Trust. Integrity. Reputation.
October - 2000
From sea to shining sea
A Vancouver protester spits on an inverted Canadian flag while others set it alight to demonstrate their anger over the federal government's "excessive violence" against Mi'kmaq fishermen exercising their treaty right to a commercial fishery in Atlantic Canada.Photo Credit: Troy Hunter
From sea to shining sea
Anger mounts
First Nations can't meet Corbiere decision deadlineNo teeth, no action, charge First Nations
Communities united in opposing Toronto toxins
Canadian media hits snoozeOlympics showcase Aborigine gripes
Upholding the rule of law - Guest Column
Nobody should die for patronage - Editorial
The above is only a partial list of all the stories featured in the October, 2000 issue of Windspeaker.
If you are not receiving your own copy of Windspeaker, then you have missed out on a great deal of news, information and humour.
By Troy Hunter
Windspeaker Contributor
VANCOUVERIt was high noon on a busy Friday when a couple of hundred Aboriginal people took to the streets and marched from the Vancouver Aboriginal Friendship Centre to Harbour Centre, the building where the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) has their Pacific regional headquarters. The march was to show support of the Mi'kmaq Indians at Burnt Church, N.B. for exercising their treaty right to a commercial fishery, under seige by the DFO and the Canadian government.
The busy intersection of Seymour and Hastings was completely blocked for more than a half-hour with protesters singing songs, beating hand drums and waving banners in the air.
It was announced that the office of DFO Minister Herb Dahliwahl was occupied, and a list of demands was read out over a bullhorn.
The demands included a call for the resignation of Dhaliwal for authorizing the use of excessive violence against Mi'kmaq fishermen. Protesters also insisted that DFO recognize and affirm the Mi'kmaq and Maliseet people's legal and constitutionally recognized right to fish, hunt and gather, that the DFO officers be brought to justice, and that the government of Canada recognize the legal decisions of its highest court, the Supreme Court of Canada, and begin implementing the Marshall decision (which affirmed the Mi'kmaq's treaty right), and the Delgamuukw decision in order to protect and affirm Aboriginal rights and title.
Larry Wong, an Aboriginal veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces is from the Kitwanga community. He carried an inverted Canadian flag in the rally.
"I am ashamed of this country that I served 22 years in the Canadian Armed Forces, standing on line for Canada only to come back without a uniform," he said. "I have a right to be ashamed of this flag that I fought for."
The flag was burned during the rally. Patricia Kelly from Cheam, B.C., a community that also recently protested the treatment by Canada in a land rights question by erecting a road blockade, was one of the people who lit the flag on fire.
"I want Canada to stop burning Burnt Church and for Chretien to know we remember the White Paper," she said, referring to the now notorious policy paper presented in 1969 by then-Indian Affairs minister Chretien calling for the assimilation of Native people. "The flag burning is my way of showing support and solidarity for the people of Burnt Church."
TOPBy Paul Barnsley
Windspeaker Staff Writer
BURNT CHURCH FIRST NATION, N.B.Mi'kmaq lobster fishers are finding themselves in hot water for doing the same thing that the Supreme Court of Canada acquitted Donald Marshall, Jr. of doing a year ago.
After several weeks of mounting tensions in Atlantic Canada after Mi'kmaq fishers began their season in August, things began to heat up in earnest on the morning of Sept. 23 as a deadline imposed by federal Fisheries and Oceans Minister Herb Dhaliwal came and went. DFO officers then began removing traps, prompting a response from Mi'kmaq fishers when DFO officers moved in close to shore on Sept. 26. The federal officers retreated, rather than force a showdown, and at press time on Sept. 27, there was an uneasy standoff in progress.
In the days leading up to the deadline, Native leaders from all parts of the country descended on the northeastern New Brunswick reserve located a half-hour's drive east of Miramichi to show their support. The fight is seen as a pivotal battle in the war to protect gains made by Aboriginal people through a succession of court cases that stretches back more than 10 years. Native leaders complain that federal and provincial politicians refuse to respond to the changes in the law mandated by the high court decisions because they fear a political backlash.
Non-Native fishers did not distinguish themselves with their actions in the days immediately before and after the deadline. Newspapers regularly carried stories with quotes containing obscenity-laden threats delivered by individuals who felt their livelihood had been threatened.
And three non-Native people in a boat were arrested on Sept. 22 after shots were fired on the waters off the Burnt Church wharf. Liquor and drugs were seized and police reported the three men were intoxicated. One man was later charged.
But the root cause of this confrontation, one that has the potential to turn into a clash that could rival the confrontation at Oka, Que. in 1990, is too complex for those without advanced degrees in constitutional law to solve in a reasonable fashion. Government officials, who have that kind of expertise, or at least have access to those who do, haven't made things any calmer with their actions.
Twenty lawyers with extensive experience in Aboriginal law signed their names to a press release on Sept. 7 that stated the Department of Fisheries and Oceans' position on the Indigenous lobster fishery is dead dead wrong.
"The Department of Fisheries and Oceans acts as if it has an absolute right to regulate the treaty fishery in Atlantic Canada," the release states. "In fact, the department has a limited ability to regulate the treaty fishery. In order for it to exercise that function, it must meet specific criteria."
The lawyers go on to say that they've seen nothing to convince them the minister has met those criteria. Quoting from Marshall Two, the Supreme Court's highly unusual clarification of its original Marshall decision, the lawyers say the government can only limit treaty rights if there are pressing and substantial public needs. And even then, the government is required to consult the Aboriginal people involved.
Marshall Two is widely seen as the high court bowing to political pressure. It was issued after violence occurred between Native and non-Native fishers off the Burnt Church wharf on Oct. 3, 1999 and there was widespread anger prompted by the original court decision recognizing the Mi'kmaq's treaty right to fish. Lawyer Bruce Wildsmith, one of the 20 lawyers who signed the release, represented the Indian Brook First Nation in Federal Court as the band tried to convince the court to issue an injunction prohibiting the DFO's enforcement measures against Indian Brook lobster fishers. In court, Wildsmith pointed out that, according to the clarification of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn fishing charges against Donald Marshall, Jr., Marshall was actually guilty. That leads to the almost farcical situation where the clarification of their decision actually contradicts the original decision even though the court refused to overturn the original decision.
"This is something the Supreme Court of Canada came up with on its own," Wildsmith told Mr. Justice Denis Pelletier in Halifax Federal Court on Sept. 7. "The Supreme Court of Canada is wrong on this one."
"It's one thing for them to say they made a mistake," Judge Pelletier replied, smiling. "It's another for me to say they made a mistake."
But the Federal Court justice did not disagree with Wildsmith. He eventually ruled he couldn't grant the request for an injunction because he would then be deciding the question of rights without hearing full evidence and argument.
Even government employees in other departments are critical of DFO's position on this issue. Bill Montour, the Indian and Northern Affairs regional director general for the Atlantic region, told Windspeaker that the striking down of one line of the Indian Act in the Corbiere decision has created a huge work-load for his department. He said DFO has done little or nothing to react to the Marshall decision, a much more detailed and far-reaching decision.
A Toronto researcher penned an opinion piece for the Financial Post that appeared on Sept. 26. Lawrence Solomon, executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute, a division of Energy Probe Research Foundation, specializes in examining resource issues from an environmentalist point of view. He put forth the theory that the government's actions can be easily understood if you have a solid understanding of the political forces at work in Atlantic Canada.
Solomon agrees with the lawyers that DFO is not acting according to the law of the land.
"I read the court decision," he said. "What struck me about the support that the non-Natives are getting is that it's all based on the notion that the government has the right to regulate. The Marshall decision was, I thought, fairly clear that that right is subject to various conditions and those conditions just aren't being met. He is convinced that, with an election expected as early as November, the politics of patronage is behind the otherwise confusing actions of the federal government.
"The government clearly is concerned about losing Atlantic Canada and wants to regain seats that it lost. The employment insurance clawbacks have been in the news, have been front page news in Toronto, and that's because Chretien wants to go back to the previous regime that didn't claw back as much. Regaining seats is very important in the Liberals' plans and I think it would be very difficult politically for them to do anything to offend the white vote," he said on Sept. 26.
On that same day, the Liberal government announced it would change the employment insurance system by eliminating changes introduced in 1997 that reduced benefits for repeat users - seasonal workers like fishers.
When Minister Herb Dhaliwal claims he's ordering the enforcement measures against the Mi'kmaq for conservation reasons, Solomon doesn't believe him.
"Really, DFO really hasn't been that interested in conservation. It really runs the department for political purposes," he told Windspeaker.
When he was asked whether there was a threat to the lobster stocks, he said yes, but not the way the minister is portraying it.
"I think there's definitely a threat to the stocks," he said. "The threat is primarily coming from the non-Native fishermen who are putting pressure on DFO - and usually being very successful -pressure to keep up the rate of harvesting.
In his piece for the Financial Post, Solomon detailed enforcement regimes in place in other countries and concluded the DFO was doing the worst job possible of conserving lobster stocks. He maintains that using the right to fish as a way to generate political capital is dangerous and has already been shown to be ineffectual in protecting cod and salmon stocks. He said that if fishers were given control of a specific area, they wouldn't be out in the water grabbing every lobster they could get before another fisher beat them to it.
"The best regulatory regime would be to give people secure rights to their fisheries and then you wouldn't need this kind of regulation," he said. "You wouldn't have governments making trade-offs between how much and how far can we push the fishery to create jobs before we take too big a risk. The people in charge of the fishery would be making those kinds of decision and they would tend to be very conservative, they wouldn't want to take risks because it would be their livelihood. The more local, the better, and even at the individual level.
"The ideal situation would be for DFO to step out of the picture, to give non-Natives as well as Natives all the rights - hand them over. Then there won't be any need to regulate them because they'd do a much better job than DFO would."
When the government announced it would undo the 1997 cuts to employment insurance benefits to fishers, the Opposition howled that the Liberals were buying votes in Atlantic Canada. Solomon agrees.
"It's one factor. The communities that fish, they get their livelihood from fishing, as well as employment insurance. The votes are concentrated. So there are quite a few ridings that would go one way or another depending on how the fishing communities viewed the Chretien policies. The tail often wags the dog in politics. Just a few seats, because those seats are swing seats, the government may want to keep them happy."
He believed the fisheries minister was caught in a political trap and acted in a way that would cost his party the least, even if it meant sacrificing the rights of Native people.
"I think that what Dhaliwal was facing was a lot of bloodshed. I think he recognized the fishermen's union was capable of a lot of violence. He felt he had to take control," he said. "He didn't want to bring in the troops to control the white fishermen but he could appear as a strongman to them by suppressing the Natives and basically pacifying the white fishermen. That's the effect of what he's done. He's wanted to show that he's in charge in order that the non-Native fishermen didn't take the law into their own hands any more than they did. It's sort of a backwards way of preventing bloodshed."
John Paul, 33, is a member of the Burnt Church First Nation. He is in the final year of his undergraduate studies in Native studies and criminology at Fredericton's St. Thomas University, a two-hour drive from his home territory.
Paul spent some time volunteering as a fisheries officer for his band this summer before embarking on a speaking tour on behalf of his chief and council. He was in Calgary the last week in September.
After almost 80 per cent of his community voted to follow their own Esgenoopetij First Nation fisheries policy rather than the DFO policy, he volunteered and worked with the Lustiguj Rangers, First Nation fisheries officers who have been trained to perform the same function as DFO officers.
During his second shift on the water in late August, Paul was on the first Mi'kmaq boat to be rammed by DFO officers.
He also believes that his people are being sacrificed by the government and the non-Native fishers, who aren't being honest about their true motivations.
"DFO offered the union fishermen $10- to 12-thousand apiece just to stay off the water," he said. "That tells me two things: Number 1 is, you're not in there just to get Natives out of the water; number 2, you've got enough money to turn down $12,000. In a province like New Brunswick?"
He was asked if fear was the predominant emotion in his community as they realize the forces they're up against. He said the time for being afraid was long past.
"It's anger. I hear them saying 10,000 traps, 4,000 traps. Get it right! It's gone beyond feeling like, 'gee, what are we gonna do.' It's gone beyond that. They've pushed so much that nobody's feeling sympathetic for anything any more. I'm not going to say I'm speaking for everybody but I'm speaking for a good majority of my community," he said.
The issue of the number of traps is one that the band appeared to try to get an independent observer to verify. Chief Wilbur Dedam tried to convince DFO to hold off on the threat to remove the traps by arranging for neutral third parties to count the traps. Before the count could be completed, DFO began its enforcement action.
The number of traps DFO has since claimed to have seized creates the impression the Mi'kmaq were fishing irresponsibly, but Dedam and his council say the numbers are unreliable. Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs president Stewart Phillip, who was in Burnt Church in late September, accused DFO of fudging the numbers, saying it's a wellknown tactic employed by the government in West Coast fisheries.
On Sept. 8, the Atlantic chiefs moved their policy conference from Halifax to Burnt Church to show their support for the lobster fishers.
The chiefs unanimously supported Dedam and his community in their stand and, Paul said, the community is almost unanimous in its support for the chief and council.
"They are now," he said. "It was questionable at first because we didn't know where he was going, but when he got a hold of James Ward, that's what pulled in his strong back-up. The people are backing him. The council came together and said, 'We've got to fight it. That's all there is to it.' There was two or three against it but the majority spoke. We had councillors on the water and that was impressive."
TOP
First Nations can't meet Corbiere decision deadlineBy Paul Barnsley
Windspeaker Staff Writer
OTTAWAThe Assembly of First Nations is saying its members can't meet the Supreme Court of Canada's Nov. 20 deadline to accommodate off-reserve residents in band elections.
Canada's court of last resort struck down a section of the Indian Act in the Corbiere case last year. The court delayed the date when the decision would take effect for 18 months in order to give the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs and First Nations' councils time to come up with a non-discriminatory means of including off-reserve members in band politics.
On Sept. 27, the AFN issued a press release saying the government's new regulations, published Sept. 2, will expose First Nations to "lawsuits and potential liabilities as a result of the federal government's flawed handling of this matter."
"First Nations have not been given adequate information or resources to implement the new election regimes that will be in force after Nov. 20," Matthew Coon Come, the national chief, said. "We are suggesting that First Nations turn the problem back to its originator - the federal government."
Dwight Dorey, president of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, the national organization that represents off-reserve residents, doesn't have much sympathy for the chiefs on this issue.
"My position is that the time allowed by the courts was enough," he told Windspeaker. "The AFN and Indian Affairs just left it too long. I'm adamantly opposed to any delay in implementing Corbiere."
Several court cases are being, have been or soon will be fought over the rights of off-reserve members. In Alberta especially, oil-rich bands are not anxious to have their political control threatened by the inclusion of off-reserve members. Some First Nation political observers see trouble on the horizon for Coon Come since he has strong support in Alberta.
The AFN press release said the organization "welcomes the concept of voting rights extending beyond reserve boundaries. This is consistent with the mobility rights of First Nations' citizens and the idea that First Nation governments represent all their citizens. This strongly held principle is a fundamental part of National Chief Coon Come's platform, the First Nations' Peoples Agenda."
While the AFN claims the government has not provided enough money and expertise to clean up the Indian Act and allow First Nations to deal with the change in the law, Dorey said the government did provide consultation dollars.
He sees the effort to delay the implementation of Corbiere to be a sign that First Nations are resisting the court decision.
"There's been a significant increase of the number of bands that have come up with custom election codes," he said. "That course of action has led to the exclusion of off-reserve members."No teeth, no action, charge First Nations
By Trina Gobért
Windspeaker Staff Writer
OTTAWAFirst Nations are growing impatient with the Indian Claims Commission and its lack of authority and scope in regards to deciding land claim issues.
"Right now the government is the judge, the jury and the whole thing. They've got all the power," said Grand Chief Perry Bellegarde of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations. "That is not proper. That is not right. So we've got to look at revamping to have an independent claims tribunal with some authority and power. Right now they are just a recommendatory body and the government decides in what manner to use their finished reports."
James Prentice, ICC co-chair, said the powers of an independent claims body are subject to negotiation between Canada and the Assembly of First Nations.
"Generally speaking, the difficulty that this commission has is that it doesn't have the authority to make binding decisions," said Prentice. "It can only make recommendations and the commission was set up on that basis."
The Walpole Island First Nation concluded working with the ICC last May on their specific land claim of Boblo Island. The First Nation is pleased with the final report but is still waiting for a response from the government.
"The commission reviewed and verified our research and validated our interest in Boblo Island, which has never been extinguished," said Dr. Dean Jacobs, director of research for Walpole Island First Nation. "We were pleased with the process. The issue now is they [the government] are saying 'don't call us, we will call you,' and we haven't heard from anyone yet."
Once the ICC releases a finished report to the government, the commission no longer retains any authority in regard to how or if the report is considered, explained Prentice.
"The government, as a courtesy, advises the commission of their position, but then that is the end of it," said Prentice. "We agree it has no teeth and we have been one of the loudest voices in saying that that needs to change. But I wouldn't agree that it serves no purpose, because we have many, many First Nations that come to the commission."
The commission has finished more than 50 inquiry reports for First Nations since its work began in 1991. The ICC's 1998-1999 annual report accounted for three settlements and 21 accepted reports, out of the inquiry reports it presented to the government. Cases relating to fiduciary duty, treaty land entitlement, and prairie land surrender are the main areas in which it operates.
"Those are really the three predominant areas that our work comes from; so in two of the three areas, I think the commission has been very successful," said Prentice. "The government disagrees with the fiduciary duty issue."
"In Saskatchewan alone we have over 500 specific claims," countered Bellegarde. "There is a backlog to our claims here that are not being dealt with adequately. A more appropriate independent, arms-length, mechanism has to be established to be put in place across Canada and they have got to get behind that."
The ICC has most recently disappointed members of Carry The Kettle First Nation. Since 1997 the First Nation has been working closely with the ICC, researching the band's claim that the Cypress Hills area was the selected land that the First Nation and the Crown agreed upon in the signing of Treaty 4 in 1877.
When the Assiniboine people agreed to sign the treaty, they were given the chance to select the land on which to reside. They selected their traditional land of the Cypress Hills. The Crown was in agreement with the selection and a "meeting of the minds" between the two parties was, in the Assinboine people's viewpoint, established.
"The land was surveyed as the agreed selection. A farm instructor was sent to teach the Assiniboine people agriculture, and they were given treaty payment as residing in that selected area," said Elsie Koochicum, treaty land settlement/specific claims co-ordinator of the First Nation.
In 1880, the government forcibly relocated the Assiniboine by cutting their food rations. They feared the people would join the Louis Riel rebellion that was going on nearby at the time.
"Big Bear and Sitting Bull were in the area as well. There were around 6,000 Indian people," said Koochicum. "So the government figured that there would be a major rebellion starting up and I believe they had only 55 mounted police in the area."
Although the Assiniboine made efforts between 1881 and 1882 to return to their traditional homeland where they faced starvation, they eventually had no choice but to relocate to the area in which the First Nation is located today.
The ICC concluded their inquiry by stating that the band does not have a reserve in the Cypress Hills and that under Canadian law a reserve is not a reserve unless both the First Nation and the government recognize it as such.
"We asked them to hold off on their report and not to send it, but to come and explain their decision to the community in person," said Koochikum. "It becomes frustrating because our Elders partook in the inquiry for the last three years and for them at the end just to walk away and not even see them, I don't think that is very respectful."
"The report reflects the best job that the commission can do in terms of its thinking, and its all kind of set out in the report," said Prentice. "I have heard that they are disappointed and I can understand that."
The commission has never traveled to a community and got into a dialogue about its report after the report has been issued, said Prentice. Interpreting the finished report or commenting upon it with others would not be appropriate for the commission to partake in, he explained.
"Our authority is to conduct an inquiry and make a recommendation and once a recommendation is released to the parties, we really don't have any authority."
Bellegarde is disappointed with the recent report that the ICC concluded for Carry The Kettle First Nation.
"Now with the ICC ruling that they don't have a claim, we will be assisting them (Carry The Kettle) to look at other options," said Bellegarde.
"Within the community, our Elders, they are the ones who are heart-broken," said chief of Carry The Kettle First Nation, Kurt Adams. "That is the way they feel because as far as we're concerned, we are trying to get justice done here. We're reaching out for justice but nothing was done."
Carry The Kettle has approached National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, Matthew Coon Come, in the hopes that he will take their case to the international forum of the United Nations.
TOP
Communities united in opposing Toronto toxins
By Joan Taillon
Windspeaker Staff Writer
KIRKLAND LAKE, Ont.Toronto city council is poised to make a decision about shipping more than 20 million tonnes of garbage over 20 years to the Adams Mine site southeast of Kirkland Lake, Ont. as Windspeaker goes to press. Twenty of 36 council members are on record as favoring the proposal, with the vote slated for Oct. 1.
The plan is being vehemently opposed by First Nations on both sides of the Ontario-Quebec border near Lake Timiskaming, and by the majority of non-Natives of the region. Even in the supposed "willing host" towns of Kirkland Lake, Englehart and Larder Lake, the results of Oraclepoll Research show 77 per cent are opposed. In recent weeks, the Quebec government, which has been notably silent about the mine project, has joined them in asking Minister of the Environment David Anderson for a federal environmental review, which is the only way the project can be stopped if Toronto votes yes.
Grand Chief Carol McBride of the Algonquin Nation Secretariat and Timiskaming First Nation, Que., which has been pressuring Quebec, met with Grand Chief Charles Fox of the Chiefs of Ontario, Chief Vernon Roote of the Union of Ontario Indians and other First Nations leaders at the Nipissing reserve Aug. 24.
"We are very concerned about the impact this project will have on health and safety," McBride told them. "Beyond health and safety . . . we hold Aboriginal title to the lands covered by the Adams Mine site, and the law requires that we have a voice in the way in which our traditional lands are to be used." She added that since neither the Ontario government nor Notre Development was accommodating their environmental concerns and legal rights, "they have left us no choice but to fight this out."
Timiskaming First Nation is directly downstream from the Adams Mine.
David Ramsay, MPP for Timiskaming-Cochrane, agrees, and has stated publicly he is willing to go to jail if necessary to stop the garbage leaving Toronto. Federal MP for the area Benoit Serré is also opposed to the project and he expressed concern about potential violence if the scheme goes ahead.
The proponent, Notre Development, is headed by Gordon McGuinty, who detractors say is "at the very least" a good golfing buddy of Ontario Premier Mike Harris, whose record on clean water issues is already a matter of public consternation.
Notre Development is a member of Rail Cycle North, a consortium of five companies in Harris' North Bay riding, that owns the Adams Mine pit. McGuinty insists that transporting Toronto's untreated waste 367 rail miles north of Toronto via train is safe, and so is his system for treating garbage that even he admits has an "active toxic life" of 120 years and must be monitored for 1,000 years.
He also said in a telephone interview Sept. 26 that an environmental assessment has already been done and that Native groups have been consulted every step of the way, so he doesn't know why there is so much opposition this late in the game. He denied there is any new evidence to hold up the process, although Minister Anderson's press secretary said Sept. 26 that the minister had received new information for consideration in making a determination whether to order a federal environmental assessment and had replied to a letter from Chief McBride on that topic.
According to Timiskaming First Nation's land rights officer Allan McLaren, there has been no proper consultation with Native people. That objection is echoed by Wabun Tribal Council, comprised of half a dozen bands in Timiskaming and Cochrane districts in Ontario.
On Sept. 27 McLaren said there was only one meeting between Notre and the Natives that he is aware of, more than a year ago, and he wasn't even invited to that. Still, he attended what he heard was an "information session" not a formal consultation process, along with a representative of the Beaverhouse Native community of Kirkland Lake, whose traditional territory is located on provincial land several miles upstream of the proposed dump.
Beaverhouse, with fewer than a hundred Native and non-Native members, would not be directly affected if McGuinty's technology-unproved technology, according to McLaren- failed to prevent toxic run-off from the Adams Mine, yet it is the only Native delegate on the community liaison committee that Rail Cycle North was required to establish to gain environmental approval by the province of Ontario.
The committee serves as a "focal point for the local communities and residents" who are "concerned with the operation and impact of the Adams Mine Landfill," according to information on Rail Cycle North's website. Yet Beaverhouse councillor Wayne Wabie said Sept. 26 that they had "dropped back" from participating on the committee because it appeared the other delegates have been "won over" in favor of accepting Toronto's garbage. He said Beaverhouse has always been opposed.
In Kirkland Lake (pop. about 9,000), where the selling point for the project has been the 80 jobs that are supposed to inject money into the former mining town's dire economy, 62 per cent of residents are opposed and so is their mayor.
Below Englehart in the Lake Timiskaming region, 86 per cent of residents oppose Toronto's plan. About 300 people in the town of 1,670 staged a protest during Englehart's fall fair.
Matachewan First Nation, a few miles west of Kirkland Lake, is hosting a rally against the mine on Sept. 30. Another well-attended rally was held in Ville Marie, Que. on Sept. 24, according to McLaren. He added that a peaceful "picnic" would be held very near the Adams mine pit the last weekend in September, but they would not be doing anything that would sway a judge not to grant them an injunction to halt Rail Cycle North from proceeding.
Toronto mayor Mel Lastman, who is pushing to move the garbage North, was unavailable for comment the last week of September, but a spokesman for councillor Jack Layton, who was ill, phoned to say Layton remains vehemently opposed.
Canadian media hits snooze
By Paul Barnsley
Windspeaker Staff Writer
BURNT CHURCH FIRST NATION, N.B.Human rights activists are saying that, once again, the national press missed an opportunity to take a close look at a problem that is national in scope and of fundamental importance to the way Canadians see themselves.
Rick Dedam handed it to the CBC on a silver platter and the CBC dropped it. Nobody else picked it up.
Dedam is the Mi'kmaq man whose Hitachi 2900A video camera captured the now infamous incident where a Department of Fisheries and Oceans boat rammed a much smaller Mi'kmaq fishing boat with such force that those in the boat had to jump for their lives. Burnt Church Chief Wilbur Dedam later demanded that the DFO officers on the boat be charged with attempted murder. So far, no action has been taken in that regard.
But the images on the videotape are so graphic that many Native observers are comparing it to the Rodney King video; amateur video that showed Los Angeles police officers savagely beating a black man. That video caused a full-scale media storm across the United States and around the world.
There was no such storm in the Canadian media, although a few faint voices were heard. In similar situations in the past, anti-racism workers have pointed to a national case of denial when it comes to facing up to virulent racism in Canada.
Dedam, however, has seen his video make a difference in several individuals, even if the national press or other groups haven't seized on it.
"Yeah, that was mine," Dedam said, brandishing his camera as he stood outside Nenooe Esgol (school) on the Burnt Church waterfront where the Atlantic chiefs converged to show their support for Burnt Church on Sept. 8. "Some people tell me that that piece of footage woke up a nation. I'm kind of proud of that."
Dedam said he was awakened early one morning and told there was trouble on the waters. He was able to record the incident and then he turned his video over to CBC-TV news. Later, when he saw the tape on the air, he saw that editors had inverted the order of the incidents on the tape and made it look like the Mi'kmaq fishers had started the confrontation by throwing rocks at the DFO boat. Dedam angrily demanded that the error be corrected and, after one newscast, it was.
On Sept. 7, as lawyers argued the Indian Brook First Nation's request for a Federal Court injunction against DFO enforcement measures taken against Native fishers, observers outside the law courts in downtown Halifax noticed a well-dressed non-Native woman emerge from the court building. She looked in the direction of several demonstrators who had attached the Warrior flag to a light pole and were drumming, and then she approached the demonstrators. There were a few tense moments as the demonstrators prepared for a confrontation.
"I've never done this before," the woman said, looking very uncomfortable. "But what I saw on TV the other night mortified me. I cried. I just felt I had to stop and say something. That wasn't right."
Noel Bernard, a band councillor for the Wagmatcook First Nation near Baddeck, N.S., is a former RCMP officer. He said he appreciated the woman's gesture but found it unusual and surprising. His experience has made him believe the racial tensions caused by stereotypes of Native people have a dehumanizing effect that prevent non-Native people from reaching out as that woman did.
"They forget we've got feelings, too," he said.
Far away in Alberta, a weekly newspaper editorial summed up the thoughts of a lot of Canadians who saw the tape and who may never have given Aboriginal rights issues any serious thought before.
Joan Plaxton, writing in the Valley News, conceded that extraordinary measures have to be taken in explosive situations.
"Extraordinary measures does not mean unreasonable force," she wrote. "[T]he ramming of a boat by a larger vessel is tantamount to premeditated murder. The incident did not appear to be an error in judgment according to eyewitness accounts and video evidence. By resorting to this kind of violence, the DFO gives Canada a black eye in the community. We have rightly earned the reputation of being peacekeepers. Will we be looked at in the same light now?"
National Chief Matthew Coon Come told the Policy Conference of Atlantic Chiefs what he thought of the incident when he addressed them at the Halifax Sheraton Hotel on Sept. 6.
"This is not solely about fish. This is about life, and the land and resources that support our existence and well-being. This is about Canada's persistent policy of dispossession of our lands and resources. This is about a repressive government that has finally showed its true face to the world in the past few weeks," he said. "This is Canada's hidden character. . . . Mr. Dhaliwal, you are responsible for attempts to harm or perhaps even murder our people. Thank God that no one was killed. Your officials tried. That is clear for everyone to see. Nothing could be more obvious-running over our boats, attacking people in the water, sinking boats. What a wanton and sickening disregard for life your troops have shown."
DFO officials said, immediately after the incident, that an investigation would be conducted. The spokesperson said it was possible there was a mechanical problem with the boat or some other explanation.
TOP
Olympics showcase Aborigine gripes
By Paul Barnsley
Windspeaker Staff Writer
SYDNEY, Australia
In a country governed by a party that actually tabled a law empowering authorities to shoot protesters who might mar the Sydney Olympics, Australia's Aborigine leaders are hoping to make the world take a close look at the tragic history of Australia and the suffering experienced by Indigenous people in the time since the colonizers arrived.
At the same time, the country's approximately 400,000 Aborigine people don't want to put too much of a damper on "Cathy's games."
The games were golden for Aborigine Cathy Freeman who not only lit the torch during opening ceremonies, but took first place in the 400-metre sprint on Day 11 of the Sydney Olympics in Australia.Photo Credit: Heinz Ruckemann/UPi
The Cathy in question here is Cathy Freeman, an Aborigine woman who delivered the goods on Day 11 of the games by winning the gold medal in the 40-metre sprint.
"It'd be hard to find an Aboriginal person in Australia who wasn't profoundly affected by Cathy's win," said Mindy Thomas, spokesperson for the National Indigenous Media Association of Australia. "We are all very proud of her and feel like she really is 'one of us.' There was some concern before the 400-metre sprint final that all of the expectations placed on her would prove too much, but there was a big sigh of relief when she won. Some Aboriginal people now want Cathy to get involved in politics and Cathy herself has hinted that she might become a politician after she retires from competition. As Aboriginal people say when someone is really good, Cathy is 'deadly.'"
The word deadly has another meaning, however.
In August, news agency AAP carried a story about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission chairman Geoff Clark describing as 'chilling' the Australian government's decision to review its participation in the UN treaty committee system, Thomas said. "Australia had come under heavy criticism from UN committees over treatment of Aborigines and asylum-seekers. The story said Clark said the decision reflected the siege mentality of the Australian government. It quoted Clark as saying: 'They are looking at restricting the involvement of those committees' participations and capacity to visit Australia to look at the implementation of the international conventions. This is worrying when you see that there is a new legislation that gives the army the power to remove you from the street and even sort of shoot to kill. I think this is a siege mentality by this particular government in this country, which I think puts a chilling warning to Australians.'"
Extremists are frustrated that protests must be licensed, but knowing the brutal history of Australia's dealings with its original inhabitants, only the most daring would seek to mount a genuine, unapproved act of civil disobedience.
Thomas said the licensed protests are achieving the goal of attracting the attention of the world's press.
"There are four main Aboriginal protest sites in Sydney during the Olympic Games, including a tent embassy at Victoria Park and the Metropolitan Land Council at Redfern Park. All of the protests are trying to draw attention to the situation facing Aboriginal people," she said. "Ironically, there seems to have been an orderly approach to the protests. The local city councils have granted permits for the camps and marches through the streets, the cops have been given cultural awareness training, etc. Everyone is talking about rights to protest - that they're all big and ugly enough to face up to criticism. The Aboriginal community's overall response to the various protests has been one of overwhelming solidarity and support. There've been marches from the protest sites to Parliament House, the prime minister's office, and SOCOG, the Sydney Olympic Games Organising Committee. The international media has picked up on the protests. For example, following the Opening Ceremony, the Los Angeles Times ran an article headed 'Original Sin?' which said that while Australians were getting behind Cathy Freeman's gold medal bid, they kept their distance from most of her fellow Aborigines. The paper's sports columnist Bill Plaschke wrote: 'Today, although Aborigines account for two per cent of the country's 19 million residents, they are eerily invisible.'"
The issues faced by Australia's Aborigines make you want to check the calendar; it's hard to believe it's the 21st century when you see what the people are facing.
"The protests are drawing attention to the big issues faced by Aboriginal people, including: We never ceded our sovereignty to Australia but have been dispossessed of much of our lands. We want constitutional reform - at least a mention in the preamble to the Australian Constitution.
Waneek Horn-Miller(left), a Mohawk from Kahnawake, Que., took to the pool to help teammates take fifth in water polo competition.
Photo Credit: Heinz Ruckemann/UPi
"We want reparations for the stolen generation, Australia's version of the sixties scoop, and land rights, including Native title as provided for under the Native Title Act 1993," Thomas told Windspeaker.
One issue seems to be straight out of Charles Dickens.
"Australia's northern territory has legislation that requires a jail sentence to be imposed for any third offence, regardless of the offence. This has seen Aboriginal kids thrown in jail for stealing a couple of pens, a packet of biscuits and other trifling items," Thomas said. "Even though Aboriginal people make up less than two per cent of Australia's general population, we are over-represented in jails. On average about 26 per cent, but far higher in some places."
Debate over the wisdom of this practice continues in parliament even though Australia's newspapers frequently feature stories about young Aborigines committing suicide while in custody.
As in Canada, health statistics reveal that something is desperately wrong down under.
"Aboriginal people generally die 20 years younger than Australia's broad population. We suffer diseases like diabetes, kidney failure and heart problems at alarming rates," Thomas said.
Also similar to Canada, Indigenous peoples are often excluded from the economy and left to live in poverty, or offered token work.
"Generally-speaking, the Aboriginal employment rate is comparable to broader Australia's unemployment rate - around 10 per cent. Even in government departments, which have EEO [employment equity] policies, Aboriginal people might get employed, but generally only in lower level positions," she said.
Unlike Canada, the Australian government has refused to address its history by attempting to reconcile with its original inhabitants.
"The failure of Prime Minister John Howard to say sorry for the stolen generation and related government policies and practices has been a major source of discontent and distress for many Aboriginal people, including stolen generation members," Thomas said. "Amongst others, Cathy Freeman criticized the government's handling of the issue earlier in the year. Howard has moved a motion of 'regret' about what happened to the stolen generation, arguing that he can't actually say 'sorry' because the current generation isn't responsible. Of course, this is not true, because child removal was happening 20 and 30 years ago. Some people say it is still going on. However, some Aboriginal people like the former Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner Mick Dodson have suggested we should let the matter drop because even if Howard did now say 'sorry,' it would be disingenuous."
