Right-Wing Post: The Fight for Integrity in the Media
The story he wrote is entitled: "The fight for the soul of the AFN" and can be found at this link:
You'll notice that the first paragraph is an indication of his lack of knowledge about what actually transpired before, during and after what was called the "Crown-First Nation Gathering" (CFNG). First of all, the meeting was promised for many years and did not transpire until the crisis in Attawapiskat First Nation captured the media's attention and stayed in the media. The ONLY reason why Harper stayed at the meeting was due to the unrelenting criticism that he would only stay for the speech - not because of any pressure by National Chief Atleo - in fact, everyone but Atleo criticized Harper for his planned early exit.
Secondly, there was no "new" money given to First Nations for anything. In fact, after the CFNG, many Aboriginal organizations received funding cuts so severe, some had to close their doors. These funding cuts included cuts to the AFN. Any money that has been identified for emergencies like Attawapiskat or water has been taken from other programs and services for First Nations. The former Auditor General clearly highlighted in her reports how Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) has a habit of reporting one thing and doing another. Harper has long stated there will be no new money for First Nations - only "efficiencies".
Getting back to Ivison's article, I spent a great deal of time explaining to him my concerns, their origins and why I am running. Although I can't speak for what is going on in his head, he obviously did not like or understand my answers as he chose to take quotes from my old blogs to make his story sound more dramatic. To back up his right-wing slant on the story, he used the Frontier Centre for Public Policy - a right-wing think tank that can be counted on to support just about anything Harper.
The right-wing contingency in Canada has openly supported Atleo - from Conservative Senator Patrick Brazeau to many of the extremely right-wing media outlets like the Sun. My issue has never been whether they support Atleo, to each his own. My concern has always been their refusal to use facts in their "news" reporting and for their opinions. Anyone can have random opinions about anything, but when these commentators refuse to base it on facts, then it is hardly be considered analysis worthy of reading.
These guys are very clever, they can find ways to belittle or minimize individuals without saying it directly. Notice how they constantly refer to Atleo as having a Masters degree, but never refer to my 4 university degrees or address me as "Dr" instead of "Miss"? They refuse to capitalize the word "aboriginal" as if we are somehow less than other groups like "French" or "German". The fact that they even use the word "aboriginal" refuses to acknowledge my nationality as "Mi'kmaw" which is found in all of my websites, brochures and how I actually defined myself during our interview.
Even the quote he assigns to me is Ivison's quote - he is the one who asked me about the "extremely cordial" relations between Atleo and Harper where I explained that my issue is NOT with having a good relationship. In fact, I support respectful and mutually beneficial relations with Ottawa - but he never quoted my actual words. I specifically said that the idea is not to settle for just any relationship with Canada - but that I wanted one that was based on respect. This means Harper has to put some good faith on the table.
Ivison went on to challenge me saying how could I speak about respect for Canada when I refer to Harper as the devil. I told him that he needed to read my entire set of blogs to understand what I am referring to - Harper's aggressive assimilatory agenda towards First Nations and his blatant disregard for democracy and fundamental rights and freedoms valued by Canadians. I am not the only one who feels this way - at this point I believe most Canadians can see what is happening, especially since the two undemocratic omnibus bills: Bill C-10 and Bill C-38, show how Harper has replaced the voices of Canadians with his own agenda in a very dictatorial manner.
In addition, I never called Atleo a "devil". That is categorically false. The conversation was strictly related to Harper's assimilatory agenda. Atleo may be leading the AFN in the wrong direction in my opinion, but I have said all along this is not about Atleo as a person. I have met him several times and he seems to be very nice. I think most people who have met him consider him to be an extremely nice guy. After all, he is working at the AFN to better the lives of First Nations. It is not his personality that concerns me, it's his making deals with Harper without a corresponding mandate from the chiefs to do so, that concerns me. But this isn't just my analysis.
Chief Wallace Fox of Onion Lake First Nation in Saskatchewan wrote a letter to Atleo on July 10, 2012 specifically telling Atleo that "there is no place for you to have your own agenda" and he went on to cite "countless examples of AFN acting without any authority from the Chiefs". Chief Fox was very specific that this was not a personal issue, but instead highlighted the "danger" of he AFN "collaborating" with Harper to push the 1969 White Paper assimilation policy. Chief Fox is not the only one who feels this way. Many chiefs across the country can see the writing on the wall. These are the facts of what is happening here and Ivison ignored all of those to print a propaganda piece for Atleo.
If you read Ivison's entire piece you will understand exactly what the rest of us are talking about. Ivison quotes Atleo as describing himself as the head of the AFN engaged in "nation to nation" relations with Canada. This is precisely the problem - AFN is NOT a Nation, it's not a treaty holder or land owner, nor is it not a national government. Atleo cannot engage in Nation to Nation relations - only we as Indigenous Nations can do that. Only Treaty 1, Treaty 6, or Mi'kmaq, Maliseet or Anishinabek, etc can speak for their Nations. This is the fundamental issue here that Ivison and all the right-wing media ignores.
Ivison also failed to quote our conversation related to funding. He tried to get me to admit that my whole solution is more tax-payer's money. I explained to him that all the wealth in this country is made from First Nations lands and resources. Every single government, business or industry is 100% reliant on the ongoing theft of our lands and resources. It is a fundamental mischaracterization to say that band funding comes from tax-payers. If tax-payers have an issue with paying taxes - that is between them and their governments - we did not create capitalist forms of government.
Our issue is that this country's wealth is 100% reliant on our land and resources. When we demand a small fraction of that wealth back, we are accused of being dependent. The only government dependent here are the federal and provincial governments who could not sustain themselves without out our lands and resources. We, as First Nations, fund every single program, service, benefit, and government in this country NOT the other way around. I also explained that at a bare minimum, First Nation government transfer payments, should at least be on par with provincial governments. Right now we are chronically underfunded and the extreme poverty is the result.
This does not include the additional rights we have in relation to our lands and resources from our treaties and constitutional protections. When I spoke to Ivison I explained all of this in great detail - but he obviously didn't like what he heard as he printed his own version. I also gave him my ideas about how our governments can sustain themselves, but he felt no need to share any of that. Instead he boils it all down to gender and quotes an unnamed AFN watcher saying that chiefs will never vote for a woman. At each step the right-wing faction in Canada insult our chiefs. We have more female Chiefs and band councillors in Canada than the federal parliament has female MPs. If only reporters stuck to the facts, then we would not have all this negative stereotypes dominating the media.
Our chiefs are smart, many are deeply spiritual and most are in this to better the lives of our people. I believe in the collective wisdom of our people - they decided to who to put in as Chief, they decide the traditional or hereditary leaders and when the chiefs vote they will decide who will have their back for the next three years. This race was never about gender - it has always been about inspiring hope in our people and laying out a vision for the next three years. For me, this means being brave enough to stand up and admit when we are off track so we can turn this ship back around.
The right-wing media will do their best to maintain the status quo - because everyone else benefits from it but us. But we have the ability to see past their propaganda and lack of facts - we can do this. We have a momentum going now to get things back on track and we will set things right. We just have to stay focused on our sovereignty, our lands and treaties and our people and we can't go wrong. The choice at this election is not radical versus moderate or male versus female - the choice is status quo or taking a chance on fundamental change. The status quo is killing our people, I don't think we have much to lose by taking a chance on turning things around.