“The government has invested in some things; there have been some investments in education, housing, and infrastructure. However, it is always top-down. If the government were serious about moving forward, it would work in a spirit of true partnership and consultation to bring First Nations, Inuit and Métis up to the standard of living that the rest of Canadians expect,” said NDP MP Jean Crowder (Nanaimo-Cowichan, B.C.), her party’s aboriginal affairs critic who put forward an opposition day motion last week calling on the government to make improving economic outcomes for First Nations, Inuit, and Métis a central plank of its upcoming budget, expected at the end of March.
Following months of protests and gatherings of the Idle No More movement across the country, aboriginal issues have come front and centre in the House of Commons.
First Nations are calling on the Canadian government to honour treaties, to resolve land claims, to share revenue from resource development, to increase the funding to First Nations by lifting the two per cent cap on federal transfers, to consult First Nations on legislation that affect them as outlined under section 35 of the Canadian Constitution, to move towards repealing the Indian Act in a comprehensive and meaningful way rather than by “tinkering,” to commit to an inquiry on violence against indigenous women and girls, to create better access to education.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) outlined his priorities for this winter sitting to his majority-governing Conservative caucus last Wednesday, but did not mention aboriginal issues as a priority. He said the Conservative government remains focused on the economy and criminal justice.
“The economy is still job one,” Mr. Harper told his caucus. “As the work of Parliament resumes, we remain focused on our Economic Action Plan to create jobs, economic growth and long-term prosperity.”
But in the House last week, Mr. Harper, who was repeatedly criticized in the Commons for his lack of leadership on aboriginal peoples’ issues and who has faced intense public pressure across the country from First Nations chiefs in the last month, said he would “continue to work with those positive partners who seek to make progress.” He said his government has improved the lives of aboriginal peoples.
“We have made … unprecedented investments into things that will make a concrete difference in the lives of people,” Mr. Harper said in the House. “In skills training, in housing on reserves, in potable water, in schools, in treaty rights, in protection of the rights of women and, of course, in also as well in the resolution of many of the land claims.”
NDP MP Romeo Saganash (Abitibi-Baie James-Nunavik-Eeyou, Que.), a Cree First Nation, introduced a private member’s bill last Monday, Bill C-469, to ensure that new laws in Canada are made consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
After three years of opposing the UN Declaration, the federal government endorsed it on Nov. 12, 2010. The declaration, which outlines individual and collective rights of 370 million indigenous people around the world and which calls for a strengthening of cultural identity, was a 25-year work in progress, dating back to 1985.
When Mr. Saganash introduced his bill, that, “These are minimum standards set by the United Nations that I am asking this House to respect henceforth, in order to ensure the dignity, survival and well-being of all aboriginal peoples, including those of Canada.”
University of Calgary professor Tom Flanagan, a former adviser to Mr. Harper and author of First Nations? Second Thoughts, said Bill C-469 is a “terrible idea” and that the government should not support it in a government bill. He told The Hill Times that the UN declaration is a “long essay” which is “full of abstract language ... that nobody knows what they mean for certain.” Further, he said, it could conflict with the Canadian Constitution.
“We already have over 200 years tradition of dealing with indigenous peoples, going back to the Royal Proclamation of 1763, even before that, but let’s say starting with the Royal Proclamation and a whole body of complex law has developed over the centuries including a couple hundred different treaties, and on top of that you would suddenly put this other abstract essay and declare it’s legally enforceable. Nobody knows what the results of that would be,” Prof. Flanagan said. “I think it would create legal chaos to adopt it. Virtually everything would be up for challenge. So probably after decades, the courts could work through it, but I don’t think we need that kind of confusion. This is a private member’s bill. I don’t think it has any chance of passing and I hope it will be dispatched as quickly as possible.”
Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan (Vancouver Island North, B.C.) told The Hill Times last week that the government has some concerns with the declaration but that it has expressed its general support.
“Our statement of support for the declaration demonstrates our specific concerns with some of its provisions. We believe that this document can be interpreted within the context of our own legal framework and the Canadian constitution,” Mr. Duncan said in a statement to The Hill Times.
“Our government is already working in partnership with aboriginal peoples on many of the issues addressed in the Declaration to foster opportunities for a better future for aboriginal peoples in Canada. We are taking concrete actions on education, economic development, housing, child and family services, access to safe drinking water, and the extension of human rights protection and matrimonial real property protection to First Nations on reserve. We continue to make strides in the reconciliation and fulfillment of Aboriginal rights through negotiation of modern treaties and the settlement of specific claims,” Mr. Duncan said in the statement.
Mr. Duncan said that the government is “making good progress” on commitments to working with First Nations. “The national chief and the Prime Minister will be having a meeting in the relatively near future. I am sure they can fully discuss at that time the progress that has been made.”
In response to Mr. Saganash’s private member’s bill, the Assembly of First Nations said that it is continuing to advance the declaration as a “basic standard and guide to the relationship between indigenous peoples, nations and other governments” and it “welcomes all efforts to raise awareness of this basic standard.”
In a statement to The Hill Times, the AFN said, “Canada’s endorsement of UNDRIP, and the original spirit and intent of Treaties compels us to work together, and that’s just what we need to do.
… Consistent with the priorities set forth by First Nation leaders across Canada, the key principles articulated in UNDRIP are essential as we advance plans and approaches to strengthening our governments and building the education and health systems, economies and communities that will allow our peoples to reach and fulfill their true potential.”
Prof. Flanagan said that the UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights has been used as a “political document” that is not binding on the Canadian government.
“People can refer to it and say, ‘The government isn’t living up to it.’ So it becomes a political resource to be used, but there’s no, as far as I know, legal obligations. If you’re into litigation, lawyers will cite it in court and attempt to argue that existing Canadian law should be interpreted in the light of the declaration. But that’s for judges to decide. A lot of international documents are used that way all sorts of areas,” he said.
Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul’s, Ont.), her party’s aboriginal affairs critic, said the government sees aboriginal peoples as adversaries.
“The frustration of aboriginal peoples is understandable, given the complete lack of progress on their issues and the refusal of the government to fulfill its legal obligation to consult them on matters that may impact their inherent and/or treaty rights and the fact that we find in government documents that the Conservatives actually see First Nations, Inuit and Métis in this country as adversaries,” she said.
Ms. Bennett said another key issue impeding First Nations is the lack of resource revenue sharing. “The failure of the government to even begin to deal with the imperative of sharing Canada’s natural resource revenues fairly has resulted in relations with Canada’s indigenous population reaching a dangerous tipping point. First Nations are pursuing their rights and winning almost every time in the courts,” she said.
Despite the protests, Prof. Flanagan said that aboriginal issues remain where they started before the Idle No More movement—Mr. Harper and AFN National Chief Shawn Atleo are working together on “businesslike management of reserves” and education.
Addressing gaps in social, health, and economic indicators is not easy, Prof. Flanagan said, but working on those two issues will go a long way to closing the gap.
“If you could improve education and get more young people better qualified to take advantage of opportunities and if you could actually make better use of the economic assets already set aside for First Nations, I think you’d improve standard of living and then a lot of the other problems related to that would kind of automatically get better,” he said. “Government can help by removing road blocks, like the Indian Act is a roadblock to the efficient use of reserves and that could be improved. But people actually have to do it for themselves. … There are a lot of [aboriginal] success stories.”
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: Bea Vongdouangchanh
No comments:
Post a Comment