Trust. Integrity. Reputation.
Trust. Integrity. Reputation.
Top News - March - 2005
Volume 22 - Number 12
Landslides reveal danger of self-regulation
Chief, AFN too cozy with Liberals, says analyst
Funding review completeWrap it up - Editorial
Some ideas that will make products Arctic-friendly - Guest ColumnCheck out Ontario Birchbark
THE ENTIRE CONTENTS OF WINDSPEAKER'S MARCH ISSUE
ARE ONLINE IN THE ARCHIVES - ACCESS IS RESTRICTED TO
SUBSCRIBERS ONLY.
CLICK HERE FOR ONLINE SUBSCRIPTION INFO.
Landslides reveal danger of self-regulation
David Wiwchar, Windspeaker Contributor, Port Alberni, B.C.
Huu-ay-aht and Ditidaht forestry workers documented 20 landslides in their territories after recent heavy rains. Landslides up to 1.5 kilometres in length have put fishery enhancement projects in jeopardy, and are raising concerns about hillside stability in logging areas.
Huu-ay-aht Chief Councillor Robert Dennis said his nation has spent $300,000 a year for the past 10 years on salmon enhancement, and those projects could be wiped out if something isn't done.
"The province hired people to do terrain assessments, and we've been asking for those reports to no avail," said Dennis. "We want to know what B.C. and Weyerhaeuser are going to do about these landslides, why there is harvesting like crazy where there is terrain instability, and why there is no money for hillside stabilization," he said.
Huu-ay-aht forestry consultant Heath Krevesky surveyed the damage to some streams, saying trees and roots were stacked up 15 feet high, and mud and silt-laden run-off was coating gravel spawning beds, possibly killing incubating salmon eggs.
"Harvest plans are not taking unstable lands into consideration, and this is compromising fish habitats," said Krevesky. "It's shoddy logging at the expense of other resources."
According to Krevesky, a 1.5 kilometre-long slide came down one hillside straight into the Darling River, blocking a mainline logging road and dumping tons of dirt into the river. After clearing off the road, Krevesky said logging company contractors "haphazardly tried to clean out the stream with an excavator," but he fears they did even more damage as a result.
Krevesky is also concerned terrain analysts fail to take into account the heavy rains that often occur in the winter months when they do their assessments.
"It rained 800 millimeters in five days just before the landslides, and although that seems like a lot of rain, it's fairly normal out here," he said.
According to Ministry of Forests district manager Jack Dryburgh and compliance and enforcement supervisor Al Cross, the slides are under review and investigation, so they could not comment on the investigation specifically.
"We will determine the cause and if legislation was complied with," said Dryburgh.
Dryburgh claimed the Ministry of Forests does not see the terrain assessment reports, which are the responsibility of the leaseholder. But it is the responsibility of the ministry to approve harvest plans. How the ministry can approve logging plans without appropriate information on terrain stability remains an outstanding question.
Hayes Forestry holds the terrain assessment reports on Weyerhaeuser's behalf, and according to Weyerhaeuser operational planner Mike Davis, the province entrusts companies to comply with basic rules and make sure they're being followed. "They're relying on the professional foresters qualifications, and if there's an issue the professional association can be brought in," he said.Chief, AFN too cozy with Liberals, says analyst
Paul Barnsley, Windspeaker Staff Writer, Ottawa
As the federal government and the provinces continue to fight over who has to pay for health, education and social services for Aboriginal people, some Ottawa observers are wondering on which side the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) stands in the battle.
Andrew Webster is an Ottawa area policy analyst who has worked with many First Nation organizations. In a paper he recently circulated, he questioned the national chief's response during the first ministers' conference on health in Niagara-on-the-Lake last summer. He also wondered out loud if the AFN will be aggressive in its demands on the federal government when the first ministers meeting on Aboriginal issues takes place this fall in Vancouver.
"In such high-stakes negotiations the provinces are willing to hurt the federal government to advance their aims," he wrote. "Yet despite common ground with the provinces, the [AFN] declined to negotiate any issue, including the federal financial offer for additional First Nations health funding. It fell silent when fiscal responsibility was raised by premiers."
In an interview, Webster was asked how he came to his conclusions.
"First, on 30 July 2004 at Niagara, the premiers issued this statement: 'The health status of Aboriginal peoples represents a significant challenge for all governments. Since it is a federal responsibility, the federal government must provide adequate funding and work with Aboriginal communities to apply dedicated attention to addressing the unique health care challenges, including health determinants, facing Aboriginal peoples.'
"This was not an important agenda item for the AFN, who attended the conference and was more interested in 'jurisdiction.' The provinces were interested in the feds paying the costs of Indian health care. The AFN was disinclined towards attacking the feds on this issue and left the matter to the provinces."
He said he was present a few weeks later when another development added to his concern.
"I stood by and watched former [Saskatchewan] premier [Roy] Romanow raise federal responsibility in a media scrum, following a meeting with the national chief. Mr. Romanow was passionate about the need to clarify the responsibility question. The national chief declined to take up the lead in front of the cameras."
The premiers, he said, handed the ball to Fontaine who declined to carry it. Webster said his provincial contacts were stunned.
Phil Fontaine ran for national chief in 2003 on a platform of working with government. Since his election, Fontaine has hired a number of former senior government officials, including former deputy minister of Indian Affairs Scott Serson. His political opponents wonder if his ties to the federal Liberals are influencing his leadership approach.
The national chief has had to deal with this matter before. During the 2003 campaign he told Windspeaker that he has never carried a Liberal Party membership card.
Many long-time observers of First Nations' politics were astounded when several Aboriginal organizations came out explicitly in favor of the Liberals during the last election campaign. The AFN encouraged their members to vote without endorsing the Liberals. But Fontaine did issue a statement during the campaign slamming the Conservative Party of Canada's political advisor Thomas Flanagan, author of First Nations Second Thoughts. Traditionally, First Nation leaders do not openly take sides in mainstream Canadian elections.
Andrew Webster is careful not to make statements about specific issues in First Nations' politics. He is a non-Native man, but he believes the First Nation incursion into mainstream politics opens the door for him to comment.
"I accept that the average registered Indian does not get to vote for their AFN representatives. It is not for me to interfere. Yet I am outraged by the possibility of my tax dollars bankrolling federal party objectives in any way-especially through First Nation interest groups." he said.
Windspeaker asked the AFN for comment on Webster's remarks. In an unusual move, senior political staff compiled an eight-page response. It took issue with a number of Webster's conclusions.
"Federal-provincial off-loading: in reality provincial governments are off-loading to First Nations-straining their capacity to deliver services. The emergence of the acute care substitution sector of home care is one good example. First Nations home care programs are being pressured to accept increasingly higher acuity patients as hospitals continue to discharge patients earlier.
Complex post operative clients with need for multiple nursing home visits per day, home dialysis, home IV therapy, and acute phases of chronic conditions are just some of the types of clients that First Nations communities are now expected to service. These clients were not envisioned in the original design of the program," the statement read.
The statement called the data the analyst relied on for his paper "questionable."
"The paper appears to follow others that intend to contribute to the discussion of First Nations health care, but bandies about numbers with no explanation attached," it read. "On page 22, the author states that: 'Health Canada continues to whittle down what it considers its discretionary services. In the case of NIHB, various drug and medical supplies are gradually dropped from the benefit lists, or else put on unpublished lists where special permission is needed.' AFN has looked closely at this-the actual numbers are: from October 2001 to January 2004, 27 drugs were added to the open list, 25 were deemed limited use, three were assigned as exceptions, and 22 were classed as either non-benefits or exclusions. In reality, there has been no significant delisting of pharmaceuticals, as the majority of those which have been removed are discontinued drugs. Certainly the NIHB program has significant flaws, particularly related to its management, but we need to make defensible arguments to promote real change and not take the approach in the paper."
Webster was accused of being out of touch with the reality of First Nation health care.
"Finally, the document is simply out of step with the reality of First Nation peoples actually involved on the ground in health care delivery," the AFN charges. "First Nations, regional health authorities and [First Nation/Inuit Health Branch] regional offices are, in many cases, working collaboratively to find creative ways to address First Nations health needs within the existing system. In addition, AFN is actively pushing through the intergovernmental processes to achieve real change and sustainable systems for the future."
Webster called the final chapter of his paper "Prognosis." In it he raised the question of whether or not the AFN would risk angering the federal government at the upcoming first ministers' meeting. He asks why the AFN did not use the media presence to take a more aggressive approach at the previous meetings of ministers. Webster maintains that his contacts tell him the AFN had advanced notice that the prime minister would set aside $700 million for Aboriginal healthcare improvements. He criticized the national chief for not pushing for more.
The AFN says Webster got several points wrong.
"Information regarding internal AFN briefings and the preparation of our strategy are completely unfounded and false. The speculation about information received by AFN prior to the [first ministers meeting] commitment is also simply not true."
Paul Barnsley, Windspeaker Staff Writer, Ottawa
Aboriginal political organizations in every corner of the country may see their fiscal relationship with the government of Canada change significantly in coming years.
The final report of the department of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) entitled, "Reviews of funding to provincial/territorial organizations (PTOs) and national Aboriginal organizations (NAOs)," obtained by Windspeaker, contains funding amounts for all organizations and discusses problems with the way the organizations are funded.
Late in 2001, former Indian Affairs Minister Robert Nault asked departmental officials to review INAC's funding process and policy for PTOs and NAOs. A 25-member working group was created that included nine representatives of First Nation groups from all regions of the country. The group reviewed departmental records, interviewed Aboriginal leaders and officials at the local, regional and national levels and eventually produced a series of recommendations or "next steps."
One recommendation calls for "adjustments to the NAO funding regime and the Interim PTO Funding Policy" to make the funding "more consistent." The report, marked "draft" and dated Dec. 20, 2004, acknowledges that the current INAC approach, where funded projects must be completed within the fiscal year in which the funding was received, makes it difficult for organizations to make long-term plans. The working group concluded that year-to-year or project-to-project funding makes it difficult to attract quality people who are looking for stable, long-term employment.
While the report doesn't explicitly call on the government to raise core funding levels, the fact that the amounts of core funding are limited by Treasury Board authorities that have not been updated since 1992 is repeated several times.
The report, in the most bureaucratic of language, did call on the department to "develop and implement an appropriate core funding level."
The working group also suggested that pilot projects designed to explore how best to implement multi-year funding arrangements should be developed and given a trial run.
The working group struggled with the idea that government funded Aboriginal advocacy groups have to serve two masters-their funders and their membership. But the group, made up of federal government employees and representatives of government funded Aboriginal organizations, concluded it was not a problem.
"The PTO review suggests that the organizations are both representative and accountable to their members as they are mandated by chiefs in assembly and continue to work with the best interests of First Nations in mind. The means by which NAOs remain accountable to and mandated by their members will vary with each organization and its constituency," the report reads.
During the review process, it was quickly discovered that INAC wasn't entirely sure which group were legitimate PTOs and which weren't. Out of 55 groups that had been funded at least once since INAC started funding such groups in the early 1970s, the list was whittled down to 23. The 23rd group recognized was the Mi'kmaq Confederacy of Prince Edward Island.
That group is being recognized for the first time in this fiscal year. Six national organizations were recognized: the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP), the Inuit Tapririit Kanatami (ITK), the Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC), Pauktuutit (a national Inuit women's organization) and the Metis National Council (MNC). The report reveals that the various regional offices were not communicating with each other or with headquarters in any formal way and no national list of PTOs and NAOs existed prior to the start of the review.
But the most interesting reading in the report for grassroots people and those with an interest in Aboriginal politics are pages 64 to 68. That's where the numbers are.
The information shows that funding for the six NAOs is on the rise with $25,192,049 allocated as of Nov. 4, 2004, about two-thirds of the way through the current fiscal year. That compares to the total of $18,425,725 distributed in all of the previous fiscal year.
This year so far, AFN leads the way with $15,051,344 in combined core and program funding. AFN's core funding for the most recent complete fiscal year, 2003-2004, was $2,070,000. That amount was by far the highest out the six national groups. CAP received $478,000; MNC $426,000, NWAC $364,000, ITK $333,000 and Pauktuutit $277,000.
In total, the report reveals that the PTOs received a total of $57 million in project funding in 2003-2004 and that number represented their total INAC funding.
