Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

Looks at this point that what they are getting now is too much.

Harper does not seem to have any choice here but intervention.

   

If you're living on borrowed money, it's always too much. If you're earning it yourself, it's never too much.

By the way, based on that video I don't think the "traditional lifestyle" argument holds much water. Are those precolumbian houses with precolumbian furniture? I think they've picked a lifestyle that is accepting of modern technology and would not be adverse to some local internet-based business pulling them up by their bootstraps.

   

Yes, it is white man's problem. It's not like we haven't been the source of all of the natives' problems for 600 years.

   

The entire concept of crown land in this country is questionable at best in the first place.



Given resources do not need to be physical. Consider the proverbial "give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll never be hungry again." These are people who traditionally fished and hunted and lived throughout all seasons without outside help, because they knew how to survive in the climate they lived in. The residential school system broke these people and took that away from them.

So, we can go on about how much money we give and give and give, but the problem won't go away until we recognise what's been taken away.

   

So we should treat their culture as a commodity? We should turn Canada into Native Disneyland? This sounds like a horrible idea, and not one that respects other peoples' culture at all.

   

Actually, the mine pays nothing in royalty fees, and all of the money goes to the province.

   

This is what got us here in the first place. Thanks for playing, try again.

   

"Native Disneyland" does sound horrible. I was thinking cultural exchange, not amusement park. I certainly don't support anything the tribes don't choose for themselves; their culture would be better off under their own care than under outside imposition.

You quoted my general principles but only disputed my specific example. Do you agree that it is possible and good for First Nations to establish their own self-sufficient economies if exterior society gets out of the way?

   

Got this from a friend:

When 82 First Nations chiefs and band councillors make more than the prime minister, all while many of their people live in abject poverty, something is horribly amiss.
It's not new, but it is amiss.

In Alberta alone, for example, 47 chiefs and councillors made more last year than the PM's $317,574.

We have serious reservations about that.
Now, since the money these chiefs and councillors pocket is grant money from taxpayers, auditing their books in search of ne'er-do-wells and misappropriated dollars would normally receive no political pushback. But the Liberals need ink, don't they?

They're a political embarrassment in search of some buzz.
So, looking for a headline grabber, along comes Liberal aboriginal affairs critic Carolyn Bennett to label the newly-introduced First Nations Transparency Act -- Bill C-27 -- a "racist" and "paternalistic" piece of legislation.
Well done, Ms. Bennett. There's your news hit.
Now please go away.
There is absolutely nothing "racist" or "paternalistic" about Bill C-27, a vital and long-overdue piece of legislation that deserves quick passage so that all Canada will finally get to know down which hole the billions in First Nations' grant money goes.

From the outside looking in, and this is what raises many hackles, it would appear that too many chiefs and not enough Indians are living the good life on the taxpayers' dime.
Bill C-27 should clear up the mess up.
Much like the CBC vs. the Taxpayer, First Nations band members deserve transparency and accountability from their elected officials, and they are not getting it when their leaders refuse to come clean with where the government's money goes, or how much goes into their own pockets.
What is "racist" about that?

Now, you may have never heard of the Glooscap First Nation reserve in Nova Scotia but you might be interested to know that one Mi'kmaq politician there pulled in almost $1 million in pay in 2010, while band councillors each earned between $210,000 and $260,000.
Now, close your eyes and try to envision just how big the Glooscap First Nation must be to warrant such mammoth salaries.
Give up? Well, in 2009, the population actually living on the reserve was 87.
We didn't drop any zeroes.

   

I say give 'em all the Yukon, lock, stock and barrel. Plenty of resources and some already existing infrastructure. Of course, arrangements or agreements would have to be made for the non-native population already living there.

And any bands that thought it would be geographically/financially advantageous to remain in their current location, would be welcomed to do so and encouraged, though not coerced, to incorporate like any other township/town.

Now if you'll excuse me, it's time to make peace happen in the Middle East


If only the FN problem could really be that easily solved

   

Yukonustan?

   

Heh, that sounds a lot like the "Give the Jews Connecticut!" proposal to the Israeli/Palestinian problem. But people don't like being forced to move, especially not so far. Inuit from the Greenland side would throw a fit.

I know you proposed it tongue-in-cheek. Sorry for the serious answer.

   

You are using a strawo-man argument, I don't think anybody supports that. Even the people who sympathise with the FN want the entire system reformed from the ground-up, they just don't share your particular vision of reform. Also, just for the record, alot of that $90M was one-time, special purpose funding, and much of that was in the form of repayable loans, not grants. Alot of hte funding is "penny-wise, pound-foolish" spending. For example, Gull Bay First Nation was put under 3rd party managment by Toronto firm Ernst and Young. E&Y, in an attempt to save money and with the approval of the Dept of Indian Affairs, purchased used temporary housing for $120k only to have the housing condemned by Health Canada as unsafe for human habitation. E&Y then asked Indian Affairs to forgive some the debt that the Band owed to the government because even E&Y couldn't figure out how to make the budget work with the debt levels. The government refused and E&Y then quit at the first window in their contract.


Is that a fact? Nobody has ever demonstrated that, nor is that the mandate of the Northern Development and Aboriginal Affairs, so why would you assume that. I agree with you that probably neither the Taxpayer nor the aboriginal residents are getting value for money on what has been spent, but there has never been any evidence (or even a suggestion) that the amount of government cash going out the door for regular funding was ever related to community needs.


I agree here, but I would argue that to date, no government has hoped the problem of poverty goes away, they have instead thrown money with the hope tha that the problem of Indian trouble-makers would go away.


No, there are big differences. Russians and Ukrainians aren't exempt from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as status Indians still are. Indians were also banned from voting until 1960 - that's nineteen-sixty. Russians and Ukrainians also didn't sign treaties with the government and they lived in the same communities as everyone else. They were not relocated en masse to remote locations of the country.




Nobody is saying its all the white man's fault - trying to racialize this conversation in order to neutralize different opinions isn't helping your argument or this conversation. As you suggested, the government needs to do more, and First Nations people need to do more. The entire system needs to be built over from scratch. However, only one of these entities currently has the legal authority and the control of resources that are required to even initiate any kind of change. We are not even sure which First Nations representatives the government should be working with or what organizaiton gets to speak for what group of aboriginals. Band Councils, for example, are largely mistrusted in many First Nations communities and some are actually viewed by the residents as being corrput agents of the federal government.

In ANY community of any race, religion or colour, social problems such as alcoholism, crime, etc only improve over the long-term once economic conditions improve.

The way I see it, the first thing that has to happen is that the Federal and Provincial governments need to indentify some group of aboriginal representatives (AFN, Band Council leaders, whomever) who they feel that they can work with AND who the First Nations people will accept as legitimiate voices, rather than government puppets.

The next step, IMO would be for all of the above parties to develop a plan where FN communities are integrated into the provincial health, education and other basic services systems.

Everything else, from the sustainability of remote communites, land rights, taxes, etc. would have to follow after that. And then, it will probably take several generations for positive change to take effect.

   

Non-enfranchised Indians were excluded from voting, indians could still vote, they just had you be regular tax payers like Ukrainian and Russian immigrants to do so.

I think they should try and phase out the whole reservation act over the span of 20 years. I think it would be wonderful if by 2032 there would be no official segregation of first nations.

   

Which is another way of saying Indians couldn't vote, since enfranchisement meant you had no Indian Status (no entitlement to any treaty rights).

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next