Commission should move from talk to action

Page 4

Two weeks ago, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples released its second discussion paper, entitled Focusing the Dialogue.

This latest work comes after months of consultations with and presentations by various Natives from across the country. In the past 13 months, commission members have visited 72 communities and talked with more than 1,400 people about the state of being Indian in Canada.

What they've come up with is four policy statements, Touchstones of Chance, that the commission believe are vital to guarantee the future of Aboriginals, their society and their culture in Canada.

The first touchstone says Natives require a new relationship with non-Natives. The second one says they require self-government. The third, economic self-sufficiency, is a natural to follow to number two. And the fourth touchstone promotes cultural, medical and spiritual healing for communities and their members.

Commission co-chairs George Erasmus and Rene Dussault are arming themselves with these touchstones to go back to Canadian Native and ask them if the commission is on the right track.

That is why, on the same day the report was issued, commission member Allan Blakeney quit his post. After months of trying (and failing) to persuade the commission to begin exploring practical, workable solutions to Native problems, Blakeney walked away.

In the introduction to Focusing the Dialogue, the commissioners wrote that they were committed to fulfilling their mandate with practical recommendations for positive change.

"We will not be simply satisfied with producing another recital of familiar problems," the document read.

When the commission will produce solutions is, as yet, unknown.

Blakeney apparently quit out of frustration because the commission's holistic approach to researching Native issues was taking too long. The former Premier of Saskatchewan, and the only commission member with non-Aboriginal government experience, said he was pushing his fellow commission members for practical solutions as early as last summer.

Erasmus said the solutions will come once Natives hear the touchstones and agree that this is what they want.

It would, however, be difficult to assume that there are any Natives who would disagree with them. It was from the numerous presenters in communities across Canada that the ideas inherent in these touchstones were conceived.

Assembly of First Nations grand chief Ovide Mercredi is disappointed with the idea of re-consulting Natives on their own ideas, and justifiably so. It does appear to be a waste of time. The commission has been around long enough to get an idea of the sort of injustices Natives have endured. The longer Erasmus and Dussault take to organize a package for Ottawa, the less likely it is that the federal government will do anything with their findings.

And in the face of a federal election, with public support for Native self-government as high as it has ever been, the commission should be scrambling to package their solutions to the Native crisis as quickly as possible.

Erasmus himself said the biggest worry among non-Aboriginals is the term "self-government." Although most people support the idea, many are concerned by the lack of a working definition.

The commission might be better off applying their findings to creating solutions and working definitions rather than wasting time discussing them again with Native communities. If they wait any longer, the commission's touchstones may well become the tombstones for real change.