Trudeau's Dance of Deception on Indigenous Rights
*Originally published in Lawyer's Daily on February 26, 2018 (edited to include links)
On Feb. 14, 2018, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced his plan to develop a new legislative framework called the “Recognition and Implementation of Rights Framework” intended to recognize Indigenous rights and avoid litigation. This announcement came after the incredible not guilty verdict in the Gerald Stanley murder trial — the farmer who killed Colten Boushie from Red Pheasant First Nation — and the subsequent nationwide rallies and protests by Indigenous peoples.
On Feb. 14, 2018, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced his plan to develop a new legislative framework called the “Recognition and Implementation of Rights Framework” intended to recognize Indigenous rights and avoid litigation. This announcement came after the incredible not guilty verdict in the Gerald Stanley murder trial — the farmer who killed Colten Boushie from Red Pheasant First Nation — and the subsequent nationwide rallies and protests by Indigenous peoples.
There
is no doubt that Trudeau was trying to deflect attention from the deep-rooted
racism within Canada’s justice system — but also in his own government’s
failure to take substantive action on any of the injustices facing Indigenous
peoples. Despite his many pre- and post-election promises to Indigenous peoples
— Trudeau has been all talk and little action.
Aside
from the opportunistic nature of his announcement, it is important to note that
this is nothing new. Since his election, Trudeau has made the same core
promises to recognize and implement Indigenous rights in a multitude of
strategically timed announcements. He campaigned on reviewing and repealing all
laws imposed on First Nations by the former Conservative government headed by
Stephen Harper. He promised to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP),
including the provision of free, prior and informed consent which he confirmed
meant a veto for First Nations.
After
he was elected he reconfirmed that his government would renew the nation to
nation relationship based on rights recognition. However, his mandate letters
to his cabinet tended to focus more on specific social programs than any
rights-based agenda. Despite these very telling mandate letters, Trudeau
managed to maintain the fanfare around his government’s commitments at the
Assembly of First Nations’ (AFN) Chiefs in Assembly meetings in 2015 and 2016.
With very similar impassioned speeches, he re-announced his government’s
commitment to repeal all of Harper’s laws, review all Canadian laws to ensure
their compliance with section 35 Aboriginal and treaty rights and implement
UNDRIP.
However,
year after year, he has not taken any substantive steps in this direction.
Therefore, when yet another announcement was made in June 2017, this time about
a Memorandum of Understanding between the AFN and Canada, there was some
expectation of concrete deliverables. Like all other announcements to date, the
pomp and circumstance celebrating the MOU overshadowed the fact that the only
hard commitment in the MOU was to meet with the AFN three times a year to talk.
This
is the well-choreographed dance used by Trudeau to make Canadians and
Indigenous peoples believe that he is making great strides, “absolutely
historic” advancements, or engaging in a “fundamental rethink” of the
relationship with Indigenous peoples. Sadly, the AFN has become a willing
partner in this deception. Had the AFN been doing its job, it would have
advised First Nations not to count on the speeches and announcements, but to
force hard commitments on paper. It should have been concerned that Trudeau’s legislative
framework idea is yet another federal government idea, much like the creation
of two Indian Affairs departments — neither of which was requested or developed
by First Nations.
We
know from the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples and the most recent Truth
and Reconciliation Commission report that every time Canada imposes solutions
on us — our lives get much worse. This announcement is no exception. Despite
trying to distance himself from his father’s legacy, Justin Trudeau is covertly
trying to do what his father Pierre Trudeau tried to do directly.
In
1969, then Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, together with his Minister of
Indian Affairs, Jean Chretien released the 1969 White Paper on Indian Policy.
The goal was to repeal the Indian Act,
dissolve Indian Affairs, eliminate Indian status, get rid of reserves and
treaties.
There
was tremendous opposition to this plan by First Nations, including protests and
several official responses, including Citizens
Plus — dubbed the Red Paper —
from First Nations in Alberta and Wahbung:
Our Tomorrows from First Nations in Manitoba. In both of these responses,
First Nations said they did not want the Indian
Act repealed and that any amendments had to be done with their consent.
They also said that their separate status as Indians and treaty beneficiaries
were to stay. Most importantly, they reconfirmed what First Nations have long
said: that they need their lands, resources and jurisdictions recognized so
they can rebuild their Nations. Trudeau abandoned the 1969 White Paper, but
subsequent governments have never stopped trying to fulfil its objectives.
Now,
Justin Trudeau, who did not consult with First Nations nationally, has made
unilateral decisions about Indigenous peoples including changing the name of
the department, creating two new departments, limiting nation to nation
relations to meetings with the AFN and a new legislative framework to limit
Indigenous rights. We know that this legislation will limit rights because of
the code words used by Trudeau during his announcement. His focus on
“certainty” is a Justice Canada word used to extinguish Indigenous rights and
title. His comment that this process is not about getting back what was lost —
is code for no return of lands and resources or compensation for the loss of
use or benefit.
Trudeau’s
confirmation that no amendments would be made to the Constitution means that no
substantive recognition of Indigenous jurisdiction will be made. Finally, his
focus on doing this to avoid the courts is another way of saying that he
doesn’t want any more court cases upholding our rights to land and our right to
decide what happens on our lands. Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould made it
very clear that free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) in UNDRIP “does not
equate to a veto” — a stark contrast from Trudeau’s promise that FPIC
“absolutely” equates to a veto.
Trudeau’s
dance of deception has the potential to gut Indigenous rights, treaties, title
and jurisdiction in Canada, especially if he is permitted to ride the pomp and
circumstance of these carefully worded, flowery announcements to royal assent
before the next election — as he promised. Conflict is coming and the true test
of reconciliation will be over our right to say no.
*Link to the article originally published in Lawyer's Daily on February 26, 2018:
https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/5976/trudeau-s-dance-of-deception-on-indigenous-rights-pamela-palmater?category=columnists
Please check out my related video on Youtube discussing Trudeau's false face speech to the UN about Canada's relations with Indigenous peoples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI3-Vc01InQ&t=5s
See also my related video providing a basic explanation of the federal legislative framework:*Link to the article originally published in Lawyer's Daily on February 26, 2018:
https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/5976/trudeau-s-dance-of-deception-on-indigenous-rights-pamela-palmater?category=columnists
Please check out my related video on Youtube discussing Trudeau's false face speech to the UN about Canada's relations with Indigenous peoples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI3-Vc01InQ&t=5s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7Z3579b20c&t=2s
I have several First Nations friends who believe in Trudeau's smooth talk and great smile.. Just this morning one quoted "I love Justin Trudeau." It's just so sad that folks cannot see he's a wolf-in-sheep's clothing.... good-looking, smooth-talking, pure lying evil.
ReplyDelete