For those not in the know, Attawapiskat is a fly-in and -out native reserve in northern Ontario that has declared a state of emergency due to inadequate housing/infrastructure in their community of approximately 2,000 people.
The Harper government has responded by questioning where the $90 million in federal funding since 2006 has gone and by appointing a 3rd party manager to take control of the community’s finances. No one from Indian and Northern Affairs (INAC) has visited the community, nor have emergency supplies/interventions been organized by the federal government.
The band has since kicked out the federally-appointed 3rd party manager saying that sending an accountant to take over band finances during a housing crisis is an insult and is placing blame on the band without actually acknowledging or dealing with the the problem at hand - people potentially freezing to death and I see their point. Band leaders are and have been submitting all required spending documentation and are audited every year - it does not appear (to me, at least) that there has been gross mismanagement of funds to date. INAC has had all of their spending figures and audits since at least 2005 and has not cried foul, to my knowledge. A brief rundown of how their money has been spent can be found here.
I have seen footage on the CBC of Attawapiskat and it looks more like footage you would see from 3rd world countries. Dilapidated shacks and makeshift tents housing extended families in a place where winter temperatures routinely go below -30C. As I am someone who lives in Nunavut, I have seen much of the same in communities here and I bet that most remote reserves are going to be grossly similar to what has been seen of Attawapiskat.
On the other hand, what kind of opportunities are open to native communities completely isolated from any and all other Canadian towns? How can a society prosper if there are absolutely no economic opportunities in these towns, and what is the duty of the Canadian taxpayer to continue funding these dead-end places?
For my own part, I believe that there are many ill-advised remote communities that are too expensive to fund both in terms of cash and in terms of human lives. The amount of money required to duplicate every public service in communities totally unconnected to the rest of Canada is overly onerous. Few jobs are available to people in these towns as there is no local economy or employer. I think that towns such as these should be moved closer to civilization but that the native groups should retain ownership of the lands currently occupied. If ever anything of value is found on these lands, the natives own it.
I have a lot of sympathy for Attawapiskat and their leadership; sending an accountant to take over the town IS an incredible insult; especially when you consider the fact that this manager was sent in the town while the town leadership was in Ottawa. This manager just showed up (with Tim Hortons, apparently) without having ever spoke to the town leadership. Shame on INAC, and shame on the Harperites.
This OP is kind of ranting, but what does everyone else think?
From what I’ve read, that looks like a good assessment of the situation. It’s an embarrassment for the country. Whatever caused it, the Harper government’s response has been astoundingly racist, as if it’s automatically the Indians’ fault. The government’s insensitivity reminds me of the Bush administration’s blindness to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. They just don’t get it.
If there is a solution found that involves the federal government, it just brings up another problem: because of the past, it doesn’t matter how good the solution is, because it won’t be accepted.
Personally, I would like fewer but larger reserves, and more effort to move into cities with money going towards cultural preservation in those communities. For example, community centres with after-school programs focused on Aboriginal culture. It’s possible to keep the culture alive without living on really remote reserves.
Another point I saw brought up was that people aren’t invested in their community because they can’t own housing. I would like to see that change as well - if you own it, you want to take care of it. Right now people are waiting for the government to come in and fix property, which can be hard to coordinate with a remote reserve.
By having more than two kids per family. In the really remote reserves, most of them live mostly off of welfare because there’s fuck all for potential economic activity. Only so many people can work for the band administration and the school. Trapping is hardly going to provide a decent living.
This was tried with the residential schools. There was a lot of beatings and rape and broken families, all in the name of Jesus. The government has spent 350 million dollars apologizing for this approach.
However, I do agree that living in that part of Canada is crazy no matter who you are. Does the government bear the ultimate responsibility for looking after people who choose to live that far from civilization? And does the government bear any responsibility once those people start making threats and telling the government to leave? I don’t want to blame the victims but certainly the citizens of this community have to bear some responsibility for their situation. Ottawa can’t be oppressing them and ignoring them at the same time.
Agreed. Screw the treaties (which never should have been signed in the first place). Cut off all aid whatsoever. Want to live like your ancestors? Feel free. You get nothing from the government. Period. Want to assimilate? Lots of help. The world moves on, and “native peoples” are an anachronism. They were conquered, they lost, they must deal with it. White guilt be damned.
Harsh, but really, what other viable long-term solution is there?
Does anyone know what the population of Attawapiskat was in the past, say 100 years ago? What is the maximum number of people that the land can support if they have a purely indigenous lifestyle?
How many people can the town (and surrounding area) support in a modern lifestyle? What are the potential resource or other industries? What is the upper limit? 10,000 people? Can we afford to have that many people living in an area that does not have anything to support them in the way of jobs?
It’s a problem with no easy solution. “Just make them move” will not work - it will be spun as "kicked off their own land. “Limit the population” sounds a bit draconian and would not fly. Create jobs? Out of what? Muskeg and mosquitoes?
The only “solution” that seems to be requested lately seems to be “Go the hell away, stop looking at our finances and send us a whole whack more money.”
Nothing, or close to it; 100 years ago the town didn’t exist. It’s on the site of a place people met, but it wasn’t a permanent settlement. It was created after the Second World War, for the most part.
The basic idea is that the federal government pays people to remain on welfare in shitholes that nobody else wants to live in, and prevents them from personally owning the land to ensure they have no stake in the matter. It’s not much of a plan, but it’s the one we’ve been trying out for decades now and I guess the theory is it might work someday.
So it seems everyone in the thread agrees that the reserve system as it is currently structured is a hinderance and not a help. Why has there not been public efforts at reform? What are the obstacles to changing the system if, as in this thread, most people agree that change is needed?
In other words, all the treaties, acts, proclamations, and so on, and all their provisions, are exempt from the Charter. The treaties (etc.) operate notwithstanding the Charter, in perpetuity. So, whatever was agreed to in 1763, or in the treaties signed since (many in the late 19th or early 20th centuries) is the way things are, regardless of the fact that it may make no sense in 21st century Canada.
To change that would require a constitutional amendment; and after Meech Lake and Charlottetown, we all know how difficult that is. So, nothing changes.
It sounds as if the land isn’t workable: hunter-gatherers got nailed down in a place which isn’t really suited as a permanent settlement; the “old ways” got a bullet to the belly and they now have peritonitis. The permanent solution needs to go through meetings between the Federal Government and the band’s representatives, to look for ways to move forward. Look for ways in which the Reservation can be worked, “go-back” programs (education grants which involve an obligation to go back for a limited time - the obligation can be rescinded or delayed if doing so is considered best for the community, for example if the grantee has a chance to do research)…
Well, I guess in theory, you could have the residential schools without the beatings, rapes, and broken families. The beatings and rapes weren’t a fundamental part of the residential school curriculum (I guess the broken families part was). The beatings and rapes were just a side effect of the fact that the schools were isolated, didn’t really have much supervision, and nobody really cared that much about what happened to aboriginal peoples.
I mean, “shoving them into modern culture” isn’t going to happen, but that’s for a different reason. The Canadian Government isn’t going to say, “Oh, Native culture needs to be destroyed” any more, and the First Nations wouldn’t stand for it if they did, for the same reason that the Government’s not going to get rid of bilingualism. But that’s a cultural change within Canada; the idea that Canada is a multicultural country and that it’s wrong to try to wipe out somebody else’s culture.
Technically, yes. But that is unlikely, as right now, the treaties favour the natives. They are unlikely to sign anything that cuts their current rights short. As it stands, Aboriginals tend to enjoy more rights than other Canadians, so they are unlikely to give those up through a treaty.
This is about the only way that matters can go forward–lots of negotiation, with agreement on both sides that make a Charter amendment a rubber stamp. “This is our ancestral land,” doesn’t really work when nobody follows the ways of their ancestors and the kids want X-Boxes and I-Phones, and care nothing for hunting and gathering. As a Canadian taxpayer, I have to look at the dichotomy here: natives want cash to uphold their traditional ways, but they no longer hold to those traditional ways, and seem to expect the same services in remote locations as would be available as if they were in downtown Toronto. So my tax dollars are helping … how?
Aboriginals do get free education–an Aboriginal lawyer colleague got his undergraduate education paid for by the government, as was his law school education. He is today a respected lawyer, practicing on behalf of his community. Unfortunately, too few Aborginals follow his lead; and locally, harass passerby for spare change and cigarettes, calling them “racist” when they refuse to comply. When Aboriginals are de facto more equal than other Canadians (in terms of funds given without accountability), is this an appropriate reaction?
Navarra and Euskadi enjoy different/more rights than other Spanish regions, to the point where we get parties who make “get rid of those people’s privileges” a main item in their program. But we’ve negotiated and renegotiated the specific conditions many times.
Maybe part of my problem comprehending the situation is that in Spain those regions who want to live off our version of the Federal government do not want those “privileges” because they come with responsibility. If the people in Canadian reservations are getting from the treaties what the Spaniards in our poorest regions were getting until this crisis (money without breaking a sweat), well, that’s both apparently-comfortable and soul-killing. It leads to the kind of situation where those who want to do more are viewed as “weird” and end up leaving, not so much for lack of opportunities, but because getting anything done “back home” is a cross between moving mountains and herding cats. Change will have to come from inside the group’s leadership and sneak up on their own people.