Assembly of Vice-chiefs? Hooky playing chiefs disrupt annual meeting

Page 8

The Assembly of First Nations' habit of not playing by its own rules has caused trouble again, this time in Charlottetown at its annual general meeting held July 19 to 22.

Only two of the more than 60 resolutions filed by chiefs concerned with a variety of pressing matters were dealt with over the course of four days. A golf tournament was fit into the schedule, however, as was a banquet and dance in honor of New Brunswick and P.E.I. Vice-chief Len Tomah.

Of the resolutions dealt with, one concerned child and family services matters. The other approved a proposed "framework for advancing the recognition and implementation of First Nations governments."

The second resolution was of central importance to National Chief Phil Fontaine's plan to work jointly with Indian and Northern Affairs on policy issues.

The other resolutions did not get debated because, late in the afternoon of Day 2, the question of quorum was raised. Once the voting delegates present were counted, it was clear that a significant number of chiefs or their proxies had gone AWOL. Since the body could not function without a quorum, despite the fact that as much as half-a-million dollars was expended to hold the meeting, the resolutions were referred to the national executive for action, a decision that caused some sparks.

It has become accepted practice that resolutions are referred to the 11-member executive body for approval if they are not dealt with during the assembly.

Dave General, a councillor with Six Nations of the Grand River (Ontario) and proxy for Chief Barbara Allison of the Lower Similkameen First Nation (British Columbia), stood at a meeting floor microphone to say the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) charter did not allow for such a practice.

The battle over when the charter is followed and when it isn't has surfaced at all recent AFN meetings. During a sometimes heated session last December at the group's Ottawa confederacy, the AFN wrestled with the idea of what to do when accepted practice conflicts with what's written in the charter. At that meeting, British Columbia chief Doug Kelly called for a return to the charter rules on voting. Kelly said the charter allowed only a limited number of chiefs from each region to vote at confederacy meetings. Many chiefs, led by Six Nations Chief Roberta Jamieson, fought back against that motion arguing the charter had been ignored for many years and the accepted practice had become that every chief in attendance could vote, as is the rule for annual general meetings.

In response to that argument, all the chiefs were allowed to vote at the Ottawa confederacy, but were put on notice that the charter would rule at the next confederacy in Saskatoon.

When General argued in Charlottetown against sending the unresolved resolutions to the executive committee, meeting co-chair Luc Laine ruled against him and the AFN charter saying that it was the accepted practice to do so. No announcement was made as to whether ignoring the charter for that decision would be a this-time-only action.

The fight revealed once again the deep divide within the assembly.

General, loyal to the chiefs who oppose Fontaine, was trying to keep the decision-making power with the chiefs in assembly and away from the executive members who, for the most part, are loyal to the national chief.

Jamieson, who finished second to Fontaine in last summer's election, called for a special assembly to deal with the resolutions. Chief Kelly, recently elected to the three-member First Nations Summit executive task force in British Columbia, said that suggestion left him "extremely frustrated."

"We're talking about calling a special assembly because we can't get people to show up and do their job," he told the chiefs. "I have faith in my [B.C. representative on the AFN executive] to represent the interests of B.C. That's why we put him there."

Chief Stewart Phillip, a B.C. chief who belongs to the Unio of British Columbia Indian Chiefs and not the Summit, disagreed.

"This is not the assembly of vice-chiefs of Canada," he said. "This is the assembly of chiefs of Canada."

He urged that the special assembly be called to "focus on the work of the renewal commission." The renewal commission is working on recommendations that will allow the AFN to end the procedural squabbles that have plagued the organization over the last few years.

As the assembly began, Fontaine and other speakers stressed that AFN infighting had to stop. One reason, according to highly placed government sources, is that the organization received $2 million for its renewal process with the expectation that it would transform the AFN into a group that could make and keep promises in dealings with the government.

In his opening address, Fontaine appealed to all factions within the assembly, saying the AFN could accommodate all the regional differences and need not have one overarching position. He suggested solutions could be worked out that allowed "not a single goal but many goals."

Phil Fontaine told the chiefs the government was prepared to look at proposals that it had refused to consider in the past, that opportunities for First Nations needed to be seized.

"This is our time," he said, "and we have to take advantage of it. We have to move with new speed, with faster speed."

Both sides blame the other for the gridlock that currently paralyses the AFN. The opposition complained the meeting agenda was designed to take the chiefs out of the process. They said the various reports to the assembly scheduled by the national executive members-who get the last word on what will and will not be on the agenda-were designed to use up time and allow the executive to keep from addressing matters the chiefs in assembly saw as priorities.

Fontaine's supporters say those who supported Jamieson in her unsuccessful bid for the national chief's job last year are interfering with Fontaine's andate, seeking to hi-jack the agenda for their own political purposes.

Earlier that day, Jamieson had complained on the floor about how Day 1 had played out.

"Yesterday was a very long day," she said, "with presentation after presentation after presentation. I would ask that the chair adjust things so that the chiefs can have some input."

Chippewas of Nawash Chief Ralph Akiwenzie echoed those sentiments.

"I am in favor of direct contact with the floor," he stated.

Fontaine responded.

"The executive is extremely sensitive about the views, wishes and opinions of the chiefs in assembly," he said. "We've accepted your guidance. There is nothing that we want to do that will go against your wishes and opinions."

Later, N.W.T. Vice-chief Bill Erasmus, a longtime Fontaine loyalist, launched a spirited defence of the national chief.

"If you want to criticize, step into this man's shoes," he said. "This man works and works and works-day and night. I can't keep up to him."

He chastised the opposition for trying to disrupt the proceedings.

"If people want to come here and try to control the meeting, where are we as nations?" he asked. "We want to work with you but if we're going to keep getting caught up in the minute little details of a charter that was designed 25 years ago, I don't know."