SPEAKING NOTES FOR
NATIONAL CHIEF PATRICK BRAZEAU
CONGRESS OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLES
To The Canadian Foundation for the Americas
Seminar on Indigenous Governance and Democracy
International Development Research Centre
OTTAWA, ONTARIO - March 15, 2006
{Check against delivery}
Good afternoon, to all. I am pleased to be here with you so that I can address the issue of Governance among Indigenous Communities here in Canada.
Let me thank the organizers for inviting me to this conference and for allowing the organization I represent to bring you all the perspective of our constituents on a matter that is probably going to be one of the major challenges to be confronted by the Indigenous leadership in the years to come – and believe me, being the youngest National Aboriginal Leader in Canada, I know what I am talking about.
For many Aboriginal Peoples, self-determination is a crucial element in their development as Communities and Nations. Self-determination has been the element of discussions at the United Nations between States and Indigenous Peoples, including Indigenous Representatives from Canada and the federal government.
I shall take a few moments here in order to commend the cooperative efforts we have had with representatives of the Canadian delegation in Geneva, including Madam Marilyn Whitaker, Allan Torbitt and Keith Smith, present here.
I would also like to thank our own representative – Mr. Armand MacKenzie, for what they have achieved in the past few months, along with other of their colleagues, a work that has been seen by many as almost impossible to accomplish; I mean efforts such as the possible adoption of a United Nations Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including this very concept of the right for Indigenous Peoples to self-determination. Congratulations.
So, as I said, for many Aboriginal Peoples, self-determination is a crucial element in their development as Communities and Nations. This has been an issue at the U.N. but as well here in Canada during the constitutional discussions in the 80’s and the 90’s, in which we – as one of the National Aboriginal Organizations - were full and equal participants of the Confederation.
A few years ago, when the idea to revisit the Indian Act with the First
Nations Governance Act was discussed, we, as a National Aboriginal
Organization, took the leadership on the issue of governance and self-determination. We were there to talk about the real things that matter to the forgotten people.
As a young Aboriginal Leader, I do believe that our right to self-determination is a fundamental human right that needs to be recognized and that is part of our right to development.
At the same time, from my personal experience and as a member of the Kitigan Zibi First Nation community, I believe as well that Good Governance of Indigenous Communities in 2006 is something to be valued in Aboriginal Communities in Canada.
Some probably will argue that I am going too far in my comments, but it is time, as well, to address a reality that is facing too many Aboriginal Communities: I mean the lack of good governance among Indigenous Communities in this country and the lack of accountability. In this short presentation I will point three areas to support my arguments.
1. Access to financial reports from First Nations.
2. Discrimination in the delivery of programs and services.
3. Discrimination against Aboriginal women.
One of the core aspects of good governance is accountability. Indigenous Governments Leaders are responsible to explain to their people what they achieved over a fiscal year with the resources that are available to them. It is important for the people to know how financial, material and human resources are allocated in the development of their community. That is how a people can make an informed decision about their leaders. But in order to have that informed decision you have to have the financial records of the communities or the annual report.
I challenge anyone here in this room to ask from a First Nation community to have access to the audits or at the minimum an annual report. It is like trying to access the key to the Da Vinci Code! Many of our constituents are indicating to us the lack of accountability of their leadership. Certain Chiefs and Councillors among First Nations’ communities take for granted their position. Theirs is not a divine right to rule. People are elected to make rational decisions on behalf of their community taking the best interests of community members. People are not elected to go to different meetings without reporting back to their community through a public meeting. This is not “good governance” and is in no aspect “accountability”.
I believe in any piece legislation that addresses the issue of self-government among Aboriginal communities the elements of accountability should be a binding legal obligation: the necessity of presenting to the community financial audits, the salaries of chiefs and councillors, any other advantages that may come from their position, the necessity of holding regular public meetings should be part of any discussions related to self-government for a specific Aboriginal Community or Nation.
Let me now address the issue of delivery of programs and services.
I refer here to a double discrimination that exists and is ongoing towards the people we represent. Over and over again, I hear expression of views from urban aboriginal people about how it is difficult for them to have access to programs and services related to health, education, housing, social services and so on even though they are registered members of their community and therefore counted when it comes to establish the level of funding for their community.
Not only, it is difficult to have an equal treatment without discrimination from their community.
It is also difficult as well for aboriginal people living in urban or remote areas to have access to the same level of funding or at least an appropriate of funding corresponding to their needs from the federal government. That is what I refer to when I talk about a double discrimination in regards to the delivery of programs and services to the people we represent.
Although we represent a very substantial number of people, the Canadian Government is spending 8 times more for Indians living on-reserves (with all the accountability issues that I have mentioned and that have been raised over and over again by the Auditor General of Canada) even though we find more and more aboriginal people living in urban areas.
I do not see any reason to penalize this group when they have very good reasons not to live on reserves. Just to name a few and I quote from the Corbiere Supreme Court’s decision:
“…band members living off-reserve form part of a "discrete and insular minority", defined by both race and residence, which is vulnerable and has at times not been given equal consideration or respect by the government or by others in Canadian or Aboriginal society. Decision makers have not always considered the perspectives and needs of Aboriginal people living off reserves, (…)
Similarly, there exist general stereotypes in society relating to off-reserve band members. People have often been only seen as "truly Aboriginal" if they live on reserves. (…) Off-reserve band members) often live apart from reserves due to factors that are likely largely beyond their control. Lack of land, what are often scarce job opportunities on reserves, and the need to go far from the community for schooling, are among the reasons that members left the reserve in the past, and continue to leave. There are also particular issues affecting Aboriginal women's migration:”
This last aspect of the decision invites me to address the third point of my presentation: discrimination faced by Aboriginal Women in their communities.
Of course, many of my Aboriginal sisters are more qualified to talk about the issues that they are confronting on a daily basis.
But, allow me to mention these three that I believe are crucial and important if one wants to talk about Indigenous Governance in the Americas: elimination of poverty among Indigenous Women, elimination of violence in all its forms against Indigenous Women and the full realization of their property rights.
Those three elements, among others, are the reason of this important “Aboriginal Women’s migration movement” in the cities.
I understand – and it is just normal - they want a better future for themselves and their children, a future free from violence and poverty and a future where they can have access to a better education for themselves and their children. For many, unfortunately, these hopes turn into a nightmare.
This is well illustrated by the Sisters in Spirit Campaign that is under the direction of the Native Women’s Association of Canada highlighting the level of violence faced by many Aboriginal Women in urban areas. I commend the work of the Native Women’s Association of Canada at that level in trying to sensitize the Canadian public about this issue. We will continue to work with them under my leadership as we have done in the past.
We will continue to work with them to address the various types of discrimination they face in their communities in regards to their civil, political and economic rights. We will continue to work with them so that we change the discriminatory provisions of the Indian Act. As stated by various UN Treaty Monitoring Bodies, it is time for Canada to put an end to the discrimination faced by Aboriginal Women by Canada.
Let me highlight some aspects of these discriminatory practices by Canada and I quote:
The (Human Rights) Committee is concerned about ongoing discrimination against aboriginal women. Following the adoption of the Committee's views in the Lovelace case in July 1981, amendments were introduced to the Indian Act in 1985. Although the Indian status of women who had lost status because of marriage was reinstituted, this amendment affects only the woman and her children, not subsequent generations, which may still be denied membership in the community. The Committee recommends that these issues be addressed by the State party. (That was in 1999)
The Committee (on the Elimination of Discrimination) is concerned that some aspects of the Indian Act may not be in conformity with rights protected under article 5 of the Convention, in particular the right to marry and to choose one's spouse, the right to own property and the right to inherit, with a specific impact on Aboriginal women and children. The Committee recommends that the State party examine those aspects, in consultation with Aboriginal peoples, and provide appropriate information on this matter in its next periodic report. (This was 2002)
And to Conclude (in 2005) “The (Human Rights) Committee notes with concern that the Canadian Human Rights Act cannot affect any provision of the Indian Act or any provision made under or pursuant to that Act, thus allowing discrimination to be practiced as long as it can be justified under the Indian Act. It is concerned that the discriminatory effects of the Indian Act against Aboriginal women and their children in matters of reserve membership has still not been remedied, and that the issue of matrimonial real property on reserve lands has still not been properly addressed. The State party should, in consultation with Aboriginal peoples, adopt measures ending discrimination actually suffered by Aboriginal women in matters of reserve membership and matrimonial property, and consider this issue as a high priority. The State party should also ensure equal funding of Aboriginal men and women associations.” Unquote
So our doors are open to do the work in conjunction with Canada to address these various challenges affecting Indigenous Governance in Canada and in the Americas.
Thank You, Merci, Meegwetch, Muchas Gracias!
- 30 -
For further information, please contact:
Al Fleming
Director
Public Affairs
613-747-6022 (office)
613-867-8696 (mobile)
al@abo-peoples.org
