- Ms Kaye is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Mary Carlisle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Prem Gill is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nancy Flight is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Justin Everett is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- John Westover is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nora Etches is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Edward Henderson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Bharadwaj Chandramouli is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dean Chatterson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Marius Scurtescu is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Robert Parkes is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- James Murton is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Susan Doyle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Vincent Strgar is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Helen Spiegelman is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Subir Guin is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Kimball Finigan is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joanne Manley is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- David Leach is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
Indian Affairs Honcho, Well Grilled
And other notes from the Assembly of First Nations convention.
[Editor's note: Last week's Assembly of First Nations convention played out in the media as sputtering fireworks and sound-bite treatments of varied issues, the most notable being Prime Minister Harper's stated opposition to "racially divided fisheries." In an attempt to bring some light to so much heat, The Tyee offers here a reporter's notebook from the session. Included as well is a full transcript of the question-answer period that placed Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice on the hot seat with native chiefs.]
Last Thursday, the federal Indian Affairs minister was publicly grilled by native chiefs on the lack of clean water and adequate housing, as well as on Prime Minister Stephen Harper's opposition to "race-based fisheries." Other chiefs were more generous, quietly voicing their belief that the minister Jim Prentice was being kept on too tight a leash by Harper, and was trying his best.
The chiefs at the 27th annual convention of the Assembly of First Nations http://www.afn.ca, July 11-13 at the Canada Place centre in Vancouver, also re-elected Phil Fontaine to another three-year term as AFN national chief. After a tough, bitter campaign, Fontaine garnered 76 per cent of the chiefs' votes, winning 373 to 117.
THE ELECTION
In 1997, Fontaine, of the Sagkeeng First Nation in Manitoba, first succeeded Ovide Mercredi, who had been national chief since 1991. In 2000, the chiefs replaced Fontaine with the feistier Matthew Coon Come, during whose term relations between the AFN and Ottawa nearly broke off. The AFN convention in 2003 re-elected Fontaine to repair relations with Ottawa.
For his campaign, Fontaine cited his accomplishments, which included a first minister's meeting that promised to tackle native poverty, and a $1.9-billion compensation package for former students of residential school abuse. After the vote, Fontaine said his first task is to revive the Kelowna Accord. Fontaine appears extremely shrewd and cautious (overly so, for some), weighing each word at length before speaking.
Fontaine's only challenger was Bill Wilson, whose aboriginal name is Hemas Kla-Lee-Lee-Kla, a lawyer and hereditary chief from the Cape Mudge band on Vancouver Island, who now lives in downtown Vancouver. Active in native causes for four decades, Wilson made national news in 1983, when he wrangled with then-prime minister Pierre Trudeau but helped draft an amendment to the Constitution that secured aboriginal and treaty rights.
He ran for national chief, he said, because topics such as aboriginal suicide, land title and treaties were being bypassed in the leadership campaign, and Fontaine had become too chummy with the Liberals. Wilson claimed the support of four former AFN national chiefs, including Ovide Mercredi, Matthew Coon Come, Del Riley and Noel Starblanket.
Wilson's words
It seems that AFN delegates preferred a more tactful leader; some of Wilson's rhetoric has made headlines. During a 1990 speech to a group of non-aboriginal lawyers, Wilson said it was a "stupid mistake" for aboriginals to have welcomed the first European colonizers.
"For the most part, they were the people from the ghettos in London and Liverpool and all over Europe who simply couldn't make a living there," he said. "Why would they leave if they were doing so well? Realistically, you're nothing but a bunch of dirty, smelly, white people who fell off the boats and had we known what you were going to do to us, perhaps we should have considered killing you all." (Wilson said the lawyers then applauded him.)
Speaking to the Vancouver Sun in 2002, Wilson chastised some B.C. native leaders as "token niggers," explaining that the federal government was using them in much the same way the U.S. southern states would give particular jobs to blacks as a political facade during the segregation conflicts.
THE ISSUES
Fisheries rights
The convention was abuzz over a letter by Prime Minister Stephen Harper published in the Calgary Herald on July 11. It read: "In the coming months, we will strike a judicial inquiry into the collapse of the Fraser River salmon fishery and oppose racially divided fisheries programs."
Grand Chief Ed John of the First Nations Summit, and other AFN speakers angrily countered that the Constitution recognizes native fishing rights, and added they have been upheld by the Supreme Court in a 1990 ruling. As well, the B.C. Court of Appeal recently ruled that federal regulations do not violate the constitutional rights of non-aboriginals.
Yet disputes continue on whether the courts explicitly meant commercial fishing rights for aboriginals, or only cultural fishing rights. Although non-native fishermen applauded Harper's comments in the press, some AFN delegates warned that the initiative could be a serious threat to treaty negotiations in B.C., and could even spark violence amongst competing fishing groups on the waters.
Health
Diabetes resulting from poor diets is overrunning Canada's First Nations at a rate three to five times that of the general population, according to a report released to the AFN and based on an aboriginal health survey.
B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell was cordially welcomed to the convention, in contrast to his reception four years ago, when he was promoting a province-wide referendum that would have limited the powers of future aboriginal governments. Introducing him, Musqueam band leader Ernie Campbell called the premier "cousin."
"It is not acceptable to me, nor to you...that there is a 400 per cent greater incidence of Type 2 diabetes. It is not acceptable that life expectancy is seven and a half years shorter," the premier said. He proudly noted last week's B.C. educational-jurisdiction deal that gave bands control over their children's education.
UN Declaration
Fontaine asked all native leaders to join in the fight to convince the Canadian government to agree on the United Nations Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Canada and Russian were the only two of 30 voting states who opposed the statement that recognizes the rights of native peoples around the globe.
Representation
An old sore point remains. "The AFN has been almost irrelevant in terms of urban aboriginal issues," the Toronto Star this week quoted Joe Hester, who runs an aboriginal health clinic in Toronto. "There's a claim on their part that they represent First Nations members living off-reserve, but it just isn't true."
Asked about this longstanding perception, the Grand Chief's son Michael Fontaine told The Tyee wearily that "The AFN represents every First Nation person in this country regardless of residency. There has been legislation passed that if you live off reserve you can vote in your own community. That tells me that wherever you are, you are a citizen of your First Nation. If outside organizations claim to represent them, that's a myth. You can't compel somebody to vote, but it's far easier to be critical.
"First Nations people vote for their chiefs," he added. And those chiefs can then vote at the AFN, just like the Canadian system. The idea that people can hold native politics to a higher standard of democracy than the Canadian system is an o ffensive fallacy. Everybody has a role to play, and all First Nations people are in this together."
THE GRILLING
On the last day, Jim Prentice, the minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, addressed delegates, the first time a Conservative government spokesperson had done so in 13 years. He apparently tried to set a new "tough love" tone for a political relationship with native peoples.
Jim Prentice, born 1956, the MP for Calgary Centre-North, is a developer, lawyer and newspaper owner. He was first elected to the Commons in 2004 and served as the opposition critic on the ministry. He was nominated in 2001 to run in Calgary Southwest, but stepped aside for Stephen Harper, and in 2003, he ran for the Conservative leadership, coming second to Peter MacKay. He later voted in favour of the Liberals' same-sex marriage bill. Prentice was saddled with the unpopular task of cancelling the Liberals' $5 billion election-eve Kelowna Accord. He tried to fill the Kelowna void by targeting money at drinking-water problems and violence against aboriginal women.
He has pledged to confront the problems facing urban natives -- a massive but often-neglected subject -- with $600 million from any unexpected surpluses. After years of Liberal stalling, Prentice finally got cash moving to the survivors of native residential school abuse.
'Not the Prentice I knew'
In his speech, Prentice appeared quite dedicated and well informed of his portfolio, but utterly hard-nosed, rigid and humourless -- maybe uneasy under the prime minister's constraints, and the embarrassment of having to defend Harper's blunt comments on "race-based fisheries." The question-and-answer session that followed was far from congenial. (Find a transcript of the full session at the end of this article.)
Perhaps it could hardly be otherwise. As Calgary Herald columnist Don Martin noted: "[The ministers] are not generally allowed to think outside the tight little box Harper hammered them into right after the swearing-in ceremony. So they mostly taunt the Liberals about the 13 years they had to fix nagging problems the Conservatives inherited."
"In that room was not the Jim Prentice I knew a year ago," Alberta regional chief Jason Goodstriker later told The Tyee. "It seems that the prime minister is hanging a big stick over the ministers' heads, so I have only sympathy for him. Mr. Prentice is the best and most qualified person we have in the Conservative party for that job. He does have compassion, and he lobbied to have the job, but if he doesn't fall into rank, the PM might replace him with someone else."
Hustled out
One consistent Tory theme is accountability: "Citizens want good value for their hard-earned tax dollars, and governments must do their best to meet this demand," said Prentice. "Aboriginal governments are no exception. For First Nations communities to become more self-sufficient, First Nations governments must be more accountable to their constituents."
As Prentice left the meeting hall, a disquieting scene ensued. Security guards barked at people to clear a path for the minister, and Prentice was hustled out within a bubble of aides down long hallways and out a backdoor like a hunted man (to catch a plane, he said, as he was scheduled to visit the Calgary Stampede rodeo the next day). Media ran to catch him, shouting questions in vain, typical of the Tories' strained relations with the press. Even Fontaine followed the scrum without finding Prentice, and reporters voiced astonishment that the minister had not posed for a photo with the national chief.
Next up, Layton
A lively speech by NDP leader Jack Layton followed. "The NDP does not believe the fisheries is race-based, now or ever has been," he said to prolonged applause and whistles. "Just like we don't believe we're in a race-based meeting now. We are talking nation to nation!"
And yet Layton was not without native critics. "Mr. Layton is just as responsible as Mr. Prentice for us losing the Kelowna Accord," Michael Fontaine told The Tyee. "If Mr. Layton hadn't voted with the Tories, the Liberal government would still be alive, and Kelowna would still be alive.
After a lengthy policy discussion with panellists, Layton and aboriginal Liberal MP Gary Merasty (a Cree from Saskatchewan), the convention closed with a moving song and a long parade of chiefs into the hall, each holding up a distinct flag for each region, and all trailed by a half dozen red coated Mounties.
NOTES IN THE MARGINS
I recalled that in 1997 in the same building, I had attended the AFN convention that first elected Fontaine as Grand Chief (as background for my course in Aboriginal Politics at UBC). How odd it seemed that in a booming B.C. economy, the same issues -- basic housing, water, diseases, jobs -- kept recurring over and over, as time seems to stand still.
It was disconcerting to walk amidst people living in conditions that Vancouverites would never accept for themselves at home in 2006, if one tries to imagine not being able to get water from taps or flush a toilet, much less being unable to find a job, or a nurse for one's children.
I wonder if the same problems will be raised again at an AFN convention a decade from now. If so, it's not something Canadians could be proud of.
TRANSCRIPT: QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION
July 13, 2006. Federal Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice and aboriginal chiefs, at the 27th annual convention of the Assembly of First Nations (http://www.afn.ca), July 11-13 at the Canada Place in Vancouver.
Male Questioner:
I am Chief Doug Kelly, from the Soowahlie First Nation of Vancouver Island. I want to thank Minister Prentice for joining us today, and making an effort to deal with a couple of important issues head on. I want to make one observation. It troubles me that the Conservative government insists on making aboriginal issues partisan. He knows the history well. Yes, there's been a Liberal government for 13 years. But there was a Conservative government for about a decade before that. These problems within our communities -- social, economic, poverty, education, issues around lands and rights -- they've existed since contact. There have been political parties of all stripes that share in that shameful history. [Applause.]
I met with [acting federal Liberal leader] Bill Graham not long ago and I asked him, "I encourage you to move away from partisan politics, when it begins to address the crushing poverty in our communities." I met with Jean Crowder, one of [NDP leader] Jack Layton's MPs and we asked her to move away from partisan politics. I did the same with you, minister, and a couple of your colleagues. I'm asking you again to move away from the shameful partisan politics where the game is played, and it doesn't change a damn thing for any of us. [Applause.]
On the issue of the Kelowna Accord, accountability, minister, is a two way street. That Kelowna Accord was signed by the prime minister, not by the Liberal leader. It was signed by the premier of British Columbia, Gordon Campbell, and the B.C. First Nations Leadership Council. The transformative accord, it's a made-in-B.C. arrangement, it flows from Kelowna. There are commitments made there that require new investment, new policy, a new significant commitment from you and your government. We're not seeing that commitment.
I want to also bring to your attention this concern that I have about the preoccupation with electoral process. There's a reason your government is a minority and not a majority. And it's about promises like that judicial inquiry. On one hand, the Conservatives talk about being wise and astute with hard-earned taxpayers' dollars, and then they throw it away on useless judicial inquires. [Applause.]
Put that money into basic research and the recovery of Cultus sockeye, and supportive partnerships, and not wasting time playing the blame game.
I want you to know, minister, we know what went wrong. I'm working with the commercial salmon advisory board, I'm working with others in the commercial fishing industry to move the agenda forward in a good way. When your prime minister makes policy changes off-the-cuff about First Nations fisheries, he threatens those kinds of arrangements. Thank you, Madame Chair. [Applause]
Minister Prentice:
Well, a couple of things I'd like to respond to very quickly. Firstly, on the issue of partisanship, I'd like to make it perfectly clear that I understand how important these issues are. I also wish to make it clear, however, that you understand just how difficult is the situation that this government and I have inherited as a minister, and I should continue to draw the comparison between this government and the last.
With respect to the issue of the fisheries, I think I've spoken clearly about this. I have worked extensively with the prime minister on this issue, as has the minister of fisheries and oceans, and there is nothing whatsoever "off-the-cuff" about the indication that there will be a judicial inquiry. It was discussed in the last election, it was in writing in the platform on which the Conservative party ran to form government. And I don't agree with your comment that it is not important. It is important for the sake of aboriginal Canadians as much as non-aboriginal Canadians to get to the bottom of what is the problem in the Fraser River fishery before there's no fish left. Surely it's important that we have someone independent and respected, who will be respectful of aboriginal rights as well to get to the bottom of this.
With respect to Kelowna, you reference the agreement that the prime minister has signed. The prime minister never signed an agreement at Kelowna, and none of the dollars that were tabled in the closing moments were ever put forward to the Parliament of Canada in a budget. It just did not happen. And there is no document describing the financial commitments that have been approved by the government of Canada. Now, if you compare the budget that this government dealt with, it is a budget on a two-year timetable, and you compare it to the budget that was discussed in Kelowna at that time, at the first ministers' meeting, the numbers are quite comparable. So we've moved forward on the agenda that I've described in my comment earlier today. I look forward to doing that.
Male Questioner:
Mr. Prentice, I am Chief Harper of the Garden Hill First Nations of Manitoba. Today I'm hearing that you've given out billions and billions of dollars throughout various programs, with different resources. But today in my community, at this very moment, we're experiencing an epidemic of tuberculosis. And I've been to Ottawa to raise this issue, and I know for a fact that you're aware of this issue. What about housing? In my community there has not been one house delivered this past year, due to climate change. And today I want to challenge each and every First Nation in this room -- and I want you to witness this, Mr. Minister -- how many of you First Nations do not have running water in your communities? Raise your hands. [Many hands raised.]
I'll tell you, minister, in my community there is no such thing as running water, a community of 4,000. And minister, I want to invite you, along with national chief Fontaine to my community, to see firsthand the problems we have to live in every day. Prior to coming here, I got invited to the Health Sciences Centre in Winnipeg to come meet an elder, 83 years old, a well-respected native elder with tuberculosis.
Time after time, your government will not face this crisis. We need community-wide screening, and housing. Something has to be done today. We won't see new housing, because it's a "winter road access only." So I'm asking you today two questions. What are you going to do about our housing? And when will you visit the region?
Minister Prentice:
Well, Chief Harper, I hear you, I understand what you're saying. If there's a way over the next year to visit your community, I will do that. I've visited many of the First Nations community over the past 20 years of my life.
You've raised three issues. First, water. We're doing the best with the circumstances that I've inherited with water. I think it's a pretty good job -- 755 First Nations water systems across Canada, 200 of them involve communities at risk. When I became the minister, we've reduced the number, and we'll continue to force those numbers down. I think the approach I've outlined with national standards and accountability is for everyone. That is the way to go.
With respect to health, I'm not the health minister, although I work together with the minister. I can tell you that in the last budget there was $220 million in additional money put forward for health, which was an increase of 12 per cent in the aboriginal health budget. So we've committed resources and the minister of health is committed to dealing with this issue, and we speak about it all the time. Again, there are difficult issues across the country that we're trying to wrestle with.
On housing, I can tell you that I've spoken with the national chief on this, and we look forward to working together, and we want to be able to leverage housing dollars, and we want to see more opportunities for people on reserve to own their own homes, to do so in a legal framework to encourage independence. So I appreciate your comments.
Male Questioner:
I am Dan Smith, Qualicum First Nation. Thank you Mr. Minister for being here. You talked about prosperity and quality of life.
Mr. Minister, from our perspective in our First Nations communities, prosperity and quality of life is culturally connected to our lands and resources. They are demonstrated through our crests, our songs and our dances. I'm not sure, Mr. Minister, if you fully understand or appreciate that we are culturally connected to the lands and resources. We want to protect that integrity. You talk about how much money is in the budget. Do you know how much money is in the respective First Nations across Canada to provide for that quality of life that you talk about? Do you know the statements that have been made by the prime minister in respect to the human rights of indigenous peoples? Do know what "race-based fisheries" comments do to our kids in the schools, at homes, in terms of interacting with the non-aboriginal communities? It fuels the fires of prejudice and discrimination. [Applause.]
Mr. Minister, I want to talk for a minute about systemic attitudinal barriers that have been created by rhetoric. The barriers have been there since 1763, and since first contact, reinforced in 1867 when the federal government said, "We will look after the Indians and their lands." When are you going to start looking after all First Nations peoples? That barrier is reinforced by statements like "we are not going to support a segregated fisheries across Canada. That's not segregated, that's a right that's recognized in the Constitution of Canada. [Applause.]
[Madam Chair: Could you please ask your question because he has to leave in 10 minutes, and there are many people waiting at other mics.]
Yes Madame Chair, my question is, "Do you know how many financial resources are in each of the communities, and if you do, could you tell us, please."
Minister Prentice:
I'm not sure I fully understand your question, but I can tell you that the government of Canada at this point spends $9 million a year on aboriginal programs and services, which, however you calculate it, is in the range of $15,000 for each person who lives on reserves. I appreciate your frankness but I'm going to be frank with you as well. When you talked about the fishery, there is an aboriginal right to fish for food and ceremonial purposes. There is no constitutional right to have commercial fisheries segregated on a racial basis, and no court has ever said that. There's no suggestion that any court would ever say that. We're talking about the commercial fishery and how it should be organized in the best interests of aboriginal and non-aboriginal people. We're committed to economic opportunities for First Nations to participate in the commercial fishery, but it will have to be as a commercial fishery. And frankly that's the approach that's been followed on the east coast of Canada.
Male Questioner:
My name is Robert, chief of a band in the interior of British Columbia. I'm here to pass on a message to the Indian agent that was sent here by the Prime Minister. [Applause.]
You come here and talk big. Not much comes to our community, but a lot goes to pensions and payoffs for bureaucrats. [Applause.]
Some of your forked tongue DFAO officers send the wrong messages from us to Ottawa. I just want you to know that you don't have a friend here. Our children can't borrow money to live on, but some of the bureaucrats are getting too rich off Indians. [Applause.]
I have just one more thing to say. You better listen to what we're saying because I think we'll be able to take over this country Canada some day, hopefully soon, and when we do that, the resources are going to be flowing from us to you, and you're going to be getting the same treatment that you've been giving us. [Long, loudest applause.]
Female Questioner:
I'm from the Deh Cho First Nation near Fort Simpson in the Northwest Territories. On your comments on the MacKenzie Gas Project. In the 21st century you're still expropriating our lands, to build a pipeline with or without the Deh Cho. Those comments are disheartening to me and my six-year-old daughter. How can she sustain herself if you continue to give away our lands for nothing? [Applause.]
I'd like you to tell the chiefs in this hall that you are not prepared to give away our lands, because how can we sustain ourselves if the government will give everything away to industry? That land is rightfully my daughter's, and her children's, and her grandchildren's. We've been negotiating in this Deh Cho process for years.
We don't want to call it "land claims." We want to call it shared stewardship of our lands, and that should be acceptable to the government because both of us will win. But your government continues to push us on land claims, giving us a small percentage of what is rightfully ours. How can we as a First Nations government sustain ourselves with what little land you will give us? How can you say "build this pipeline with or without the Deh Cho"? That is my question. [Applause.]
Minister Prentice:
I'll deal with that very directly, and I think it's very important that everyone have the facts straight. Shortly after I became the minister, I instructed the department to make a fair offer to the Deh Cho. We have tabled an offer that is consistent with every other land settlement north of 60. I know the Deh Cho do not think the offer is acceptable. But we have tried to be fair.
With respect to the pipeline, there are four First Nations communities along the pipeline including the Deh Cho. The other three First Nations are owners of the project, they own 30 per cent of the pipeline. It is one the largest pieces of oil and gas infrastructure in the world. I hope the Deh Cho will see their way clear to become owners also, because the revenue stream from that pipeline is enormous. But we can't have a situation in Canada where any single group has a veto over the best interests of other aboriginal and non-aboriginal peoples. That's what I've said and I stand by it. Thanks very much, ladies and gentlemen.
Madame Chair:
Monsieur Prentice, on behalf of the Assembly of First Nations, you have a gift. [Hands him an engraved wooden box.] It's an empty box, and when you come back, it means you'll have some money in there, some agreements, some good stuff. [Applause.]
Minister Prentice:
Thanks very much, ladies and gentlemen. I appreciate your honesty. I'm aware of the responsibility on my shoulders as the minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, and each and every day I do my best to discharge that. [Applause.]
Stanley Tromp is a journalist based in Vancouver. ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Who Mowed Down the Premier?
- Canada's Economy, Deconstructed (by a 12 year-old)
- Death in Remand: a Tyee Inquiry
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- 'A Gut Feeling'
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- Why Blackberry's Embrace of HTML5 Is Good Karma
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- The Ethics of Addiction Studies
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- Alberta Fills Pipes with Corrosive Denial
- Does BC Stand for Ban Clotheslines?
- BC biotech company seeks approval for GM apple
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- What's Behind BC's Doors?
- Death in Remand: Stacked Deck
- Does BC Stand for Ban Clotheslines?
- 'Moonrise Kingdom'
- Tyee Builders Tally: Amazing!
- From Financial Advisor to Occupier
- 'Storage Wars'
- How Our Immune Systems Exaggerate Fear
- Does Simon Fraser University Need a Men's Centre?
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- Why Blackberry's Embrace of HTML5 Is Good Karma
55
Login or register to post comments
freebear
5 years ago
Comments on "Indian Affairs Honcho, Well Grilled"
Did anyone notice that the Vancouver Sun described Minister Prentice as also the Fisheries Minister. I sent a news tip to the Sun to tell them they should check their facts!
I like the empty box gift!
Much work to do, and it better get done; I am tired of being ashamed of my country with regrads to the relationship with First Nations adn Inuit peoples.
(Wondering where and when IAMC/Capitalism?Maybelle will show up!)
Jack's
5 years ago
In that context, Prentice used the expression 'problems we inherited' a few times - which is a popular cop-out.
Possibly they are accountable to their constituents but they sure as hell are not accountable to government auditors.
Maybe we could coax Harper into the job of Minister of Non-Native Affairs.
Capitalism
5 years ago
freebear,
what kind of response would you like from me? I don't really understand the social or economic implications with respect to the Kelowna accord.
i read the article and still don't. I know the Liberals earmarked a whole lot of money during their epic pre-election spending spree.
i do agree with you that there is much work to do. I don't agree with you re. our efforts with respect to First Nations people. we have done our best. We have been extremely liberal in doling our land wrt the land claims, they are provided with free education and are paid to attend college or university. They are provided with housing, a degree of self governance and welfare.
i am generally very supportive of first nations spending, given that they are owed significant restitution. If throwing a ton of money is the answer, then so be it....let's get this Kelowna accord through.
Though, I think the best approach would be to settle the land claims outstanding, and allow first nations to partner with businesses and governments to profit off the land - either through mining rights or tourism.
Capitalism
5 years ago
PS - Layton is fishing for votes and he can say the popular things given that he will never be elected....
Race based fishing does exist and it is unconstitional. PART of the reason for the decrease in fish stocks down the Fraser River is due to no controls or regulations over Native Fisheries....
Many have set-up nets spanning the entire Fraser River and are over-fishing...
Harper is right (and you lefties should agree) - this is contributing immensely to poor fish stocks....though, it is much easier for you all to blame Gordon Campbell (and now Stephen Harper) - even though he hasn't ever presided over a fishing season....
Frank
5 years ago
Show me a politician who doesn't spend their time fishing for votes and I will show you Carole James. I'd rather my politician did in fact fish for votes.
As for making promises he doesn't have to keep cuz he won't win an election, well gee,being elected never forced anyone else to keep their promises either.
I don't blame Harper. I blame a society that uses rivers for sewage and industry. A society that massively overfishes the oceans of the world because there's no price to pay for wrecking a "commons".
Fish stocks world wide are in the process of collapsing. No regulation + over-population equals nothing left.
Capitalism
5 years ago
I disagree. I would argue that Harper has never fished for votes and never promoted meaningless rhetoric. He has come forward with his (and the Conservative) vision for Canada and has followed through on his election platform (by and large, and more than any other Federal politician in recent memory). The guy makes decisions based on his convictions and not the "poll" of the day.
I would much prefer Carole James and Stephen Harper than the likes of Paul Martin or Jack Layton. I know when I hear a criticism for Ms. James, it carries merit and it not a bunch of baseless ideologies. I am not saying I agree with her views and vision, but I agree with the lady....
Those are the other factors. However, the overfishing caused by Native only fisheries should not be ignored when considering the Fraser River..
Frank
5 years ago
You're splitting a hair here Cap by referring to Harper alone as opposed to Cons in general. You know that in a few minutes of googling I can bring forth all sorts of "fishing for votes" by Conservatives. Do you ever read that campaign literature they leave in your mailbox? Or the letters they write to their local papers or the bigger dailies? (I have one in front of me now from my local paper) Its nothing but promises to keep the sun shining and the rain falling, sometimes at the same time. And its always current affairs related. Whatever the issue of the day is, they promise to do the popular thing.
Trudeau did this too. Some liked it, some didin't. Historically, so did that staunch conservative Otto von Bismarck, the Prussians on the Elbe liked it, the Bavarians not so much.
Leadership does not mean ramming your policy down someone's throat. The word is often mis-used by people who want "their guy" to do just that under the banner of "leadership". To me, leadership means that even when they're against you you stand up for what you believe by arguing it out. Not simply passing the law as if the opposition meant nothing. It also means that you have to accept when you're wrong and know when to stand down. Otherwise 4 year olds would be widely hailed for their leadership qualities and we'd look to stubborn pre-schoolers for political party leaders.
freebear
5 years ago
Capitalism: "I disagree. I would argue that Harper has never fished for votes and never promoted meaningless rhetoric. He has come forward with his (and the Conservative) vision for Canada and has followed through on his election platform (by and large, and more than any other Federal politician in recent memory). The guy makes decisions based on his convictions and not the "poll" of the day.""
So "Canada is an Energy Superpower" is not fishing for votes, or keeping caught fish/votes on the stringer?
Laughable!
Did you know South Africa researched the way Canada had dealt with First Nations people, in order to set up apartheid?
In order to settle land claims the negotiators have to find enough land that can support the goal of First Nation self-governance. Imagine if Alberta had to negotiate access to resources in order to fund their governance.!
Just because a political party may never govern is no reason to ignore good ideas that can move Canada and all Canadians forward into a sustainable future; not a future of ripping, stabbing, and sucking out natural resources as fast as possible so some can get rich (in the short term) and the U.S. can quench its unquenchable thirst for fossil fuels so that it can continue to trumpet the deluusion of the so-called American (and many Canadians) Dream!
freebear
5 years ago
Hey get rich quick and damn the impacts/Capitalism I suppose you also believe that commercial fisherman have the right to catch the last salmon!
Just like oilmen have the right to suck up the last drop of oil (then what are the economic gurus in Alberta going to do?)!
billy pilgrim
5 years ago
who's representing the fish in all of this? maybe douglas adams was right and the dolphins are the most intelligent creatures on this planet. as the dolphins said when they left:
so long and thanks for the fish.
anarcho
5 years ago
Capitalism sez:
"we have done our best. We have been extremely liberal in doling our land wrt the land claims,"
This is an outrageous statement! Greedy bastards come over here, steal their land, give them a tiny reserve to live on, then over the course of 40 years give back a few dribs and drabs and that is called "doing our best"? Jesus H. Christ!!!
"Capitalism", should as his name implies, respect property rights. I guess its OK though to steal Native People's property
anarcho
5 years ago
"Race based fishing does exist and it is unconstitional."
It is a treaty right for Native People to fish. Race based fishing is a propaganda term to create a racist reaction among the bigots in this country against Native People. You capitalists are big on honoring contracts (in theory) well, a treaty is a kind of contract between two nations. They contract to do certain things. If one party does not carry out their part of the treaty they are not honoring the contract.
IAMC
5 years ago
Our forefathers didn't come over here as greedy bastards. I mean hank God Canada wasn't visited by Spaniards.
Spaniards didn't bother with such mundane ideas like treaty's. Them simply subjugated the Indians into submission without any rights whatsoever.
Our forefathers, for some reason, I am sure based on contract law, made deals with these guys, albeit crooked deals, they made deals.
I would like to make a deal. One that would distance ourselves from aparteid S.Africa, that we have now. One that would get us off the hook for 10 Billion dollars per year, one that recognizes FN as equal, one that gives them back their Crown land that constitutes their Reserves.
It's not possible to make this deal. The FN won't go for it, even if they each got a million dollars.
Why doesn't the rest of the world have this dilemma ?
It's because they never did get sucked into this idea the FN, were actually the true owners of our country.
Yes, they were here, in some locations, but they killed those that were before them. And where were they ? The first may have come by land ( Kenowith Man ), and if so, why are they not making claims to Russia, South America ????
I don't buy it. Sorry for being politically incorrect, but not racist.
Bill Wilson ( no comment )
anarcho
5 years ago
"Yes, they were here, in some locations, but they killed those that were before them. And where were they ? The first may have come by land ( Kenowith Man ), and if so, why are they not making claims to Russia, South America ????"
If true, it is a red herring. But what you propose is only speculation anyway. One semi-polynesian skeleton with an arrow in it, a genocide does not make. More likely that the Native People are of mixed origins, as genetic studies show, rather than using Kenniwick Man as an excuse for stealing a continent.
By the way, the theiving bastards I was referring to were the European ruling classes, who practiced on our ancestors (the Eurpoean peasants) before they came over here and stole the Native lands. I don't hold the workers and peasants who immigrated here to settle on the stolen lands responsible for this crime, because we were little better than serfs - and indeed still are...
anarcho
5 years ago
"Our forefathers, for some reason, I am sure based on contract law, made deals with these guys, albeit crooked deals, they made deals."
I see, our ruling classes are better than the Spanish ones. They murdered and stole, ours only stole. Nice. Crooked deals are null and void, don't forget.
IAMC
5 years ago
anarcho, you know of course the FN are not united in a generic entity, but are really split amongst themselves.
There are First Nations, Mete and Inuit. Three distinct groups. I know the politics make a contest between them, and indeed there is prejudice between them.
I call for one Canadian, equal to all in every way. We must get over this. Those European ruling class guys are dead, and I don't answer for them. It's over.
G West
5 years ago
More lies I see IAMC - Do you never quit? Have you any idea what the native population was prior to contact with European culture?
Do you know what it had dwindled to by the beginning of the 20th century?
Coincidence?
I don't think so.
DO you know anything about the 6 nations confederacy?
Do you actually know anything?
Jack's
5 years ago
This is not my belief. For 1 mill each the natives would negate every treaty they've entered into.
Might not be a bad deal for the government. For a few billion dollars it could dispense with all the native complaints and legal hassles forever.
In fact it would be a damn good investment.
Jack's
5 years ago
whoops - my math is a little off here. Maybe giving them $100 thousand each would do it.
Working Man
5 years ago
Intersting little biased jab. The responsibility for these problems has nothing to do with the provincial government. It is a federal jurisdiction. And he was doing so well up to then....
DPL
5 years ago
There is no argument from me about the Indians right to ceremonial, culteral and substinace fishing. MY gosh I've eaten quite a lot of cerimonial fish myself.( I use the word Indian, as that's the name provided by the government and used in the Indian Act)
Fact is most folks don't argue that case. What they argue is a policy brought in by certain governments( first by Mulroney) allowing "Indian only" fishing times that ended up being used to sell the fish. A number of Supreme Court of Canada decisions stated the Indian does not have the right to sell fish collected for other reasons. Van Piet comes to mind.
Another little stretch is the wording in the Douglas Treatis To paraphrase. "Hunt and fish as formally"
Some folks believe this means commercial fishing was done prior to contact. Pretty hard to prove either way, oral history being what it is.
To say first nations commercial fishing is not allowed, which is also the opinion of many, is wrong. Last time I looked over 40 percent of Commercial licensed fishermen in BC are first nations fishers. Even the Fisheries Survival folks don't dispute that.
To sort out this and other messes, modern treaties are the way to go.
Accountablity is not a word developed by the Conservatives. I attended well over 75 main table meetings as a observer, sat on a Regional Advisory Committee as a third party interest representative, lots of public meetings and a number of conferences. Oh by the way I also paid my property taxes to a band council for which I couldn't vote. But I did get invited to the Indian taxation conference to put in my two cents worth.
Accountability came up at almost every one of those events. We have all heard lots of first nations members talk about the same things. There is a lot of poverty on reserves but some folks there are living quite well. If the communal system works so well, shouldn't everyone there be getting the same size slice of the pie?
some poiticians want quick answers and sound bites to fill up the news clips. It's demeaning to all parties involved.
NDN_Coach
5 years ago
One thing never surprises me when it comes to people like IMAC or Jack when it comes to Aboriginal rights and issues.
To hear them speak, you think think they were experts on:
-Every single supreme court ruling regarding Aboriginal rights for the last 30 years.
-An exhaustive knowledge of traditional Aboriginal history, which included 13 distinct language groups in Canada.
-Every study done by sociologists and researchers on Aboriginal social issues (Believe me, there are a lot of white folks out there getting rich writing about the 'indian problem').
-The knowledge of living on a reserve.
Quite knowledgable people indeed.
Frank
5 years ago
WM,
So you'd agree then that Campbell is simply "fishing for votes" and is able to now (post-referendum) be native-friendly and support the Kelowna accord because he doesn't have to pay for it?
I think Capitalism would agree also that Campbell is a vote-fisher, knowing that he will never be in a position where he has to cough up the dollars himself.
G West
5 years ago
sez Capitalism/Maybelle.
Harper hasn't 'fished' for votes? He hasn't fished for votes with Native People - that's certainly true, but every other catagory of voter has had visions of sugar plums dangled in front of them virtually daily.
Some examples:
Veterans;
The Military;
Consumers;
Stay at home Moms;
Quebec;
The Oil industry;
High income earners;
Corporate power structures;
Quebec voters; and
Fundamentalist Christians -
Need I go on?
G West
5 years ago
Should have added urban voters in both Vancouver and Montreal - with his solicitation of unelected representatives in both those districts - only Toronto he ignores.
anarcho
5 years ago
I too, am always amazed at the great amount of learning expressed by the “Well, I'm not a racist but...†crowd. Something that a life time of study wouldn't even scratch the surface – just ask any anthropologist – but these folk know it all just from reading the headlines in the National Pest or some other neoconman rag. May I suggest a book to find out what Native People are all about? Maybe it won't do for the “don't confuse my mind with facts†crew, but here goes anyway. “Dancing With A Ghost – (Exploring Indian Reality)†by Rupert Ross, a Crown Prosecutor in Northern Ontario. Would also be good to take a few lower level social science courses too, but that would be too much to expect from our resident 'wingers...
G West
5 years ago
Stolen Continents: The "New World" Through Indian Eyes. by Ronald Wright is another good one and one I'd recommend.
woody
5 years ago
Will someone explain, what is so terribly wrong with having a judicial inquiry into the fishing industry here in B.C.,on the surface it appears that the natives are fearful of it, why?
freebear
5 years ago
"Another little stretch is the wording in the Douglas Treatis To paraphrase. "Hunt and fish as formally"
Some folks believe this means commercial fishing was done prior to contact. Pretty hard to prove either way, oral history being what it is."
Do you really think that villages did not trade with each other, or that coastal villages did not trade with interior villages?
Come on! Any time a group of people have extra of some commodity they will look to trade with others who do not have that commodity and vice versa!
Any government policy may be implemented to ensure that a group of peoples, not just First Nation peoples, have an opportunity for the same standard of living, or well-being, that a majority of Canadians have.
freebear
5 years ago
Hey 'Hard On' (Woody):
"Will someone explain, what is so terribly wrong with having a judicial inquiry into the fishing industry here in B.C.,on the surface it appears that the natives are fearful of it, why?"
I do not think Native people are fearful of it; just that it is a waste of money. Obviously the problem is the mismanagement and unsustainable rate of harvest.
What if finfish aquaculture (likely has some impact) was at fault; or the overdevelopment of the Fraser River basin; or rising ocean temperatures...perhaps an inquiry will concluse that the cause is complex and therefore uncertain-a waste of money to reach a common sense conclusion.
No livlihood is guaranteed, nor is it a right. We all can't be fishers. What fishing should take place is one that is sustainable; taking into account as many factors as possible that impact fish stocks (numbers), and allocate quoptos or licenses accordingly. I do not have an issue withn a policy that allows First Nations' people, and their families, and communities to catch up with a recently non-native dominated industry.
Or, we all could be fishers but only alloted 4-5 fish to catch each!
woody
5 years ago
Freebeer, the following is a quote from Chief Doug Kelly
These remarks he made were some of the reasons of my query in regards to a judicial inquiry regarding the fishing industry, he says we know what went wrong, What’s wrong with all of us knowing or finding out what went wrong in the industry?
He also mentions wasteing time playing the blame game. What is he alluding to by this remark?
DPL
5 years ago
Do you really think that villages did not trade with each other, or that coastal villages did not trade with interior villages? Says freebear.
I do recall at a number of government meetings one fellow used to get up, (just after the four Supreme Court decisions about selling fish commercially was illegal if you wern't a commercial licensed fisher) he tried to convince us all that his band sold fish as far away as the UK. He sort of stopped when someone mentioned. Hey if you showed up in London selling fish way back when it was probrably in the local newspapers. I still believe the Supreme Court of Canada's position. You want to claim ownership either prove it or negotiate it. The courts preference was negotiate. Sounds good to me. And of course to the 70 percent or so first nations who are slowly grinding along that path
anarcho
5 years ago
Once again there is a science called "anthropology." A half an hour flipping through a book on the anthropology of West Coast Aboriginal Peoples would show that they had extensive trade networks, trading fish products to the interior for obsidian, deer hides etc. Why don't you actually do some research before making your comments?
DPL
5 years ago
If anarcho's comment is being steered my way, may I remind him or her that the Supreme Court of Canada made the decisions on misuse of commercial fisheries by unlicensed fishermen. As for the guy doing his thing about trading fish with the UK, you do some research and read the transcripts of the meetings to which I referred. I recall a Deputy Minister telling me that for every anthopology expert a group could dig up, he could find a number whose opinion was heading in the other direction.
This ongoing arguments about title, ownership and who did what to whom has taken a great amount of time in all our lives. As one earlier writer mentioned. so what if there is a judicial review? Someone else mentioned costs.
As the present costs for status Indian costs are running around 9 billions a year which seems to get bigger each year, maybe it's time to do something. I most certainly are not a conservative supporter. But ten years of debate that I was connected to was enough to make me sell my home on a local reserve, losing money by doing so and walk away as the arguments continue back and forth. Let's not forget Cambpell was adamantly opposed to the Nisga Treaty had a referendum that first nations folks argued against, yet some of the same folks applauded because he now figures it's time for the Kelowna Accord to come back, or at least that's his story at present. No wonder so many voters are getting tuned off from the ongoing arguments. since first nations folks in Bc are around 4 percent of the general population you will never succeed in arguments in the rest of the population rightly or wrongly decide to ignore you. The courts are full of Indian cases and there doesn't seem to be an end in sight. But then again the lawyers are making money and DIAND seems to be prepared to fund so many of the cases.
IAMC
5 years ago
This judicial review on the surprisingly low sockeye returns may find out where millions of fish disappeared to. Or was it a tremendous miscalculation by DFO ? I would think it is necessary to get to the bottom of this for the protection of all stakeholders.
Right to Bear
5 years ago
G West said "Stolen Continents: The "New World" Through Indian Eyes. by Ronald Wright is another good one and one I'd recommend."
I agree "G". You and Acibiadies recommended this a while ago... It is an awesome read.
RTB
freebear
5 years ago
Hey Woody:
"These remarks he made were some of the reasons of my query in regards to a judicial inquiry regarding the fishing industry, he says we know what went wrong, What’s wrong with all of us knowing or finding out what went wrong in the industry?"
So are there not non-native people sitting on the commercial salmon advisory board? What are the non-native commercial fishers saying is the decline of the fish stock?
freebear
5 years ago
"As the present costs for status Indian costs are running around 9 billions a year which seems to get bigger each year, maybe it's time to do something. I most certainly are not a conservative supporter. But ten years of debate that I was connected to was enough to make me sell my home on a local reserve, losing money by doing so and walk away as the arguments continue back and forth. Let's not forget Cambpell was adamantly opposed to the Nisga Treaty had a referendum that first nations folks argued against, yet some of the same folks applauded because he now figures it's time for the Kelowna Accord to come back, or at least that's his story at present. No wonder so many voters are getting tuned off from the ongoing arguments. since first nations folks in Bc are around 4 percent of the general population you will never succeed in arguments in the rest of the population rightly or wrongly decide to ignore you. The courts are full of Indian cases and there doesn't seem to be an end in sight. But then again the lawyers are making money and DIAND seems to be prepared to fund so many of the cases" (DPL)
How much does the non-native INAC (Indian & Northern Affairs Canada) grab to administer "Indians"? bureaucracy consume dollar wise
DPL
5 years ago
Gosh Freebear, last time I looked there were a considerable number of Indians employed,in that department. Phil Fontaine used to work there.I could of corse name others but why, you won't believe it anyway.
The budget is easy to read and is on that departments web site. The long and the short of the argument is that ten years ago the amount of the budget was around 6 Billion. Other ministries also invest large amount of dollars to the same pretty small number of people.
Speaking earlier about accountabiliy, brings to mind the meetings we used to attend with some band councils around taxation issues. We were there because we lived there. We were told it was non of our business how our local taxes were to be spent, contrary to the deal cut by the governments when they allowed the so called self taxation system. First thing that happened was the Indian component exempted all of the bands members from any taxes. One got so carried away they taxed a first nation guy who lived down the street but wasn't from the band. It took us a while to clear that one up. I brought it up at the First Nations Taxation conference in Chase. Even they figured the band had done a dirty
hannibal
5 years ago
While the'Insane Clown Posse'continues to play cowboys and Indians with regards to FN's treaty rights to fish .The east and west coast fisheries are quickly disappearing/collapsing .
What is needed is a audit of the entire fishery with input from all parties .
Why are less and less smolts available ?
Dose fish farming hurt indigenous species ?
What species are at the strongest which are the weakest ?
Can it be arranged that FN's sit on the Fisheries boards and have real input in the management ?
All questions that need an answer I think.
woody
5 years ago
Freebear asked,
Sorry for the delay in responding.
I can not provide any answers to your questions, again, this is why we should have an inquiry as to provide us with answerers to these type of questions.
netscaper2
5 years ago
Sure a lot of jibberish going on above here ! Who gives a damn what happened in the 1700s.
We, the white boy's, build native housing and the natives tear them down in drunken rages for firewood.
They want to be independent and govern them selves but remain at the white mans trough...
They break whiteys laws and install huge billboards near bridges but thats OK cause it's on "their" land.
I don't like the USA but perhaps we should do as they do in dealing with Indians,
"Like it or leave it".
Next time I get upset at govt., I'm gonna
block the 1st Avenue viaduct until I get
a full set of Michellin tires, INSTALLED...
Yea, right, then I'll go fishing on the Fraser, with a net from shore to shore.
Billy George !
DPL
5 years ago
Commentor: netscaper2. Some of your comments are pretty racist in my view, but everyone is entitled to their view if it can stand up in courts. Some of your may not stand that test, but:
I drive the Pat Bay highway almost evey day and like other reserves along stetches of road , there are signs adversising assorted things. I don't like them either, but believe it or not, that is federal land and thats' where to aim your concern. I repeat, the bands don't own the land, the Feds. do. The bands can't own the land as it's federal set aside for Indians.( RIght there in the Indian Act) On federal land a great number of provincial, and most municpal laws are overridden by the Indian Act. A lot of folks found out after purchasing homes on assorted bits of "Land set aside" from mostly non Indian companies that things believed to be obvious, such as landlord tenancy law, building codes, sanitation standards, etc. simply don't apply. Unless of course there is a DIAND head lease in place( most don't have such a lease)
So what to do? well it's one of the reasons so many people work hard to resolve modern treaties. That's the place where the "Bundle of Rights" get defined. If your complainst/ concerns arn't being met right now. Go grab your MLA or MP and tell her/ him to get more actively involved in the treaty process. But don't expect anyone to write off the Indian Act anytime soon. Each time ammendments are proposed the noise gets pretty loud as vested rights folks in the present system get vocal enough to scare off politician. The folks hollering arn't all Indians. Indian women for years have raised issues of human rights and got shot down, even as the rights tribunals state they are bieng abused by the triubunals have no authority. So go see some MP's and rattle their chains. Don't hold your breath though as in all the time I followed the treaty process, I only saw 2 MLA's( Weisgurber, and Wilson and not a single MP ever showed up. The Aboriginal affairs Minister was around quite a lot of the time. Not that swift a record for ten years of being in the system.
As for fishing in the Fraser, get a good lawyer, and go right ahead. DFO has to charge somebody so it might as well be you.
netscaper2
5 years ago
DPL...Do you really think a treaty and self government will make every thing rosy in the native community ?
Give your head a shake.
Within five years of signing the treaty and getting billions of "caucasion" dollars, they'll be saying the white man took advantage of them.
It'happened many times in the past and will continue and if they don't get more, they will close the Duffy Lake road !!!
As for being racist, NOT. If it was, Mr. Tyee would have been busy with some white out. Sometimes the truth hurts.
netscaper2
5 years ago
...and on another note, I think our new
PM might just be looking carefully at issues other than "fishing right's".
woody
5 years ago
DPL don’t you think that its only tit for tat as to what netscaper2 says, after all, remember what
Bill Wilson said ,which I feel was not only racist, but also possibly advocating hatred towards caucasians, here are some of his words.
DPL
5 years ago
Hey folks I'm not a supporter of Bill Wilson , besides I couldn't vote for him if I wanted to. But because of all the BS happening around Indian issues I most certainly support modern treaties.
As for giving my head a shake. I spent more than 10 years living on land set aside and of course all things going on in that land won't disappear the next day, however any Indian law must be equal or better than senior governments laws. and yes taxation is a part of treraty so if a band needs money, hey tax their members.That alone will make for some accountabiity.
The most recent treaty in BC was Nisga'a and I don't see that government coming back saying the "white man" look advantage of them.Actually I've never heard a Indian ever refer to "the white ma" although the word European came up now and again.
I don't have any contact with anyone near the road you speak of, and wonder if in fact you do either. If it's a provincial road or federal road let the cops deal with it. Just like at Gustafson Lake a few years ago.
Or would you prefer that nothing changes and you can spend time telling us all the bad things that have been happening should continue. Get real. Business for one wants modern treaties. They and most of us want some stability, acccountabiliy,and laws that cover all citizens. If Tyee whites out or not isn't the issue. Infamatory words don't solve a whole lot. And that goes for Bill wilson as well. You might have noticed he didn't come close to winning the election , just like he didn't do well trying to run for a couple of federal parties
woody
5 years ago
DPL I guess Im a little slow, I just came to the realization that your native, don’t take may remarks personal, keep plunking on the old key board , that’s how we can all learn of one another, chow ,sorry I don’t know how to so long for now in your tongue.
DPL
5 years ago
Thanks Woody but you are a slight bit off in your guess. I am Irish( Mother side/English Canadian( fathers side) and born in Ontario.
My interest in modern treaties stem from my first presentation to a Federal/ Provincial Regional Advisory Committee I was asked to be on to represent 30 plus thousnad non Indian property owners on land set aside in BC.
( Gordon Campell shut down all such committes as soon as he got elected and prior to his ill thought out referendum)
I saw three options.
1. Status quo, which sure as hell isn't working.
2. Changes to the Indian Act, which isn't too likely.
3. Modern treaties where all the big stuff gets sorted and the little stuff has a method of being resolved.
I still consider those three options.
I have met some real jerks from all three sides of the treaty process, but a lot more are dedicated people working their buns off to make things happen. And no I don't and have never worked for any government or band.
But sure picked up a lot of information along the way. It's amazing just how many court decisions are wrapped around some issues. Folks tend to jerry pick the ones they like. I sort of like the Supreme Court of Canada ones. If you listen really carefully thefinite points raised by politicians lead folks to think they hear different things.
BS runs pretty thick in a lot of areas but name calling really doesn't resolve much. I figure this item has prety well ran it's course, but before I go, I'll bet you ten bucks Steven Harper will never get any substantial changes to the Indian Act. Some of the folks should read through it sometime. It overrides a lot of stuff and in my view is there to protect the federla government and the bit of "Land set aside" not necessarily anyone living on it, Indian or other wise.I use the word Indian only because that's the official federal government name for aborriginal, first nations or first people( take your pick )
See you in some other forum maybe.
Skookum1
5 years ago
Speaking to the Vancouver Sun in 2002, Wilson chastised some B.C. native leaders as "token niggers," explaining that the federal government was using them in much the same way the U.S. southern states would give particular jobs to blacks as a political facade during the segregation conflicts.
Why isn't Wilson up on hate-crimes charges for these kind of comments the way David Ahenakew was?
DPL
5 years ago
Bill Wilson seems to be a bit of a jerk. But it doesn't get him anywhere although his words do generate some press. But he isn't alone. I remind you others make sone pretty inflamatory comments, in flustration, possibly : For example.Right from this site.
--------------
Sure a lot of jibberish going on above here ! Who gives a damn what happened in the 1700s.
We, the white boy's, build native housing and the natives tear them down in drunken rages for firewood.
They want to be independent and govern them selves but remain at the white mans trough.
They break whiteys laws and install huge billboards near bridges but thats OK cause it's on "their" land.
I don't like the USA but perhaps we should do as they do in dealing with Indians,
"Like it or leave it".
Next time I get upset at govt., I'm gonna block the 1st Avenue viaduct until I get a full set of Michellin tires, INSTALLED...
Yea, right, then I'll go fishing on the Fraser, with a net from shore to shore.
Billy George !
------------------------
Takes all kinds so lump Bill Wilson in with this fellow.
Akenakew was charged by someone for hate crimes, just like Wilson could be changed, maybe. so why not one of you folks go do the job of charging him. And certain things happened way back when. The king of the day made a Royal Proclamation about Indians. Maybe some more of us should read it. Since he was the boss of the territories at the time it still exists. So we have to care, like it or not. We had a fellow named Trutch doing some early reserve deals. In his view all Indians wewe sort of at the savage level. Courts over the years have ruled other wise. We may not like the courts decisions but thats how things work. should we now fire all the judges?
netscaper2
5 years ago
DPL:...I am not a racist but simply wondering why the natives think they a so far above the law !
Try and look past all the treaty signing etc., and look at whats really happening.
Just a few weeks ago they waited for hearings to start in Toronto over some past riots and decided to riot again while the ex Ontario premier was testifying.(Aberwoki) ?
If a white man is killed while commiting a crime, we get over it. A native ?? If I did block the first avenue viaduct, do you really think the police would wait for an injunction.... equality would be nice.
GET REAL !
DPL
5 years ago
Unfortunalty you don't seem to understand the not so obvious netscaper2.
The viaduct you talk about is under municipal control through municipal bylaws, unless of course if it happens to be on provincial land , and then a provicnal law would be in effect. If it turns out to be fedweral property it gets more complicated, and especially if it happens to be over land set aside for Indians under the Indian act.
If a Indian or any other Canadian kills someone, somewhere down the road they end up in the slammer. I'm not saying you are or are not a Racist, that would make it too easy. Lets say its because like most of us we arn't that up on assorted bits of legislation.
I would draw your attention to a book called Native Law by Jack Woodward. Jack is a non Indian lawyer in BC.
It's used in a number of universities. Jack says "It has long been recognized that when reserves fall within municipal boundries a conflict may arise between Parliament's power over Indians and Indian lands, and the provincial legislature's jurisdiction over municipal institutions.
Incorporation of Aboriginal Governments into Canadian law. From the time of the earliest treaties, the governments of the Indian tribes of Canada have been recognized as legitimate and competent to represent the interests of the tribe.
Liberal interpretation of Law. Canadian jurisprudence provides that ambiguous laws are to be interpreted in a manner that is favourable to Indians.
Entrenchment of rights.
The constitutional entrenchement of native right in section 35 1982 sets Canada apart from other nations in the common law tradition with minority aboriginal populations. There is no equivalent in the US, where express Congressional action may still extinquish aborigianl rights.
Provincial laws affecting Indinness become federal laws. Section 88 Indian Act.
The basic principal is that provincial laws apply unless excluded by. a) Not to affect Indian rights,b) Not to affect Indianess,c)not to single out Indians for special treatment.
Jack said,a common theme of this book is that certain sections of the Indian Act are so obscure or ambiguous that they are unworkable. That the Senate and the House of Commons continue to draft and enact such legislation, apparently unconsious of the problems caused by them for the people who must work with it, is distressing. Amen to that Jack.
The Canadian Bill of Rights cannot supersede the Constitution entrenchement of aboriginal rights found in secton 35 of the Constitution
So I leave it at that. The system is a bit of a mess but I see no changes coming up anytime soon. The best way of course is modern treaties.
netscaper2
5 years ago
DPL...and my final. I see the bad side of the situation and, like most things, not the good side.
I completely disagree with the way government
handle SOME native problems but I can also see why they do.
A great article is currently making the internet rounds regarding the dual citizen ship of the Lebanese and their complaints of the Can. govt failing to remove them from the war torn country. It reminds of the native situation, in a way.
If you wish to see it, mail me
DPL
5 years ago
Well netscape2 even bloggers might not always have the correct slant on things. I see NO connection to Indian issues in this country to dual citizenship in the country. Indians were here first as far as history tells us, they were not defeated in war as was the case in parts of the USA. They can and do hang thier hat on the Royal Proclamation, and a lot of jurisprudence. wouldn't you?
Lots of countries have duel citizenship and like it or not they are Canadians and entitled to help when needed. We had, in the military a great number of French and german wives , with kids. They were all dual citizens, how else could the kids become Canadian if born in Europe or elsewhere. And if someone was about to bomb the hell out of me, my family, my friends I'd be hollering louder thanthe folks being interviewed while still in shock. YOu might be interestd to know that when the kids grow up, if the folks happen to be back in the country of Dual citizenship they are subject to that countries draft. They all know it.