[Indigsol] Algonquin response to Citizen article

[Dan (OPIRG-Carleton)]

Hey all,

Thought you might like to read this response by Paula LaPierre, who's
involved with the Algonquin struggle against the uranium mine, to an
article in the Citizen.
http://mostlywater.org/node/26821

Algonquin Response to Ottawa Citizen Article
Submitted by ron on Tue, 2007-07-24 15:17. Turtle Island | Indigenous
[Received via email] | by Paula LaPierre

In Response to "Our natives must evolve into an economic force in
Canada", The Ottawa Citizen, published: Friday, July 06, 2007, by Fred
Maroun of Ottawa, Re: "Turning guilt into billions of dollars", July
1, and "We can't keep native communities on life-support forever",
June 29.

In Mr. Maroun's article he correctly observes that there exists within
Canada an Aboriginal bureaucratic system that extracts billions of
dollars in revenue with few mechanisms in place concerning what would
be considered standard practices of good governance and
accountability. In any system lacking strong anti-corruption
mechanisms the inevitable will occur…….blatant corruption. More money
from the government will not solve the natives' problems in Canada,
because the source of the problems is not monetary, they are problems
of governance and law. The Algonquins were once a major economic force
in Canada……so it must be asked what has happened?

And it must be remembered that these faulty systems of poor governance
are designed and funded by the Canadian federal and provincial
governments. By maintaining systems destined to fail and attract
distrust any actual attempts by Canada's Aboriginal people to gain
independence and sustainability are simultaneously severely sabotaged
from within the Aboriginal community through corruption and
internalized oppression and considered suspicious and threatening by
mainstream Canadians. Few Canadians understand the vast complexity of
the issues.

Of major significance must be the understanding that there does not
exist in Canada an Aboriginal "First Nation" but a complex and diverse
mosaic of Aboriginal cultures and political entities which have become
clumped together through the application, or more correctly, the
imposition of Canada's Indian Act and other Aboriginal policy. Nor
were Aboriginal societies solely made up of wandering bands of
hunters, fishers or gatherers. The Algonquin Nation, and other
Anishnabek nations had highly sophisticated central governments that
had excelled during the French trade regime. British policy, and then
later Canadian policy set out to destroy the most powerful aspects of
Aboriginal society. These policies altered the existing political and
social organization of Aboriginal societies that were profoundly more
sophisticated than what we have been led to believe and forced their
dependency on the dictates of externally oppressive policy.

One of the most negative aspects of this forced restructuring of
Native societies was the establishment of fragmented and dispersed
Indian Act bands and the promotion of Indian Act band "elites".

Existing within every Aboriginal community are the haves and
have-nots. Chiefs, councillors and band employees enjoy positions of
power not limited by the same degree of accountability or transparency
as is normally expected. Individuals in these positions are caught in
a series of conflict of interests. There is ample opportunity for them
to exploit the members of their communities while appearing to be
opposition facsimiles to the rest of Canada. Indian Act Band executive
and employees and financially dependent of the governments for their
salaries and the many other perks associated with poorly governed
bureaucracies while given the public appearance that they are
challenging the government for more monies on behalf of their
community members.

Essentially such a system ensures that mainstream Canada, while making
the rules, continues to oppress the Aboriginal people. Even where
there might be the illusion that Aboriginal leaders are prying away
dollars for programs and services in the best interests of their
community members it must be constantly remembered that Canada holds
the purse strings, that Aboriginal leaders are therefore financially
dependent on the Canadian governments, are in no way directly
accountable to their own people, and that they are financially reliant
on maintaining a deficit social system. A social deficit system
requires a population of needy victims whose only hope lies in the
provision of more programs and services………Maintaining a victim society
works for both the Canadian bureaucracy and the Aboriginal elites.

The solution? Canada must realize that there are contractual
obligations to the original inhabitants of this land for "benefits",
or rent in effect, in exchange for the shared use of their land and
resources, and that these benefits need not be provided through
programs and services. The essence of these contracts is the assurance
that the original inhabitants of the land and their descendents would
not be left destitute because of the decision to share their natural
resources. That is the legal foundation of Canada. But the legal
obligations have been avoided or minimized through the development of
sophisticated avoidance policies. Canada has attempted to avoid its
obligations through a number of tactics. The intent of the law has
been obscured by policy. Any legitimate solution must resolve the
inconsistency between avoidance policy and the still existing law.

Through the first tactic Canada has attempted to lessen or even get
rid of the number of beneficiaries of the contract. Canada used racial
qualifiers to lessen the numbers. Carefully designed ethnogenesis, or
community identity concepts, orchestrated through Canada's control of
the purse strings, have profoundly changed the Native peoples concept
of themselves, and the mainstream Canadian understanding of the native
Canadian population. Most of Canada, Aboriginal and not, now
erroneously accept the Indian Act as the "ultimate" definition of
legitimate aboriginality in Canada. If you have "status" you are
considered as having superior right to benefits despite the fact that
the Indian Act and its racial preoccupations have been the most
destructive and oppressive policy inflicted on the genuine Aboriginal
cultures and communities. Indian Act registration, or status, does not
adequately represent all potential beneficiaries of original First
Nations. Any solution must first identify beneficiaries according to
law rather than flawed policy.

The imposition of the Indian Act managed to reduce the numbers of
individuals entitled to benefits within the Algonquin community by an
estimated 2/3s and made the receipt of benefits contingent on
relocation away from traditional resources and economy. The Algonquins
in Ontario are currently grappling to reconcile those injustices. Can
it be done in a matter that will bring legal certainty to the issues
solely through a negotiations process? Only if the negotiations
process and policy can be clearly seen as reflective of good
governance practices, Canadian and Aboriginal law, which upon close
examination, the negotiations process is not. A solution must include
the re-vitalization of empowering Aboriginal institutions and
individuals consistent with law, free of constricting policy.

Unfortunately, after more than a hundred years of dependence on these
systems adherents of these systems are very reluctant to explore a
more honest reconciliation of legal fact away from the "funded"
identity, severely hampering actual reconciliation. Within most Indian
Act bands there does exist however individuals still committed to the
traditional definitions of culture, identity and nationhood, and
wanting to confront the layers upon layers of oppression and
corruption. Unfortunately though, throughout Canada's poorly informed
media and political circles many of these legitimately concerned
individuals are branded as radicals, rebels, or when organized in
groups, as "splinter groups", and are, expectedly, rejected by the
Band leaders. Recent Aboriginal protests can be attributed to
Aboriginal social justice activists attempting to draw attention to
legitimate issues that arise from the failure of Canadian Aboriginal
policy, administered by both Canadian and Aboriginal bureaucrats, to
meet the legal requirements of the Canadian Aboriginal legal contract.
These social activists are often unfortunately inappropriately
criminalized, and some, such as Dudley George, pay with their lives.
Mutually agreed upon systems must be developed that can assist in the
culling of corruption of all types from Canadian Aboriginal relations,
recognizing that such corruption is a shared responsibility, and
liability if left unchecked.

While the Aboriginal population residing on reserves, and
disproportionately unemployed, are not reflective of the original
cultures or nations it must be recognized that if the actual
conditions of the Aboriginal contracts were honoured as they should
have been persons of Aboriginal descent would be enjoying regular
royalties similar to the collection of rent for the use of their lands
and the profit derived from the associated resources. With access to
such revenue, and pride, they would be contributing to the Canadian
economy in who knows what kinds of constructive ways rather than
wasting away as needy statistics waiting on the next program or
service continuing their existence of dependence.

The people in Canada of Aboriginal descent are not solely those on
reserves or recognized through the Indian Act. Many have been robbed
of even the knowledge of their identity and rights. The diverse
Aboriginal people of Canada however are a distinct group sharing the
common legal fact that they were here first. Unlike Irish and Italian,
or any immigrants, the Aboriginal people were here as organized
societies prior to colonization or immigrations, and as nations,
entered into contracts regarding the shared use of their territories
and resources. Just as the Irish in Ireland and the Italians in Italy
still maintain certain rights and benefits within their home countries
so do the Native people here maintain legal rights in their home
country. Unfortunately, their home country has been invaded and taken
over by outsiders, blocking Aboriginal people direct access to their
own resources and the compensation promised them. In such a
dysfunctional economic system based on cut-throat competition, each
person or group in positions of power and privilege has a vested
interest in crushing every other person or group to maintain their
status. Therefore those at the top actively work to block any genuine
progressive change.

How motivated to work for the invaders, or their systems, would you be
in such a situation? Aboriginal persons deserve direct access to the
benefits they are promised and the freedom to use those resources to
direct their communities and leadership, just as the rest of Canada
does.

Would such individual Aboriginal empowerment lead to the destruction
of Canadian society?

I suppose it would pose a serious threat to a corporate Canada that
enjoys the unbridled freedom to exploit natural resources strictly for
profit. Fundamental to most Aboriginal cultures is a profound
recognition that land and resources are gifts to be enjoyed first for
the continued sustainability of the people reliant on that territory.
Are our rivers strictly profit generating commodities to be exploited
at any expense? Are our forests nothing more that standing timber
waiting to be harvested? Is the earth nothing more than undeveloped
real estate? Such a world view could have a serious impact on the
bottom-line of Domtar Lumber or Dupont Chemicals, AECL, or SRB
Technologies but empowering the actual Aboriginal community may bring
to life in Canada a political and economic conscience that might
challenge the existing materialism and short-sighted consumer society.
As an individual Canadian are you opposed to that possibility, or are
you equally led by a political "elite" that is able to profit
immensely from your ignorance?

Canadian Aboriginal issues are not about two nations, or two races,
opposed to each other. Canadian Aboriginal issues are about law and
power dynamics regarding the purpose of and distribution of natural
resources. Hidden behind the public faces of the "leaders" and
institutions of both camps are power struggles for riches. When any
group of people lose access and control of their territory and the
natural gifts the environment provides for their basic necessities
they will become impoverished and dependent.

Learn from the hard lessons experienced by the Aboriginal people of
Canada. Actual independence and prosperity is far more complex than
attaining jobs. Don't be fooled into thinking that working for a
foreign company exploiting your water, land-base, or accessible energy
buys you or your descendents freedom or prosperity. Work together with
a revitalized Aboriginal culture to ensure that sustaining resources
are protected and controlled by the local population.

Contrary to Mr. Maroun's statement Native cultures are not an ugly
blotch in Canadian history. The struggling and impoverished native
people are an existing testimony to the destructiveness of greed, and
we are all vulnerable.

While I am thankful for Mr. Maroun's interest and his keen
observations I would ask that all thinking Canadians be prepared to
become very informed. Critically analyze Canadian Aboriginal policy
and pay close attention to the Algonquin land claim. These matters
impact all of our futures and I am certain that underneath the
generated differences separating us as neighbours that there is more
in common amongst the common people, Native or not. The Algonquin Land
Claim should act as a catalyst for important social change.

Sincerely,

Paula LaPierre

Principal Sachem

Kichesipirini Algonquin First Nation