Come sit down and enjoy the fire, I have some baby carrots and beef jerky to share. It's a special day today and a lot that needs to be remembered actually needs to be learned. This post is not to diminish the incredible sacrifice of our armed forces. Its purpose is instead for that recognition to be elevated so that we might all enjoy the freedoms that were fought for.
I'm going to have to go way way way back to the Royal Proclamation of 1763. By the way, for those that don't know, this is the basis and beginning of our constitution within Canada, and is in fact the first instance of the word reserve was used. Part of the purpose of the Royal Proclamation was to appease the First Nations people who's land was being infringed upon by con men and settlers. It also sets up the frame work for the creation and negotiation of treaties. You see it said that all the land that was 'reserved' for Indians was owned by the Crown, and no one may buy, sell, or use it without the Crown's permission. In fact all land deals that involved 'Indian reserved land' must go through the Crown. There is also a statement that the Crown promised to defend the traditional lifestyle of the First Nations.
To do this slightly bizarre set up the Crown, in the Royal Proclamation created a new term, called 'Indian Title.' What this meant was, that all lands reserved for the Indians, was actually owned by the Crown, but that the Indians could use it and continue to use it for any traditional purposes. It's funny how a statement that was made then to protect First Nations people, actually is used to hamper them now.
Oh yes, and this proclamation also made all Indians subjects of the British Crown but exempted them from being duty bound to serve in any military campaign. Of course, anyone who has studied North American history know that First Nations have served in every single war that has ever occurred on our own soil, as well as every single one we've contributed to outside of our borders.
All of these points are in effect in today's treaties and are relevant to any discussion of changing, modifying, renegotiation, or abolishing the treaties, because each and every point here has been used to degrade, diminish, and destroy the First Nations.
First off, by setting themselves up as the only agent through which economic trade with First Nations could be done, either through sale of land or other arrangements, the British Crown, and subsequently the Canadian Government, set itself up in a relationship of Fiduciary Responsibility. In simple terms, the government is now held accountable for the financial well being of the First Nations.
The example I always use is one of parent and child. Let's say my Little Bear becomes a huge pop star tomorrow. She makes sixty million dollars throughout her career as a minor. According to an agreement we have made as her agent and father I am allowed to access 10% as my fee (Which is actually pretty low for an agent) and then spend any money on agreed expenses for Little Bear's lifestyle and business expenses. The rest is put in trust for her when she turns 18. Now as a good parent I've attempted to keep things reasonable and hey, when she turns 18, there should be say ... half that left in trust for her, so 30 million dollars. If she turns 18 and that money is not there for her, then guess what?! I'm on the hook for that money, and can legally be sued to pay it.
Ok so this brings up a number of issues. First off, the Canadian government has not fulfilled its obligations in regards to the well being of First Nations. You go to the reserves and tell me if these people are enjoying the prosperity that the government has promised them. In fact we have documented cases (Kahkewistahaw is a good one) that prove they not only did not fulfill this obligation but acted against it. There are thousands of other examples of this same thing happening over and over again.
The second is this interesting thought: the relationship of First Nations and the Canadian government could be, and legally is, seen as something similar to the child/parent relationship. It is seen frequently in the way INAC takes control of First Nations organizations when they feel they are not being handled correctly. This relationship is damaging because it creates a case of unfounded superiority and control that degrades the lesser party in the relationship. It is unhealthy and will continue to create problems that resonate throughout the negotiation of new ways to do things, and ultimately will prevent any real change. It also leads to ridiculous statements like those of Tom Flanagan who state that small governments on reserves create familial factionalism and economic abuse that create a rich and poor class. These statements are ridiculous because our own government and political system creates these exact same things! By making these statements it reinforces the 'other' or 'lesser' idea that is inherent in the child/parent relationship of the current situation and do not allow for any real growth. Simply put, it is ok for white people to practice nepotism and horde wealth, but First Nations cannot. It would be 'bad' for them. (Personal note: Ok I know this is being presented as an intellectual exercise but is anyone else feeling incredibly offended and ready to kick someone in the junk?)
The last issue involved in this relationship is that final accounting. If the government ever wants to abolish this relationship then the bill will be due. Just as in my previous example, if the Canadian government ever abolishes the child/parent relationship then every single First Nation has ever legal right to sue for everything they have no gotten, every dollar earned from their land without proper recompense, and for every broken promise the Canadian government put down on paper.
I'm going to stop here for now, but there is a number of points still uncleared. Next we'll look at the restrictions used within Indian Title, the lie that was military service exemption, and the failure of the Human Rights Code.
No comments:
Post a Comment