There is a tremendous amount of talk and action going on now
in Canada around the Idle No More movement. Idlers claim even out of country
support! But like anything there is a ton of controversy, tension and anger,
from both sides. My intention here is to outline the issues on both sides and
offer a bit of comment. I apologize in advance but I’m a Twitter addict so I am
going to use hashtags and usernames. Join the conversation!
Chief Theresa Spence @ChiefTheresa
She has been on a hunger strike for almost a month, demanding to meet PM
Harper @pmHarper. Ezra Levant @ezralevant, like many others have pointed out a
few things of importance. First, her hunger strike is actually daily fish soup.
Apparently, this is fairly nutritious and she doesn’t appear to be in danger of
death. Second, holding the government hostage doesn’t seem to be the best of
ideas. Third, she is Chief of Attawapiskat, an Ontarian First Nation reserve of
about 2,000 people. You all remember the huge financial scandal last year?
Millions of dollars unaccounted for? Her people living in grave poverty while
she drives a Cadillac? She doesn’t seem to be the best spokeswoman for
#idlenomore. Personally, I’m not sure how people can call her inspiring.
Check out http://en.video.canoe.tv/archive/the-scandals-of-chief-theresa-spence-and-attawapiskat/2070970265001
With that said, attacking Chief
Spence as if she embodies the movement is called an ad hominem logical fallacy. In other words, saying that a person is
dumb and therefore their argument is dumb, is not good argumentation. Further,
the #idlenomore movement actually began with Saskatchewan women, not Chief
Spence. It is a grassroots movement, not an Assembly of First Nations (AFN)
movement. It is tremendously unfortunate if people mistake her for the movement’s
leader, as she is quite a controversial figurehead.
There are
some people in particular whom I need to direct quote to add to this
conversation.
Michael Hettrick
@Mickhettrick “I am not saying that these issues are
unimportant or unworthy of Harper's attention. What I am saying, however, is
that any leader that protests a piece of legislation designed to increase
transparency of financial transactions is not worthy to lead.
My primary concern is for the average Native who suffers discrimination and poverty while their leaders join the millionaire's club.”
My primary concern is for the average Native who suffers discrimination and poverty while their leaders join the millionaire's club.”
Waltera Van Gennip Michael, this issue is
complex and does not need to be clouded by myths (e.g. the Zomboni myth). Chief
Spence is not protesting financial transparency and accountability. She was
already vindicated in court in that regard. Nor are there multiple chiefs on
the payroll in any First Nation band. The issues at stake are environmental protection
, treaty rights, and the duty to consult. All of these have a strong legal
basis in Canada and are being disregarded/eroded by our government.
Michael Hettrick Waltera, with
respect, if we are talking about myths (of which the Zamboni is not one, simply
look at the financial statements for that), perhaps we should review the three
issues you brought up, as they seem to have been greatly misconstrued by the
media.
Environmental protection: primarily, the protests focus on concerns about changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act. This act is in no way an environmental protection act. If anything, it is closer to a zoning act. It prevents any bridges, ferries, boathouses, or docks being built along "protected" waters without a federal permit. The amendments to this act places all currently "protected" waters into two categories. Category A is for all commonly used waterways, like the Saskatchewan River, and interconnected waterways, like Candle Lake. Category B is for non-connected and rarely traversed waterways, like Shannon Lake (a beautiful little lake on the side of the highway to La Ronge). Category A waterways still require a federal permit to build on, as well as any local or provincial permits required. Category B waterways no longer require federal permits, but are still subject to any local or provincial ones.
I still haven't actually been told, nor seen, what treaty rights are being abused. If it has to do with reserve land, as I've read a bit online, then it's very strange, as these changes were actually requested by a group of First Nations from British Columbia who wanted to change leasing laws to make it easier to provide on-reserve services. These changes are very simple. Instead of having a majority of the voting population (that means everyone on reserve eligible to vote, not everyone who votes), the referendums are now a simple majority of votes cast. In other words, say a reserve had 1000 eligible voters on it, and they held a referendum. Now only 600 actually voted, and 499 of the votes were "yes". Although this is a large majority, it does not hit the required 501 votes for a majority of eligible voters. C-45 changed the law to streamline aboriginal business ventures, and should have been celebrated for doing so.
Regarding the duty to consult. This, I do not disagree with, provided that the consultation is with the PEOPLE of the reserves, not the Chiefs.
And finally, sadly, Bill C-27, the First Nations Financial Transparency Act, is indeed being protested, as the website for Idle No More specifically states. This act brings First Nations financial transparency to the same levels as we enjoy on a city level. Seems more than fair to me- it shocks me that such an act was not passed 20 years ago.
I do not disagree with you, however, in that this is a complex issue worthy of a debate based on facts, and the facts are horrifying. I truly hope that Idle No More at least achieves a national conversation on changes which will benefit every Native throughout this great country.
Environmental protection: primarily, the protests focus on concerns about changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act. This act is in no way an environmental protection act. If anything, it is closer to a zoning act. It prevents any bridges, ferries, boathouses, or docks being built along "protected" waters without a federal permit. The amendments to this act places all currently "protected" waters into two categories. Category A is for all commonly used waterways, like the Saskatchewan River, and interconnected waterways, like Candle Lake. Category B is for non-connected and rarely traversed waterways, like Shannon Lake (a beautiful little lake on the side of the highway to La Ronge). Category A waterways still require a federal permit to build on, as well as any local or provincial permits required. Category B waterways no longer require federal permits, but are still subject to any local or provincial ones.
I still haven't actually been told, nor seen, what treaty rights are being abused. If it has to do with reserve land, as I've read a bit online, then it's very strange, as these changes were actually requested by a group of First Nations from British Columbia who wanted to change leasing laws to make it easier to provide on-reserve services. These changes are very simple. Instead of having a majority of the voting population (that means everyone on reserve eligible to vote, not everyone who votes), the referendums are now a simple majority of votes cast. In other words, say a reserve had 1000 eligible voters on it, and they held a referendum. Now only 600 actually voted, and 499 of the votes were "yes". Although this is a large majority, it does not hit the required 501 votes for a majority of eligible voters. C-45 changed the law to streamline aboriginal business ventures, and should have been celebrated for doing so.
Regarding the duty to consult. This, I do not disagree with, provided that the consultation is with the PEOPLE of the reserves, not the Chiefs.
And finally, sadly, Bill C-27, the First Nations Financial Transparency Act, is indeed being protested, as the website for Idle No More specifically states. This act brings First Nations financial transparency to the same levels as we enjoy on a city level. Seems more than fair to me- it shocks me that such an act was not passed 20 years ago.
I do not disagree with you, however, in that this is a complex issue worthy of a debate based on facts, and the facts are horrifying. I truly hope that Idle No More at least achieves a national conversation on changes which will benefit every Native throughout this great country.
Bill C-45
There
is much misunderstanding regarding what this is about. Some say it is a much
needed update, others that it is an affront to consultation, treaty and land
rights; see above.
Culture
I recently attended a
workshop on communication. Without the boring details the basic gist was you
cannot assume that because you know what you are saying, the person listening
understands. Also important, that all people listen and hear in varied and unique
ways. As I write this it is Epiphany Sunday: The celebration of the wise men
from the East pilgrimaging to adore the Christ child. This is most profoundly
the revelation of Christ, not only to the Jewish people, but to the Gentiles,
to All Nations!
In
other words, people worship differently, act differently, love differently,
live differently, and this is not wrong. In fact, experiencing the way other
cultures live and pray can enrich our understanding and love of God! This is a
crucial point in the #idlenomore movement. This is a crucial point for Canada!
It is not until we realize that people are different, that we will begin to
respect people. We can no longer say or expect that people should assimilate to
our ways before they can be taken seriously. When is the last time the European
Canadian tried to learn the traditions of other cultures and way of thinking?
Environment
Here is where I am
concerned. Regardless of whether Bill C-45 is about Environmental rights, this
is an issue. Pope Benedict XVI, in Caritas
in Veritate, was very adamant about our care for the earth. “Nature
expresses a design of love and truth. It is prior to us, and it has been given
to us by God as the setting for our life” (p. 68). This is not merely an issue
of recycling but of truly protecting the environment. “Questions linked to the
care and preservation of the environment today need to give due consideration
to the energy problem” (p. 69). In
other words, building a pipeline through BC is not the answer.
3 comments:
"In other words, people worship differently, act differently, love differently, live differently, and this is not wrong."
I like that line you wrote, probably because it's basically the thesis of my synthesis. I also like to forget it, because everyone should just be like me. It would make the world much simpler ;-)
Haha solve all conflict! Make everyone like Andy. Lol :)
It may be boring, but it'd be efficient!
Post a Comment