yet, not a single cent was dedicated to address the crisis in First Nation housing. What about this lack of funding for housing speaks of reconciliation? The assimilation scheme of starving the Indians off the reserve is well entrenched in Conservative policy, yet Atleo sees this budget as making "important investments".

I can assure you that I am not seeing monsters where non exist. This assimilation plan for Indians is well-documented in government records and has always been considered by INAC as "the final solution". The Cons are just more aggressive in speeding assimilation along. The budget document focuses on "integration" of Aboriginal peoples into Canadian society - as a labour source, as tax payers and as individual property owners. Even the constitutionally protected right of Indigenous peoples to be specifically consulted and accommodated on their Aboriginal and treaty rights is translated as consultation (no accommodation) that will be "integrated" into current regulatory processes.

But let's look at what is really happening. The Indian Act is staying in place, as confirmed at the CFNG and the current level of federal control over First Nations will not only be maintained, but will be dramatically increased with the suite of legislation it intends to impose on First Nations. This budget confirmed what we already heard in the CFNG:

(1) Non-Indians will gain interests in reserve lands in the matrimonial real property legislation;

(2) Cons will transfer all liability for water and sewer on reserve to First Nations without funding to address the increased standards;

(3) First Nation education legislation will impose increased standards and force provincial partnerships while not providing additional funds;

(4) Reserves will be opened up to privatization (ownership by individuals) to allow mass sales of reserve lands and facilitate extractive industry activities on our lands; and

(5) Accountability legislation to impose standards on First Nations leaders not imposed on Members of Parliament.

Again, I am really confused how any of this screams "reconciliation". In fact, this entire suite of legislation violates our inherent rights to be self-determining and violates our constitutionally protected  Aboriginal and treaty rights to govern our own affairs. It also threatens our communally-held traditional lands and current reserve land holdings. It will result in a dumping of liability and no funding to cope with a whole slew of additional regulations and standards that Canada itself can't meet in First Nations now.

In fairness, Atleo did say "First Nations must be at the table on any discussions that could affects our lands, our lives and our rights". Or what? What is Atleo going to do? He certainly has represented ANY kind of threat to the Cons yet, nor has he publicly offered any real resistance to this run-away assimilation train. He also states that he will get clarity of what all this legislation means and ensure First Nations voices are "respected". Really? Our voices have not been during his whole tenure - what makes now any different, except maybe that his election is coming up in July?

The fact is, the AFN knows full well what these proposed pieces of legislation mean as they have already testified before the House and Senate on some of them. The focus should not be in ensuring our voice is "respected", it should be in ensuring that our inherent right to be self-determining is respected, implemented and enforced. Our jurisdiction over our own communities is what needs to be recognized. We don't need 5 more Indian Acts to prescribe how we will live our lives. I don't want my voice to be accommodated in federal legislation - I don't want the federal legislation.

I honestly wish I could find some positive in what NC Atleo is doing on all our behalves, but I just can't. It is not a personal thing, as I don't know him as a person - most of us don't and never will. I don't get to vote in AFN elections, so this is not about voting. I have given the issue a great deal of thought and have spoken to a great many people that I trust about my dilemma in criticizing an organization that is set up to advocate on our behalf. It hurts me to do it, but after much contemplation and soul-searching, I feel like I have no choice.

All we, as grassroots people, have to go by is what Atleo does or does not accomplish for us. The proof is in the outcome and this is not the outcome that will move our Nations forward in decolonizing, healing, rebuilding our languages and cultures and protecting our traditional territories for future generations. While Atleo cannot be blamed for the aggressive assimilation plan of the Cons (and I admit, he has a tough political landscape right now), he is to blame if he does not stand up and actively resist it.

Our people are the ones who live in shacks - now is not the time to tell them their voices are "being heard". Our people are dying pre-mature deaths - now is not the time to promote "reconciliation". Our people see the impending battle - now is not the time to "seek clarity". Our people need a leader - now is not the time to be a politician.

Maybe Oliver Needs a Job in Mining? Curing Conservative Dysfunction

Conservative Minister of Natural Resources Joe Oliver announced this week that amendments to Canada's regulatory process are needed to speed up the approvals of mining and other extractive industry projects. Part of his justification for speeding up approvals is to transform "aboriginal communities' which he considers to be "socially dysfunctional". The cure for this alleged social dysfunction is to take even more oil, gas, minerals, and other resources from their territories at a much faster pace.

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Dysfunctional%2Baboriginals%2Bneed%2Bjobs%2BTory/6341582/story.html

As Oliver's heart bled for the poor Indians, he said it was his goal to "give" aboriginals some hope. His plan, in fact, is to "move them from despair to hope" by giving Indians jobs in the extractive industry. I have to agree with Chief Clifton from Gitga'at First Nation that the language was "insulting". I would go further though and say that the language is also consistent with the Conservative's assimilation plan.

http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2012/03/20/are-we-being-assimilated-promo/

Harper made it clear that the objective is to give "individuals" jobs and to keep the Indian Act right where it is and will even impose additional legislation on First Nations to further control our governments and territories. The "problem" as defined by the Conservatives is that we are not fully absorbed into the body politic yet. The problem will never be resolved until Indians are "equal" with Canadians - i.e., have jobs, pay taxes and their communal lands are "open for business" (i.e. resource extraction).

I am always struck when the Conservatives are able to convince the public that the source of the serious housing, water and poverty crisis in First Nations is simply because we don't have jobs. In one line, Oliver is able to discount hundreds of years of brutal colonization and the well-known inter-generational effects of both the historical and ongoing colonial laws and policies imposed on our peoples.

The residential schools system was not an "education policy gone wrong" (Minister Duncan)...

http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2011/10/27/residential-schools-saganashduncan-apologize/

...nor can Harper say (in truth) that Canada has "no history of colonialism".

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/534215/prime-minister-harper-denies-colonialism-in-canada-at-g20

Canada has met every criteria for genocide against Indigenous peoples, the only issue is that Canada is not likely to be charged with the offence any time soon. This does not make it any less genocidal, nor is specific intent for physical destruction necessary.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/pamela-palmater/2011/11/unbelievable-undeniable-genocide-canada

The laws, policies and political decisions that led to deaths in residential schools, forced sterilizations of Indigenous women, small pox on blankets, and gruesome scalping laws are some of the most destructive genocidal acts, but today we have children taken from our families at higher rates than residential schools, we have Starlight tours and deaths of our people in police custody, we have courts and judges who put our people in jail at higher rates than Canadians, we have hundreds of murdered and missing Indigenous women and the list goes on.

Colonization hasn't stopped, nor is the reason for homelessness in Attawapiskat, contaminated water in Kashechewan or child suicides in Pikangikum due to someone not having a job in the mining industry.

But let's talk social dysfunction for a minute. Here are some dysfunctional social conditions I have noted over the last few years:

(1) Canada has one of the highest child poverty rates and when compared to 17 peer countries ranked at 13;
http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/society/child-poverty.aspx

(2) Children account for only 22% of the population, but represent 38% of food bank users;
http://www.campaign2000.ca/whatsnew/releases/MediaReleaseRCNov24En.pdf

(3) Homeless population in Canada is around 300,000 and 1.7 million struggle with housing affordability. 50% of Canadian population lives in fear of poverty and 49% believe they are 1 paycheck from being poverty stricken.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2007/06/26/shelter.html

(4) The "measurable" health-related costs of violence against women in Canada is more than $1.5 billion a year!
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/pubs/women-femmes/violence-eng.php

(5) Meanwhile, some municipal librarians are making 6 figure salaries.
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/publications/salarydisclosure/2011/munic11a.html

(6) Harper's Conservatives were thrown out of Parliament for contempt.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/957379--committee-finds-harper-government-in-contempt

(7) Conservatives are now implicated in robo-calls which may have impacted their re-election.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/mps-summon-elections-watchdog-to-talk-robo-calls-on-same-day-as-budget/article2379807/

Before Canada starts pointing fingers about our Indigenous Nations being dysfunctional because we don't run to give up our lands in exchange for a mining job, I think politicians better look in their own back yard and clean up their own dysfunction. At least there are historic and ongoing reasons for our poverty - we are managed against our wills by the Canadian government. If Canada can't manage its own affairs without dysfunction, how can it presume to manage ours and not expect the same results?

If there was ever a justification for First Nation jurisdiction over our own lives (aside from sovereignty, treaties, and our right to self-determination) this would be it!

To say that First Nation poverty, cultural trauma, and the inter-generational effects of colonization would be cured by a job in mining is ludicrous. Even just framing the discussion this way presumes that the best First Nations can hope for is a job  - as if we don't own the lands they want to mine. These lands are ours  and it is up to decide to whether we want own, operate or stop mining on our lands. This is the very essence of Indigenous land title and our right to free, informed and prior consent which is now internationally protected under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

Oliver should resign as Minister of Natural Resources and get a job in mining - maybe that will cure his dysfunctional mouth.

AFN Election 2012: Stopping the Assimilation of First Nations in its Tracks

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.

War and Peace: Illusions of Partnership at Conservative-First Nations Gathering

War and Peace - those were the two symbols that kept popping into my mind as I watched the Canada-First Nations Gathering in Ottawa on January 24, 2012. My father always told me to pay careful attention to my surroundings and that even the smallest of signs could be an indication of the real threat behind someone's words or actions. He was always curious about people, how their minds worked and how their actions often betrayed their real intentions. He felt it was important for me to always keep that in the back of my mind.

So, when I watched what was called the "Crown-First Nation Gathering" but was really a meeting between Harper, a few Conservative Cabinet Ministers, and too many bureaucrats on one side, and a very limited number of First Nation Chiefs on the other - I knew my father was right. Liberal and NDP MPs were not allowed to attend, but instead had to sit in the media room where I was watching the events. Thus, unless someone has anointed Prime Minister Harper King of Canada, this was far from a "Crown" First Nation gathering - but instead was a Conservative meeting with the AFN and selected Chiefs.

True to my father's advice, I decided that I would pay attention to all aspects of this "gathering". The first thing is how the meeting came about. The promise of this meeting had been made several times by the Harper Conservatives as part of their election campaigns. This promised meeting was not born of any interest in building partnerships between the Crown and First Nations, but was born instead of political aspirations, self-interest and self-promotion. Even once Harper was elected, many years went by and no meeting. It was not until the horrific conditions in Attawapiskat were highlighted by the media and Harper could not easily deflect the attention that the Conservatives were shamed into finally setting a date for his "election promise" meeting.

The other thing I noticed was that this meeting was called in a rush. It was announced at the height of the Attawapiskat media frenzy and to the shock of most First Nations leaders and communities. This goes to show how little consultation or partnership is really at the base of the current "relationship" between First Nations and Canada. It also shows how little consultation there is between AFN and First Nations. Yet, despite how many surprises the Conservatives pull out of their... hats, they seem to be fairly certain that National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Shawn Atleo will support them.

They must be very certain of Atleo's unconditional support, because the way in which the gathering unfolded really showed how little consideration the Conservatives have for First Nations. The whole event was entirely controlled by the Conservatives, in terms of the rushed date, the very restricted agenda, the attendees, location, speakers, and timing. More than that, the entire meeting was steeped in symbolism, none of which reflected our peoples, Nations and histories, but was representative of the dictatorial and confrontational stance of the Conservatives vis-a-vis our Nations.

The meeting was held on Conservative territory - the John Diefenbaker building - on Sussex Drive in Ottawa. Diefenbaker was a Conservative Prime Minister from 1957 to 1963. He is credited with repealing the laws that prevented "Indians" from voting in elections. He did little to address the poverty or blatant discrimination against First Nations, the atrocities being committed in residential schools, or the denial of treaty and land rights. His contribution was self-serving - expanding what he obviously hoped would be a supportive new electorate.

The meeting itself was very tightly controlled by the Conservatives where changes were made to the agenda, the attendee list, location and other logistics on nearly a daily basis leading up to the meeting. At one point, the media reported that any Chief who wanted to attend could do so, and we heard registration numbers of up to 400 Chiefs. Then it was confirmed that the Prime Minister would only stay for the opening ceremonies and gift exchange but would not attend the actual meeting. This resulted in a huge backlash by most Chiefs, First Nations members and commentators, with the notable exception of Atleo and the AFN who sung Harper's praises throughout.

While the media was engaged in that debate, the Conservatives were still changing the agenda, the speakers, and were secretive about the location. First Nations leaders didn't know whether to attend or not. This shifted the focus away from the purpose of the meeting to whether or not Harper would even attend. The Conservatives also asked the AFN to tell the regional First Nation organizations to cut down the number of chiefs they'd send to the gathering. This of course was more than just insulting to First Nations, many of whom had made travel arrangements when the meeting was called. So from "any Chief who can travel to Ottawa" to well under 200 of the possible 634 Chiefs were "allowed" to attend - the who meeting was mired in confusion and with little input from First Nations.

None of this organizational nightmare would compare to the very overt symbolism embedded in the actual ceremonies. The gathering was held in a government building, with a limited number of chiefs, separated from their real strength - their people, under the guard of many RCMP, undercover security and what looked like snipers on top of the building. It is very notable that one of our most respected elders in the procession was immediately followed by an RCMP officer. Similarly, after our elder gave a prayer, this was immediately followed up by an RCMP singing Oh Canada. This is symbolic of the very real control of our populations by Canada's police, RCMP and military. Our relationship has been and continues to based on control over our communities by Canada in often harsh and deadly ways.

The fact that the Prime Minister was speaking of trust and relationship-building while we were surrounded by RCMP and snipers was more than a little ironic, but is in fact a testimony to the insincerity of Canada in moving forward in peace. Those RCMP and snipers, whether dressed in uniform red or sniper black, represent all the over-representation of our people in their prisons, the star light tours, deaths in custody,  brutal beatings, the deaths of our children in residential schools brought back there by RCMP, the ignorance by RCMP of our murdered and missing women; and the heavy-handed repression of our protests to protect our lands. The symbolism in this meeting reflected our lived realities - but not in a good way.

I found it particularly interesting that the very symbolic gift exchange at the gathering showed First Nations presenting Canada with a wampum belt of peace, while Canada presented First Nations with a reproduction of a painting depicting the War of 1812. We extend our hand in peace and Canada asserts its dominance with a picture of war, death and military domination. A war which was at its most basic, a battle between foreigners over our territories resulted in the loss of lives of many thousands of First Nations peoples living on both sides of the imaginary border between what is now Canada and the USA. This picture represents the loss of land, the division of our Nations which straddle the border, the brutal control of European powers and the many treaty promises which would be broken afterwards.

Throughout history, First Nations have always been the ones to extend their hands in peace and sharing. From feeding and sheltering the first explorers during our harsh winters, to showing early settlers how to survive our harsh winters, our people were generous, empathetic but also politically strategic. It is much easier to negotiate treaties with groups you have befriended - at least that was the case with treaties as between Indigenous Nations. This is why we continue to extend a hand in peace by offering the wampum belt. Yet, despite how many times we extend our hand in peace, Canada strikes with an act of war. This exchange of a wampum belt for a picture of war is symbolic of our lived realities.

In case any of you think I may have taken my father's advice too seriously and am reading way too much into the symbolism of the event, one need only read the speeches of PM Harper and NC Atleo and then compare that to the Joint Action Plan issued by Canada and the AFN to see what I mean. Harper's speech took many shots across the bow of our canoes which were not returned when Atleo gave his speech. Harper talked about getting rid of our "incentives" (aka benefits) and promoting "individuals" (aka breaking up communities). Instead of returning fire, Atleo gave a speech written for his upcoming election in July 2012, ignoring Harper's speech and using appealing words like "treaty rights" and "inherent rights".

Harper spoke of keeping the Indian Act and Atleo spoke of getting rid of it. Harper focused on a legislative agenda of more imposed legislation related to water, education, matrimonial real property and reserve privatization, while Atleo focused on how to appeal to his voters. Each with their own agenda, neither focused on the grass roots First Nations peoples. There was no mention of the need for an emergency plan to deal with the crisis of poverty caused by the chronic underfunding in First Nations like Attawapiskat, Pikangikum and Kashechewan, by either Harper or Atleo. The two missed the whole reason why the meeting was called to begin with - a major misstep for Atleo.

As some commentators immediately jumped on the content of Atleo's speech as hitting all the right notes and being just what was needed, I waited for the Joint Action Plan. Words can be inspiring, but also deceiving. As important as symbolism may be, the grass roots people need REAL commitment and action on their behalf. Sadly, we would all be disappointed when we read the Joint Action Plan. The plan read like a play book based on Harper's speech. The assimilation plan of the 1969 White Paper which is also reflected in Flanagan's two books, is now being promoted under the guise of "individual opportunity". What is worse, is that Atleo signed on to this plan fulfilling Flanagan's and Conservative visions of "voluntary" assimilation.

All you need to be able to read between the lines is to understand their use of codewords like "individual opportunity (destroy communities)", "solution to Canada's labour woes" (we are their labour pool)", "unlocking the potential of First Nation lands (transfer to non-Indians)" and "maximizing benefits for all Canadians (Canada gets rich off our remaining lands and resource). Try reading the two speeches again, and see if you don't see how similar this is to Flanagan's, Manny's or the Conservative's assimilation plans.

This "Joint Plan" is the beginning of the end if we let it happen. Clearly, the AFN has crossed the line and no longer works on our behalf. Atleo now belongs in the same category as Brazeau. I wish I knew how and why the AFN fell so far so fast, but what matters is what we do as grass roots people to make sure our leaders take action. Some people have told them me that I should also look at all the political coincidences at play here. One member told me Minister Duncan was married to a relative of Atleo's who came from the same community of Ahousat. Another reminded me about the APTN report that highlighted Atleo's alleged involvement in the Bruce Carson scandal (think First Nation water crisis and lucrative contracts).

I don't know about all of that, but what I do know is that not only does Atleo need to go, but all those at the top at AFN who support this plan also need to go. We need a shake up at the AFN if they ever hope to save themselves as a national organization that is relevant to grass roots First Nations. The AFN has even lost the confidence of a growing number of First Nations Chiefs and regional organizations and these cracks will continue to grow unless they replace Atleo in July. We can't just replace Atleo with another self-interested, right-leaning political wanna-be - we need someone who will inspire the grass roots people and reunite our leaders against the biggest threat to our sovereignty in many years - the Harper majority government.

This gathering was not about partnership, it was about our voluntary assimilation. Once we let that happen, there is no going back. Once our lands are turned over the 3rd parties, we'll never get them back - just ask the First Nations in the US. Once we allow non-Indians to occupy our homes on reserve, we'll never get them back. If we allow Canada to transfer liability for water and sewer to us without any funding, we'll never undo that law. If we give up our power now in exchange for Senate seats, organizational funding and photo ops, there is no negotiating it back. The time for niceties, politicking, and shaking hands is over. Our people are being jailed, beaten, murdered and missing, getting less education, food, water and housing, and dying pre-mature deaths - it's time to do something about it.

Atleo - Bureaucrat Summit: How Bad Does it Have to Get?

There is no question that every government since pre and post-confederation has had a hand in the theft of our Indigenous lands and resources, the control of our citizens and the division of our Nations. Governments now make very public apologies, but still maintain our communities in poverty. There was a small sign of change with the Kelowna Accord, but the Conservatives blew that out of the water once they came to power. There would be no investment in food, water, education or housing for First Nations - not on an assimilationist, radical Conservative watch.

However, there is always the pesky media and public to worry about, so after Prime Minister Stephen Harper tore up the Kelowna Accord, he had to save face publicly by making one of his infamous empty promises. Harper promised that instead of $10 billion dollars to address the crisis of poverty in our First Nations, we'd get a First Nation-Crown Summit. I was very skeptical about this "deal" for 2 reasons: (1) it was unilaterally imposed to save face and (2) it didn't seem like a fair deal to me.

This meeting that was promised by Harper and his Conservative government three times, always failed to come to fruition. During this time, and in Harper's own backyard, we saw the people of Kashechewan First Nation evacuated from their community because they were all sick from the contaminated water due to the chronic underfunding of infrastructure on reserve. We also read the disturbing findings of the Coroner's Death Report about the epidemic of child suicide at Pikangikum First Nation. If that wasn't bad enough, Attawapiskat First Nation called a state of emergency for the third time because people had no homes and were living in sheds.

Given that the media kept its attention on Attawapiskat for more than 24 hours, Harper was publicly embarrassed. Add to this his ineffective Minister of Indian Affairs, John Duncan who could not help but spew stereotypical and inflammatory remarks about First Nations and Harper was once again forced to do something. This was a very difficult position for him because he has no intention of doing anything for First Nations - so he relied on his post-Kelowna disaster promise: a First Nation-Crown Summit.

However, meetings never come together very well when one has no intention of really doing anything at the meeting and you don't want to meet in the first place. But, it was a meeting none-the-less and it accomplished the task of taking most of the media's attention away from Attawapiskat and focusing it on the now "historic" meeting between Harper and First Nations. Yet, this historic meeting was not to be as historic as the First Ministers Meetings with First Nations because the provinces would not be in attendance and now, Harper is bailing out as well.

The First Nations-Crown Summit agenda that was originally posted on the Assembly of First Nations website showed a day which was mostly taken up with ceremony and political speeches. The minimal time actually dedicated to the meeting with Harper and First Nations was to be top secret and not televised or streamed live on the web for grass roots First Nations or the public to see. There was also to be a complete media black-out as no media were allowed to watch or participate in the meeting. A few strategic locations in Canada were to be set up with cameras so that Chiefs could watch the event, but those locations are also top secret - at least to the media anyway.

So, if that were not bad enough, now we have word that Harper won't even stay long at his own meeting. Harper will not even attend the actual meeting itself - if you can believe that. No, Harper is too busy with his international "jet-setting" to attend a "historic" meeting with First Nations to address issues like Attawapiskat. Instead, National Chief of the AFN Shawn Atleo and 400 Chiefs get to meet with a couple of Cabinet Ministers and a whole lot of federal bureaucrats.

So, what will be Atleo's response? He is after all, the National Chief and the one who must set an example for everyone else. He has not only First Nation Chiefs watching him, but all the grassroots people who live or die by what he does and does not do. We look to our leaders, in all forms, to stand up for us, advocate on our behalf and make sure our voices are heard. Alot is riding on his response to this latest slap in the face by Harper. How will the AFN respond?

For those of you concerned about previous comments I have made about Shawn Atleo's weak leadership, please let me assure you that these comments are not about him as a person. I don't know him personally. I have met him a few times, and he seems nice enough. My issue is with his job as a leader and as a First Nations person, I am entitled to expect strong leadership from someone who holds such a powerful position. When I critique his politics, it is not lateral violence against him as a person, but instead a call to act responsibly for our people.

I always say images shape aspirations. If we see our parents treat us with love and compassion, we are likely to treat others that way. If we see Indigenous professors and University Presidents, then we are more likely to think of those jobs as possible for ourselves. If we see strong Indigenous women leaders, we model the way for our youth to know that they can work for their people regardless of gender. In the same vein, when Atleo acts, he is indirectly telling our First Nation children, youth and young adults what is possible.

So, if Atleo sees the Prime Minister:

- tear up Kelowna Accord;


- watches as Harper refuses to sign the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;

- Denies that colonialism ever happened in Canada;

- makes amendments to the Indian Act that continue both gender discrimination AND legislative extinction;

- blames Attawapiskat for their own suffering and refuses to vist the First Nation;

- Does not act when conditions in Pikangikum get so bad that nine year old children commit suicide;

- Allows his Minister of Indian Affairs to deny that residential schools were acts of genocide; and

- watches Harper duck out of the First Nation-Summit;

then does nothing about it - then the message he sends to First Nations children living without water, food or a warm home is that we are not worth standing up for.

All the murdered and missing Indigenous women in this country are not worth standing up for.

All the Chiefs that have been ignored, insulted, stood up, stone-walled, and belittled are not worth standing up for.

After all, if Atleo does not think we are worth standing up for, why would anyone else thing we are worth it? Children will see that their suffering takes a back seat to the risk that by standing up for us like a real leader, Atleo might lose some funding for the AFN. Perhaps the Conservative government might not attend their AGMs for a year or two. Or Harper might even refuse to meet with Atleo for a while.

We all know that this is a serious risk. We saw the Native Women's Association of Canada lose its Sisters in Spirit funding when they brought international attention to Missing and Murdered Indigenous women in Canada. We saw the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society lose their funding when they filed a discrimination complaint against Canada for chronically under-funding child and family services putting our children at risk.

But our Indigenous leaders take risks. Our warriors put their lives on the line for our territories and our people. Our ancestors gave up their lives to protect us. We still have our pride, our cultures and our communities because of them. The least Atleo can do is take a risk and finally say enough is enough. - tell Harper that we will not settle for scraps anymore.

This First Nation-Crown Summit has now been reduced to an Atleo-Bureaucrat summit where most of the time will be taken in fluffy, empty speeches to make Harper look good, some gift giving and ceremony and then Harper leaves before anyone has a chance to talk about the hard issues. If Atleo would stand for this on behalf of all the Chiefs, this makes me wonder - how bad does it have to get? What would it take for Atleo to say enough?

His lack of action and bizarre defense of Harper makes me wonder if Atleo is the new Brazeau? No progress has been made, yet Atleo is always defending the Conservatives. That may have got Brazeau a Senate seat, but it didn't improve the lives of First Nations people.

I guess I'll get my answer when Atleo responds to this latest development. If he defends Harper's no-show at the upcoming meeting - I guess there is nothing more I can say about it. We'll see on the news tonight or tomorrow if he stands up for us or supports Harper.

Here's naively hoping....

UPDATED - Harper Hypocrisy: Media Blackout on First Nation - Harper Summit

I am compelled to write this blog before the upcoming meeting between the "Harper Government" (i.e. Harper and a few Cabinet members) and a small contingency of First Nation Chiefs (approximately 100). It has been reported that no provincial premiers will be in attendance, nor will any grass roots Indigenous peoples will invited. I realize that the meeting has not yet happened and may be imprudent to try to guess what will and won't happen, but the way this meeting is shaping up deserves some consideration.

I can understand a meeting being restricted in size in order to address important issues. What makes no sense to me is that the media is severely restricted about what they can and can't broadcast or attend. The media is allowed to record and broadcast the opening ceremonies, the opening speeches and the scrum (series of questions) afterwards. All the real business in the plenary sessions will be part of a media black-out - no one in the media can see what happens inside. None of this is necessary in an age where web-casting, pod-casting and live-streaming is available on the Internet as well as television broadcasts.

This is not only offensive to me as a grass roots Indigenous person, but also seems to me to be the ultimate in Harper hypocrisy. The Harper government has vilified our leaders in the media as being corrupt and not accountable, has tried to impose legislation on them to make them more "open" and "transparent" and even made open, transparent and accountable governments part of the agenda for this meeting. Yet, it is Harper, not First Nations leaders, who is implementing the media black-out for the actual plenary meetings - thereby preventing openness, transparency and accountability.

Every time an elected Chief even attempts to make what he/she does open and transparent, Canada, through Indian Affairs, reminds him/her that they are only accountable to Indian Affairs via the Indian Act, and not to their people. How can Harper accuse First Nations of NOT being open when an important meeting like this one will be off-limits to the community members served by those Chiefs? These are the very ways in which Canada sets up our leaders to fail their people every time.

How can any grass roots person have an opportunity to judge for themselves what their leaders do on important issues if they are banned from seeing it for themselves? This is an insult to grass roots members and even to the many Chiefs who are not able to attend the meeting. Notice how Harper is dividing Chiefs into elite groups with "access" and those without, and also dividing communities into those with power (Chiefs) and those without (grass roots). Something like this should be open for all to see if they choose.

It is not uncommon for some government meetings to be closed to the cameras or the public. One must keep in mind, this is not a confidential Cabinet discussion about an upcoming budget, it is not a meeting to negotiate foreign trade strategy, nor does it involve litigation or even high-stakes negotiations. This is a high-level political meeting more for show than for decision-making. In fact, this meeting has no mandate to do anything at all but talk about what Harper decided was important: education, economic development and accountability. So far, Harper has told the media that First Nations should temper their expectations - that nothing should be expected out of this meeting.

But we all know what the real issue is. This meeting would NEVER have even come to fruition, and certainly not on January 24th, 2012, had the politically embarrassing situation in Attawapiskat not hit the headlines in the media and stayed in the media for so long. Harper had promised such a meeting several times before and it never came about. So, we see that this is a meeting not one of choice, but of perceived political necessity - i.e., to save face.

Having a meeting for the purposes of saving face politically and to appear as though Harper is taking concrete action on Indigenous issues neither starts the meeting with the right intentions, nor can it be expected to result in any sort of commitment for Indigenous peoples. However, given that the meeting is about saving face, Harper could never allow the public or the international community to see him called out by First Nation leaders about his assimilatory legislative agenda, his purposeful chronic underfunding of essential social services or his complete rejection of Aboriginal and treaty rights. This is the real reason why the meeting is not slated to be broadcast.

So, Harper demands transparency on the part of First Nations, but then does not allow to be transparent. He demands openness on the part of Chiefs, but then closes the doors on an important meeting involving the health and well-being of all Indigenous peoples. He demands accountability, but only works with "willing partners" - i.e., those who will support the Conservative agenda. This meeting represents everything that is wrong with Harper - he is a dictator and assimilationist who would enjoy nothing more than to have Indigenous people dance for him, give him gifts in hopes of gaining his favour - an exercise in futility.

UPDATE:

I have learned that organizations like the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN) will be providing a live feed of the three plenary sessions at the Saskatoon Inn so that their community members can watch the proceedings.

http://www.fsin.com/index.php/communiques/713-fsin-executive-communique-january-13-2012.html

I also understand from the Assembly of First Nations website that they are trying to be inclusive to the Chiefs who cannot attend by setting up certain locations where non-attending Chiefs can view all three plenary sessions. It also looks like the AFN is trying to set up a second Ottawa location (I assume not at the venue) where officials can watch the proceedings.

http://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/crown/nc-bulletin_december.pdf

I will continue to contact organizations and see if anyone is providing a live-stream feed on the Internet where all grass roots Indigenous peoples can watch what is happening any of the three plenary sessions. It now makes even less sense to me that the media is not allowed in the plenary sessions or that they cannot broadcast the plenary sessions when clearly First Nation organizations are permitted to do so in select locations.

I applaud those First Nation organizations like FSIN who will be doing their best to ensure people can see the events, but I am sure they are limited by funding and technology to be able to set up viewing stations on every First Nation in the province. This is something that should be streamed online or at least televised by the Government of Canada, or at least something the media is permitted to do.

My biggest concern is that he will propose the following "deals" with "willing partners". These deals won't be spelled out in the Summit - but instead key words and phrases will be used to signal where he and his officials are headed. The true extent of the deals will be spelled out in future one on one meetings - how Indian Affairs usually does its business.

(1) Education

Harper will commit to find "efficiencies" in current funding envelopes (aka no new funding) to fund a First Nation education system as defined by him. This will mean that funding will flow through a national school board system, or similar method that mimics provincial systems or in some way that removes jurisdiction and decision-making away from local First Nations.

This will pit individuals versus communities; lump diverse Indigenous Nations like Cree, Mi'kmaq and Mohawk as a generic Indians (again); and ultimately promote the same assimilatory education agenda that is so prevalent in many (not all) provincial school systems. The idea here is to make sure First Nations communities are not in control and that they don't get to hire education coordinators or provide things like child care for single mothers trying to go to school.

The efficiencies found in eliminating local control and related educational services will be used to promote a school board or boards stacked with Conservative supporters and those "willing partners" willing to take power away from First Nation governments and create new forms of power among Conservative Aboriginal elite.

(2) Economic Development

There is no surprise here either. The language that Harper has been using around this item is very clear as to the end results - "unlocking" the economies of First Nations for the "benefit of all Canadians". Clearly this relates to continued use of our traditional lands and natural resources for their own government and corporate benefit. Think: oil sands, mining, timber, fishing and international exports and ignore Aboriginal rights, treaty rights, inherent rights, international human and Indigenous rights and so forth.

But key words have been used here: "unlocking" is the language used by the most infamous assimilationist, Tom Flanagan, in his newest book: Beyond The Indian Act. It is the same language being used by Manny Jules, head of First Nation Tax Commission, who agrees with Flanagan's plan to break up reserves into individual pieces of land that can be sold to non-Indians.

We only hold less than 0.2% of all land in Canada as reserve lands, yet the 99.8% of our traditional lands will continue to be exploited for the "benefit of all Canadians". This 99.8% of our lands are not enough for those with a capitalist persuasion. They now want to "unlock" what little we have left and squeeze every ounce of cash out of our reserve lands that they can with no thought for our well-being or future generations.

So, any commitments or efficiencies found in other funding envelopes might be used to offer economic development incentives with the condition that support is found for the upcoming First Nation Property Ownership Act or that quick and cheap agreements can be made to forgo land claims. Other legislative initiatives like the matrimonial real property legislation which will open up reserve lands to non-Indians may also fall under this category.

(3) First Nation Accountability

We all know what this is about. Harper wants his legislation to pass forcing First Nations to publish their salaries. But that is just what we see on the surface, what he is really after and what we will likely never see or hear are the hidden changes to funding agreements, reporting requirements and reporting of business activities that will likely be more invasive, despite the Auditor General's criticism in this area.

I can also see extreme pressure being placed on First Nations to accept the water bill proposed in the last session of Parliament (S-11) where Harper will be able to transfer all costs and liability for water systems onto already underfunded First Nations. There will be no extra money provided for this purpose of course, but the efficiencies found in off-loading the responsibility may be used to provide up-front training and minimal infrastructure investments that will fall apart will lack of stable funding for upkeep and maintenance.

It will be stressed that accountability = doing what Harper wants - versus what is best for their communities will be the condition for all future funding. Things like emergency housing or water services will likely be contingent on third party managers or co-managers imposed quietly. This meeting and those that we will never hear about will focus on getting control over the Indian problem.

The Indian problem will be resolved in one of two ways: (1) our continued colonization through empowering those Aboriginal people who have internalized colonization and now turn on us, or (2) legislating those Indigenous people who resist colonization and assimilation out of existence - keeping them in constant litigation, medicating them, vilifying them as "radicals", splitting up families, dividing women from their communities, and over-incarcerating us.

If anyone thinks I am being pessimistic - you are welcome to your opinion. However, the writing is clearly on the wall and anyone who expects otherwise will be disappointed. Now, I might stand to be corrected. Harper could make any sort of announcement where I would happily concede the error of my predictions.

Harper might announce at this meeting that he will reduce First Nation Poverty in 5-10 years:

http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2012/01/12/harper-once-pledged-to-reduce-aboriginal-poverty-in-5-to-10-years/

Oh, wait, he already did that.

Ok, Harper might announce that he will speed up land claims with a "revolutionary" new Specific Claims Tribunal:

http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2011/05/16/four-years-later-harpers-promised-tribunal-still-mired-in-bureaucracy/

Darn, he did that too, with similar non-results.

Sadly, 2, 4 even 6 years later, Harper's old promises still have not come to fruition. I think if he makes any new promises at this meeting - First Nations might be well-advised to wait and see what concrete actions are actually taken, and not jump too quickly for that "willing partners" name tag.

I fully admit that all of this is my best guess based on all my research, education, and experience, but that is all us grass roots people will have, since the actual meeting is off-limits to the majority of us who are affected by their decisions - unless of course we find an organization that is permitted and willing to live-stream the event online for all of us.

I will keep looking...

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, Whose the Smartest of them All? The Problem with Radicals, Insurgents, Terrorists, and Non-Thinkers

Mirror, Mirror on the wall, who's the smartest of them all? Well, according to Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver, the Conservatives are the smartest of them all - at least, they are the only ones who take "facts" into account when they think. This means that everyone else who does not think, act and support the Conservative right-wing agenda is relegated to that neanderthal group of non-thinkers who pose a national security risk. Sound familiar?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/story/2012/01/09/pol-joe-oliver-radical-groups.html

Well, I am not just talking about me and my alleged "subversive and hostile activities". Nor am I talking about Cindy Blackstock and her evil pursuit to give First Nations children a chance at the good life. This time I am talking about all those pesky environmentalists, anti-poverty groups, churches, amnesty groups, human rights organizations, international organizations, students, academics, lawyers, animal protection groups, scientists, researchers, women's right organizations, Canadian politicians and political groups, actors, actresses and singers, and philanthropists, as well as the most notorious radicals, insurgents, and terrorists in Canada - Indigenous peoples.

http://indigenousnationhood.blogspot.com/2012/01/when-advocating-for-first-nations-is.html

Somehow this gigantic, ideologically, culturally, socially, politically and legally diverse group form a "radical" group of people who, according to Conservative Minister Oliver: "don’t take into account the facts but are driven by an ideological imperative". This imperative is to "block trade" and "undermine Canada's economy". This out of control group "threaten to hijack our regulatory system to achieve their radical ideological agenda".

Honestly, just the thought of someone trying to hijack our regulatory process sends a cold shiver down my spine. Imagine the level of sophistication, planning and education that allowed such a dangerous group to read and understand those millions of regulations. The sheer level of dedication to their terrorist plot to protect the environment, the health of the residents or Indigenous lands is astounding.

Don't let this insurgent group's reliance on research data, scientific studies, academic publications, and internationally recognized reports fool you. They are not basing their ideology of sustainability and human rights on "facts" - they are, instead, blindly following a radical ideology which is intent on destroying Canadians - i.e., those that voted Conservative in the last election. "Their goal is to stop any major project no matter what the cost to Canadian families in lost jobs and economic growth. No forestry. No mining. No oil. No gas. No more hydro-electric dams." What next? Wind mills, solar power and bicycles?

I think the answer is actually hidden in Minister Oliver's comments - REAL Canadians support mining, logging and oil sands - regardless of the costs to people, land, water or the environment. Radicals support clean water, alternative energy and respecting Indigenous lands and resources. Thus, by stripping this rather large group of radicals of their citizenship (non-Canadians), intelligence (thinking without facts), or legitimate concerns (radical ideologies), they can be de-humanized, vilified, criminalized, and ultimately ignored.

If you think I am being paranoid (that one's for you CSIS), then ask any Indigenous person who has been labelled as "savage", "pagan", "heathen", "uncivilized", "communist", "radical", "insurgent", "terrorist" threat to Canada. We are so dangerous in fact that it takes CSIS, special units of the RCMP, DND (military) AND Indian Affairs to keep an eye on our tiny little population. Stealing our land and resources, decimating our populations, outlawing our languages and cultures, keeping us in extreme poverty, stealing our children from us, throwing us in jails, and publicly vilifying us in the media is not enough to comfort those fact-based thinking Conservatives.

If you ask me, the real radical terrorists are the "new" Conservative party. They are so far away from their old political ideologies that even some Conservatives are scared of this new party. However, given that many consider Harper to be akin to a dictator, these same old-school Conservatives fear doing anything but supporting this new radical party. It is plain to see that the right wing fanatics from the Reform Party invaded the Conservatives and have never ceded power. Once a dictator assumes power, the only way he can maintain it is through propaganda, misinformation, secrecy, fear and force. This is exactly what we see now.

The new Conservative Party has shown that it is THEY who hold radical right-wing ideologies that they ram down the throats of the majority of Canadians. These ideologies are never based on fact, science or reality, but instead on their radical ideology that the ultimate goal is to achieve the most power and wealth it can. This is not my political rhetoric, as you will recall I don't vote in federal or provincial elections as none of those parties represent our Indigenous Nations. What I am saying is fact - and in case you have any doubts, I invite you to consult the Parliament of Canada website and peruse the legislation that has already passed or is being proposed. It is highly focused on power (military, defense) and wealth (stopping unions, stealing reserve lands).

http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/Home.aspx?language=E&Parl=41&Ses=1

If such a political party can proceed with oil sands despite the catastrophic environmental, human and animal impacts; if it can proceed with destructive extraction industries ignoring Indigenous rights; or pursue wealth and power while leaving children and families to live in poverty - then I ask who is the radical terrorist? Who is acting in a way to subvert the well-being of Canadian citizens and Indigenous peoples, lands and waters?

Since when did sustainable development, sharing the wealth, respecting human rights and Indigenous rights become anti-Canadian? Moreover, since when did participating in a democratic process like testifying before a regulatory board about one's concerns about a project become such a radical act?

Is Minister Oliver saying we are no longer entitled to hold a different opinion? That sounds radically like a dictatorship to me. I think we ought to start monitoring his Facebook, Twitter, and e-mail accounts and see what kind of meetings and conferences he attends. I'm a little nervous about this one.