The Conservatives’ No-Longer-Invisible Aboriginal Policy: Assimilation.
Part 1: Backdrop
I noticed this year that they’re projecting giant images up against the walls of the Parliament buildings as part of the Christmas light show. It struck me as an apt metaphor for our last few months of politics – our government as a giant shadow puppet show, a flickering charade of tiny minds and ideas in furious mock-combat, a Punch and Judy show projected for our entertainment and distraction against a somber facade, while the real stuff happens behind the scenes – decisions being made, policies locked in, plans for the next few years being laid.
Diverting as the spectacle of our erstatz “leaders” in combat may be, there IS real stuff happening I am going to bore you over the next few days with a few comments on something real; the Conservative Party’s new program for the assimilation of Aboriginal people, now formally passed and endorsed by the Party.
Let me begin with a recap, a little tirade familiar to readers of this blog, to set the scene.
A couple of lifetimes ago – you know, before the last election – the Bunker put up a piece on the invisible Aboriginal policy of the Conservative Party. We had gone looking for a formal statement of their policy goals, and found nothing.
That’s not to say that the Conservatives didn’t HAVE an Aboriginal policy. Every party has a policy.
Some are explicit. The NDP and the Greens, for instance, promise everything, secure in the knowledge that they’ll never get elected and have to deliver.
Some are explicit, but dishonest. The Liberals, for example, have a long and distinguished history of promising major innovations like the Kelowna Accord, and then forgetting about it upon election.
And some are there, but never really articulated. The Reform-Conservatives (to distinguish them from the rather more honourable Mulroney flavour) had never published an Aboriginal policy. Their actions since their election, however, have all been completely consistent with the views of Tom Flanagan, Harper’s professor and key policy advisor.
In 1999 Flanagan published “First Nations, Second Thoughts”. In that book he argues that the presence of Aboriginal people in the new world doesn’t give them any legal or constitutional rights. The fact that the Canadian Constitution, the Supreme Court of Canada and the UN all disagree with him didn’t phase Flanagan. He also argues that:
• Aboriginal culture is inherently inferior to European culture, and always was;
• Métis are not Aboriginal people;
• Because Aboriginal didn’t haven Westminster style parliaments, they are incapable of governing themselves;
Flanagan’s conclusion: the only (final?) solution for Canada’s Aboriginal Problem is Assimilation.
How should that assimilation be accomplished?
- Land Claims and Treaties should be made subsidiary to Canadian laws.
- Nation-to-Nation relationships should be terminated. Self governments should be reduced to the level of municipal governments.
- Every incentive should be presented to move natives off reserves and into the cities; the land base should be diminished to the extent possible.
- Special programs of support for Aboriginal people are discriminatory, and should be eliminated.
You’ll remember that in the fall of 2006, the Liberal government announced that after 18 months of negotiation, they were ready to sign the Kelowna Accord. It was going to deal with a whole bunch of areas, including housing, health, education, economic development. It was the one of the first times that Inuit, status, non status and Métis all agreed on something, and it was the first time that the feds, the provinces and territories did too.
And then the election happened, and all that work disappeared. Monte Solberg dismissed Kelowna – a year and a half of research, planning, budgeting, and hard negotiation – as an imaginary agreement scribbled on the back of a napkin, and that was that.
Of course the new Conservative government were asked what their Aboriginal policy was upon election; it amounted to “not Kelowna”. But they said they were “working on it”.
As a policy wonk, I checked in with INAC and political people over the course of the Conservative’s first term in office. ever No Aboriginal policy. They were “working on it”.
Just before this last election, I went over all four major parties Aboriginal policies. A lot happened over the last two years – all the demonstrations in Caledonia, the Prime Minister’s apology, the residential schools truth and reconciliation committee –but there was still no Conservative policy. They were “working on it”.
No written policy, that is. Because of course there IS a policy. It was written ten years ago by Tom Flanagan, and it was called “First Nations, Second Thoughts”.
Just a few weeks ago the Conservative Party held their major policy convention in Winnipeg. And for the first time they have set down, formally in writing, what their intent vis-à-vis Aboriginal Canada.
I won’t review the entire document. It’s here if you want to see it. And it makes very interesting reading as a case study in disguising assimilation as tender, paternal solicitude. but you should. And as you read it, remember to look hard between the lines.
Earlier this year we talked about the Matrimonial Property Act, which sounds wonderful: it give Aboriginal women the same matrimonial property rights as non-Aboriginal women. Good idea, right? Except both NWAC and AFN oppose it, because it was a Trojan Horse; a pious excuse for overriding Aboriginal self-government and asserting the primacy of Canadian federal AND provincial laws (the laws that Conservatives LIKE, that is – not that pesky constitution or those annoying Supreme Court decisions.)
The Conservative Policy is an extension of the same strategy – a series of measures designed to cut the balls of self governments, but all couched as as tender concern for our poor but deserving Aboriginal brothers and sisters.
Time to scrape away the bullshit and take a look at what lies beneath.
Next: DECODING THE NEW CONSERVATIVE ABORIGINAL POLICY.
Thanks Balbulican. I don’t think all bodes well for Indian Country.
I think we will hear of some more of the plan in the new fiscal year. Rumour has it that INAC intends to transfer the Post Secondary Support Program from First Nations communities to either the Canada Student Loans Agency or a third party. It is also rumoured that INAC has been ordered to make $380 million in cuts as part of an “informal program review”. And this is probably not even a “notch” in the fiscal belt tightening that Aboriginal people will be expected to endure. (As pat of our over-all contribution to the ending the recession/depression/economic calamity…but in reality moves closer to assimilation, certainly away from any First Nation control.)
I read about Strahl touring Indian country to explore ideas for economic inclusion in fiscal stimulus projects. The AFN said their strategy involves housing and training……I’ve heard this strategy too many times. Short term make work projects that benefit few (although I am not going to deny the need for more housing) and the over-trained individuals in communities. By over-trained I mean to reflect the variety of “training” individuals will endure to stay employed or active can be mind boggling.
I worry that once this ’stimulus’ money is spent where and what will all the newly trained house builders go or do? Maybe I’m stupid but I think many of our communities require a different type or kind of long-term stimulus strategy. But then…maybe that’s why I’m just a blogger.
The strategy, as we will see over the next few posts, is simple, and very typically Conservative. It depends on unceasing repetition of a lie and exploitation of ignorance about the nature of the relationship between First Nations and Canada.
Wideye, send me your website addy privately? I wanna put up a plug for you know what.
All right, where the heck is the document link? I do want to read it and I’m too lazy to use the “Google” if you already know where it is and just forgot to include the link.
C’mon, feed your readers!
The language of assimilation has always been kicked around, even if there was no formal policy–and this is more than the canceling of Kelowna and Flanagan’s book. I remember when Prentice was Minister of IAND the words he used, slightly edited for today’s sensibilities, and the arguments he espoused were those of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century politicians and religious leaders who helped to bring us the residential schools. I only noticed because I was reading about Protestant missions “to the Indians” at the time.
I second the motion how about a link to the Conservative platform.
Do you mean the proposals ;
Adopted at the National Policy Convention, Montreal,
March 19, 2005; Conservative Party of Canada which were also part of their “Stand Up for Canada”, Federal Election Platform, 2006
Here is a link to a joint media release (Métis National Council, Assembly of First Nations, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami) expressing concern of Harper’s close ties to Flanagan:
National Aboriginal Leaders Want Stephen Harper to Explain Writings Of Tom Flanagan
http://www.itk.ca/media-centre/media-releases/national-aboriginal-leaders-want-stephen-harper-explain-writings-tom-fla
Here is another fellow that has Harper’s ear on Aboriginal matters:
“…A fox entering a hen house ruffles fewer feathers than Patrick Brazeau. Not long after he was sworn in as national chief of CAP [Congress of Aboriginal People], letters began to arrive in the office of Indian and Northern Affairs Minister Jim Prentice.
“I challenge you to demand that the Congress of Aboriginal People issue proof of their membership and aboriginal ancestry,” wrote Jean-Guy Whiteduck, the longtime chief of the Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg reserve. “Mr. Brazeau and his father were reinstated into the Kitigan Zibi Amishinabeg First Nation,” continued Mr. Whiteduck, “after the 1985 C-31 amendments to the Indian Act. Mr. Brazeau never resided on the reserve and was raised in the town of Maniwaki and had little or no contact with reserve life in all his years of existence.”
Chief Lawrence Joseph of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations wrote the minister to say he had “grave concerns regarding the structure of CAP, its funding, its electoral process and its influence on national and federal issues.”
Angus Toulouse, regional chief of Ontario, wrote to Mr. Brazeau personally, demanding he “cease and desist your irresponsible and unsubstantiated attacks on the legitimately elected First Nation’s leadership.” Not stopping there — just warming up in fact — Mr. Toulouse went on to tell Mr. Brazeau: “Real nation building must be driven by the actual citizens and leadership of those nations, and not ill-defined, non-representative entities trying to curry favour with the government of the day.”…”
Maybe I’m ruffling some feathers
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=3f7827a1-d524-4c56-a6f4-d86bb1aada68&p=3
More on how Harper is leveraging his close alliance with CAP to dismantle FN collective rights:
“…This summer, Harper declined an invitation to attend an Assembly of First Nations meeting in Halifax.
Rick Simon, Atlantic regional chief of the Assembly of First Nations, said “the chiefs of Canada felt snubbed at that point, and here’s a group (the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples) that has no structure and accountability, and the prime minister finds the time to come in and address.”
He said the assembly is disappointed.
“It’s a coalition of the willing,” Simon said. “Quite clearly the Conservatives have their own agenda and will ally with those who will go down the path of assimilation in First Nations issues.”
Patrick Brazeau, the national chief of the Congress, had introduced Harper to the conference as “a man and a leader who has taken bold steps to ensure Canada’s off-reserve aboriginal community are no longer considered a forgotten people.”
However, Russell Diabo, a consultant to a variety of aboriginal groups who is based in Orillia, Ont., said he believes “(Harper) is just using them.”
“Patrick Brazeau’s gone out of his way to keep cozying up to (the federal Tories), all the while bashing the Assembly of First Nations. Basically, he’s being partisan,” he said in an interview.
Diabo said it is the same strategy that AFN National Chief Phil Fontaine used with the Liberals.
“Not much different than Phil. Different party, but same idea,” said Diabo, who is not affiliated with either group.
“I think the perception of the Conservatives is that Phil is a Liberal and is too closely tied with the Liberals. They feel that he’s being partisan, so they probably feel it’s OK for them to be partisan on aboriginal issues.”
He said the choice for the prime minister’s first major speech to a native annual meeting sends a clear message on his agenda to “promote individual rights over collective rights.”
Harper responded that he has worked with the Assembly of First Nations on land claims settlements and a settlement for Aboriginal Peoples abused in residential schools.
“I don’t get into the rivalries between the various groups. We work with willing partners when we share common cause,” he said.
Alexa McDonough, an New Democrat MP who was also attending the meeting, said, “I think it’s unmistakable that part of his (Harper’s) being here was to create a wedge. This is a party that specializes in wedge politics.” …”
Natives criticize PM for meeting with rival group
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071102/pm_natives_071102?s_name=&no_ads=
Another example of the quality of respect for Aboriginal rights in Harper’s cabinet:
“A Conservative MP who on Wednesday told an Ottawa radio station that former residential school students need a stronger work ethic, not more compensation dollars, has apologized for his comments…”
Conservative MP apologizes for ‘hurtful’ comments on aboriginal people
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2008/06/12/poilievre-aboriginals.html
The only thing I could find was here.
Check page 24. Cannot confirm that they approved it though, or amended it in anyway.
Thanks Throbbin.
Refreshingly brief as I was expecting a far more comprehensive document, but then it is a lot easier to sound high-minded with smart phrases while leaving the devilish details to the imagination.
Throbbin, thanks; that IS the link. The resolution, with the amendment on program audits, was passed on Fri., Nov. 14th, at the “Social and Democratic Framework” workshop.
Pg. 7 is interesting too.
Beijing: the problem with CAP is that the people it claims to represent are NOT impacted by Land Claims or treaties. They’re not band members. Aboriginal title and the nation-to-nation relationship is at the heart of all the current issues – CAP’s “members” are urban or non-status. Brazeau is raising his profile and protecting CAP’s funding by sucking up to the Conservatives.
I would argue that CAP’s member’s are not even ‘urban’ – just non-status. And it is a true shame that Brazeau is hell-bent on destroying legitimate argument by creating fissions rather than building an argument or strategy for inclusion. And shame on freakin Chief Whiteduck. Yes it is the right of a Nation to define its citizenship but don’t most want to increase citizenship? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. It appears at times that First Nations while claiming the desire to be Nations spend more time finding reasons to exclude possible citizens rather than include them.
I don’t like Brazeaus politics and yes he has taken a very shallow and fast track to raise his profile for sure. It’s so easy to sit back and trash talk what you know little about and easier if you are aware that the general public is also not aware. He takes his lead from his communications person (non-native ex-INAC communications person) who chooses, knowingly, to take advantage of the public’s ignorance. (kinda like the Conservative strategy)But he has not managed to increase funds to his organization – and he went through cut-backs. In fact the under-ground in Ottawa is quietly snickering at his obvious sell-out and bum-kissing antics. For all his flirtatious antics to be noticed by Harper, Brazeau still receives no extra funds or ‘capital’ just the occasional stage and micro-phone.
They will milk him for everything he so freely offers …why pay for it? Is he a powerful voice in the community? I dunno – I imagine Brazeau’s profile in the general public is way lower than Phil’s and the huge majority don’t know who he is or the AFN – so….meh.
I always got a kick out of CAP. In theory I know where they are coming from – off-reserve Indians deserve representation just as much as on-reserve – but their antics always amused me. They were known for hocking the Government Agenda even more than the Government officials we were meeting with (back when I worked for our version of “The Man”).
Brazeau has always had a measure of appeal to me. He was always willing to criticize the established powers at the AFN for what he described as corruption and nepotism. Admittedly I don’t know as much as some of y’all when it comes to the Ottawa underground, and I know next to nothing about AFN’s operations and turf wars with CAP. I shook my head when Brazeau went balls to the wall for the Cons like he did.
All that aside, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
There’s a huge difference between claiming to represent, and actually representing. That is CAP’s problem. Under previous administrations (pre-Brazeau), it actually stood for something. Status Indian organizations claimed off-reserve band members but refused to serve them or go to bat for them. The Métis were even worse off than non-status Indians, who might receive some benefit from some support programs through friendship centres and the fore-runner of CAP, the NCC (not for music or plays but the Native Council of Canada).
Harry Daniels and Dwight Dorey really tried to build bridges with other native organizations, work for non-status, off-reserve, and Métis peoples, and did a fair to good job of it. But the Métis got named as an official “Aboriginal peoples” in the Canadian Constitution in 1982, and they split from the NCC. Chiefs on reserve began to realize they had legal obligations to not only take money for but spend money on off-reserve members. And CAP was left looking like a beggar without a hat to piss in.
Its Brazeau-era strategy to tear down status Indians does seem to many like the old puckeroo on Harper’s unappreciative backside. It’s a wonder that the member organizations have not re-examined CAP’s direction, developed a more constructive set of aims and objectives, and have kept him around this long. I suggest putting him out with the rest of the refuse on garbage day – but they don’t listen to me.
[...] 19, 2008 · No Comments Balbulican at StageLeft has something of interest. It’s about the not-so-invisible Reform-Conservative party’s [...]
[...] Earlier this week the Bunker introduced you to the Aboriginal Vision of Thomas Flanagan, mentor and advisory to Stephen Harper and author of “First Nations, Second Thoughts”. That tome is an editorial (backed with bad history and worse constitutional analysis) espousing the abolition of Treaties and Land Claims, and urging the assimilation of Aboriginal peoples. It has since become a classic among the Reform/Alliance crowd – at least, the ones who still have scruples enough to need an intellectual fig-leaf to conceal their contempt for Aboriginal rights. [...]