Low incomes mean substandard housing

Page 2

Australian Aboriginals have reached a land claims agreement with their government. In contrast, Canadian Natives are lucky to even be able to afford adequate housing.

These are two perspectives urban planners from across the world heard at the recent Habitat '94 conference held in Edmonton. Habitat '94 is the annual gathering for members of the International Federation for Housing and Planning.

"The future of the First Nation weights heavily on my mind," Patrick Stewart, a Vancouver planner, told the assembled audience. Stewart was one of three speakers addressing the issues of Housing and Planning for Indigenous Peoples and Culture."

The planner talked about the barriers which kept many Canadian Natives living in substandard housing. Eighty per cent of Aboriginals in Canada have incomes below $20,000 annually, he said. Of those, half cannot pay for their own homes.

Beyond that basic economic fact, cultural differences between Natives and non-Natives play a large role in the kinds of housing currently being developed.

"As First Nations develop their land, they feel pressure to use Western concepts of property," he said. "A three-bedroom bungalow situated in a suburb is not sufficient, especially for families that can't afford cars."

Among other things, Stewart called for Native control of federal fund allocations for housing. Six federal departments now control funding for First Nations housing.

Australian planning lawyer Mary-Lynne Taylor spoke of the progression of self-government for Australian Aboriginals.

In 1992, Eddie Mabo from one of the Murray Islands off the Australian Coast claimed continuous ownership, occupation and possession by Natives of the Island of Mer. That's what was needed to prove to the Australian High Court Australian Aboriginals had title to the land they lived on.

In his lawsuit against the State of Queensland, the government of the Islands, Mabo proved that Australian Natives in fact had a highly developed social system complete with laws.

Mabo won. The case has had huge implications for Australians. The Native Title Act provided recognition and protection of titles and also gave titles back to land free-holders. In it, land claims must be uncontested and negotiated, with all parties agreeing. If this fails, a federal court helps settle the claim. So far 50 claims have been made.