“B.C. Dene vow to halt Northern Gateway pipeline”: The Globe and Mail. Wednesday, March 14, 2012. By Shawn McCarthy.
Prime Minister Stephan Harper has stated that the Northern Gateway pipeline is in the best National Interest and a top government priority. Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said Ottawa will fulfill its moral and constitutional duty to consult First Nations, but the decision has already been made in the national interest. He said, “Law is they don’t have a veto, but they are certainly entitled to be consulted and accommodated”
Chief Jackie Thomas echoed the stand that many native leaders believe that treaty law and international law give them the right to free, prior and informed consultation over any project that traverses their land. This is a view not shared by the courts. An independent legal expert pointed out the duty to consult doesn’t encompass a veto for First Nations. Enbridge did not fulfill the duty to consult when they had a joint review panel with members from the National Energy Board and the Canadian Environment Assessment Agency and Gateway will rely on federal agencies to do the consulting. Further, the pipeline is expected to go forward despite stalled land claims, and academic experts expect court challenges along with vast civil disobedience.
The term ‘national interest’ is the concept that the federal government hides behind to address First Nations issues; because as a government, national interest is a priority for good governance. However this national interest excludes First Nations. Consulting to First Nations will be done by federal agencies; in other words, it’s like the town drunk telling you he doesn’t have a drinking problem and your guard dog, the United Nations, is all bark and no bite. Lawyers also must be looking at their Arizona dream home properties and can already taste the cactus water that they will be sipping once this project hits the courts.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Education about Trauma of Residential Schools Key: Chair. By Terri Theodore. February 25th, 2012. Brandon Sun. Page A8.
Barney Williams, who was sexually abused among many his age, feels that the Canadian public should know that First Nations experienced and survived such a horrible chapter in Canadian history and supports the move to have it taught in the education system. Sinclair states, “it is through the education system that that information can be corrected, that that lack of information can be filled.” Commissioner Marie Wilson also says a lack of that knowledge and understanding has led to stereotypes and judgment, making us all losers. Murray recommends that a copy of the Prime Ministers Apology to Survivors be made public in all schools. NWT Education Minister, Jackson Lafferty, who also went to residential school, fully supports public education.
I think the majority of the general society lacks education on this history and carries an emotionally disturbed stereotype and judgment of First Nations people. The apology sets the tone for the importance of public education for the general public and is a means of healing for survivors.
Canucks Angry of Native Crisis: Winnipeg Sun, February 29th, 2012.
The article makes reference to how the public reacted to the Attawapiskat crisis by phoning both the Prime Minister’s and Aboriginal Affairs Minister office directly. It is important to understand that if the general public is concerned about Aboriginal issues, the government will do something about it. It is for this reason that the Federal Government reacted quickly to provide 22 RTM units to the housing crisis.
This article also refers to judicial review of the third party manager. The important message in this article is that public opinion is what makes government act. That is a reason why First Nation’s chiefs have to work together with the public to advance their cases. The more informed the public is of First Nation issues, they can pressure the government on behalf of First Nations.
In the political environment of Canada, public opinion matters because this is the way that the government is elected, to respond to the constituents and their public opinion. Finally, public education of First Nations issues is important to convince the Federal Government to address First Nations issues and crisis in a positive way.
FEDS MISLEADING ON ELECTION RULES: CHIEF. BY MIA ROBSON. WINNIPEG FREE PRESS, FRIDAY, MARCH 2, 2012.
OTTAWA -- Legislation to establish new election rules for First Nations goes far beyond what Manitoba chiefs agreed to in negotiations with the federal government, according to the province's top chief.
Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Grand Chief Derek Nepinak appeared before a Senate committee asking for major amendments to the bill.
"I come here in the spirit of co-operation and respect," Nepinak said Wednesday.
The legislation, Bill S-6, gives every First Nation the chance to opt in to a new electoral system that would have four-year fixed terms of office and set common election days for all First Nations in a particular region. It sets out penalties for elections offences, such as fraud or obstructing the electoral process.
And it would allow First Nations to appeal elections results through the courts rather than the minister.
The four-year terms and the common election days were both part of a request the AMC made to the government several years ago. A resolution asking for the changes was also passed by the AMC in 2009.
Nepinak said that part of the bill is perfectly fine.
But he said the government is selling the bill as being fully supported by the AMC when all the AMC supports are the common election days and the four-year terms.
"The fact they are using that early vote in Manitoba to bolster the legitimacy of this bill is problematic for me," he said.
In a letter sent to Senate aboriginal peoples committee chairman Gerry St. Germain, Nepinak accused the government of acting in bad faith "by setting aside our discussions and its promises and substituting it unilaterally with developed legislation that contains many unwanted provisions, while including essentially only one of our recommendations and rejecting all others."
In particular, Nepinak takes issue with the ability of the minister to force bands to accept the new system if the minister believes there is a protracted dispute about election results. He would prefer an independent First Nations elections agency or tribunal be established to oversee disputes and sort out appeals.
Nepinak also takes issue with the clause that allows a band council to opt in to the new system simply by having a vote of chief and council, but if the band wants to opt out they need to hold a double-majority referendum. That means at least half the electors have to participate and at least half the participants have to vote to get rid of the new system.
"(First Nations) will have the choice to 'opt in' to this new election system that will help First Nations create the political stability necessary for solid business investments and long-term planning that will lead to increased economic development, job creation and improved quality of life for the community," said Moira Wolstenholme, spokeswoman for Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan, in an email
My thoughts on article:
First nations elections needs to be changed to address the political instability in a more productive and positive way. One problem about band elections is the terms are too short. One of the Nepinak’s criticisms is government wants to control it; he wants the courts to have a say, not AANDC government officials. A band council opt in by simply asking Chief and Council, but to opt out, you need band members to vote in a referendum, why the difference? It’s more than control, a ratification to opt out, to surrender your original rights. What the governments underlying purpose is for you to give up your rights; to convince you your treaties are no longer important.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The article entitled, “Hitting the Jackpot! By Mary Agnus Welch, in the Winnipeg Free Press Feb 11th, 2012 provides an observation of two First Nations in Manitoba. The first is about Swan Lake and she highlights that the revenue from vlt’s have made a difference in the First Nations situation. The revenue of vlt’s have supported the construction of new playground equipment, a band office, and both new housing and repairs to a high standard. This revenue supplements what the federal government already provides. This economic development is possible, because of strong leadership by chief and council and that of a project manager. The answer to any success on a First Nation is good leadership and good management. Swan Lake has a chief with strong leadership skills and a project manager that provides good planning and implementation for projects. Policies are in place to encourage upkeep of homes. Any repairs that are caused out of neglect or plain stupidity will be garnished from employment or welfare wages.
The other first nation in this article is Fisher River. Again this first nation has a very strong capable leader in David Crate, who is interested and dedicated to education. The financial management of this First Nations is what is required for any first nation to advance. For fn school funding, by bylaw requires that every cent be used for education only. Fisher River will not use other program dollars to support a failing program and service. This is referred to as accountability and transparency that all programs and services must operate within their budget.
The writer Mary Walsh, provides some suggestions to solutions. First is the property right. This may look good to the outside view from government and public, that is home equity, and property rights can be used to access bank funding. However this view is not shared from a treaty perspective. All First Nations reserve lands are for all their members together, it is also land set aside forever that all First Nations can have traditional and territorial rights too. If parcels of the reserve land were to give property rights to individuals, these individuals can sell this land, or may lose it to taxes. Different parcels of the reserve sold to non band members, repossessed by banks, would create a checker board of ownership and a historic tragedy in the right to land.
These property rights on reserve lands, is not the answer for economic solutions. There are some band members who are business orientated, have good credit rating, which do not require equity of houses to get bank loans. This good credit is possible if an individual pays his bills on time. Second is the education system is the answer to First Nations to advance in society. If the government can provide quality funding for quality education, and first nations are able to provide good leadership and management of schools and education, this fosters good partnership resulting in quality education at the reserve level.
Another issue is the Treaty Land Entitlement. This process must be advanced by the provinces and the federal government. TLE’s should not take years and years to transfer crown land to reserve status. This is a classic government bureaucracy holding up process. Another issue is band governance. Band governance through accountability and transparency is required by any first nations to advance. Qualified leaders should be elected and good qualified managers are needed to implement programs and services. Long Plain has an election code that requires candidates be educated to grade twelve, be subject to drug testing, provide a criminal record going back eight years, nomination funding, and to be supported by a certain number of members . This eliminates election fraud. The last solution is resource sharing. This is part of a treaty promise that all lands, and resources, were to benefit first nations as well. If this resource sharing was in place, most First Nations would advance in their programs for their development.
The solutions portion of the article in the free press only provides the surface of the issues. It is necessary to have a more in-depth understanding and knowledge of first nation’s issues to suggest solutions that can advance first nations.
No comments:
Post a Comment