Manitoulin chiefs suspicious of Bill C-7 "propaganda"

Page 4

The First Nations Governance Act (FNGA) proposed by Indian Affairs Minister Robert Nault has some frightening components, according to some Manitoulin Island observers.

First Nations members from Zhiibaahaasing to Whitefish River gathered in M'Chigeeng Feb. 3 and 4 to examine the provisions of Bill C-7.

The legislation was first introduced in the House of Commons as Bill C-61 on June 14, 2002. A House of Commons standing committee on Aboriginal affairs has been conducting public hearings on the proposed act in communities across the country.

Chief Patrick Madahbee of the Ojibways of Sucker Creek warned that similar legislation south of the border has "detrimentally affected tribes and led to the break-up of some tribal lands in the United States. If you participate in the consultation process for this act, you run the risk of forfeiting your inherent rights," he said. "This act is dangerous because it perpetuates government colonialism and outside control of our communities.

"There's no rhyme or reason to the government's timetable on this legislation," he said. "In fact, the term 'legislation' is worrisome because it means any government can change it at any time. The legislation is dangerous because it can be changed at the whim of any government."

If another political party gains power, First Nations sovereignty might be in jeopardy, he suggested. In his view, the Alliance, the Progressive Conservatives and the Bloc Quebecois have the reputation of trying to diminish Aboriginal rights.

Chief Madahbee condemned the government's waste of money on what he termed "a road show delivering propaganda" across the country. He dismissed the legislation as "a piece of garbage" and called upon other community leaders to reject the trend to "municipalize First Nations.

"Self-determination is not the government's to give," he said. "No one can give it (self-government) to you. We have to set our own standards in place first. Then it is our direction, not the government's direction. Community-driven processes are how we remain strong."

Zhiibaahaasing First Nation Chief Irene Kells also expressed misgivings about the legislation scheduled for royal assent in June. She pointed out that her small community on western Manitoulin Island has been struggling since 1993 to gain stability. "We don't have the resources that some communities do," she said. "I don't know how we are going to do it (get all the policies in place); we don't have the people."

"We have a lot of issues and barriers to overcome. The timeframe given by the FNGA is unrealistic to me. We need to read between the lines of the legislation and see what is good and what is bad that the government wants to see applied in our communities," she concluded.

Franklin Paibonsai, the newly elected chief of the Whitefish River First Nation, admitted the FNGA sets off alarm bells for him too.

"We have to oppose this legislation because they (government) don't honour our treaties and our rights. That's what it boils down to at the end of the day," he said.

An inadequate resource base has been impeding First Nation economic development, in his view. "The government uses the resources off the First Nations traditional territory and we have never benefitted from those resources," he said. "We need access to those resources; that's where we have to go."

"We have demonstrated our ability to manage our own resources," he said. "We are accountable and responsible to our own people.

"Financial accountability and transparency are already there. We need our own vision for our own community because we understand our community best. We have our own ideas, dreams, traditions and values and that's what will take us into the future."

M'Chigeeng community member Grace Fox expressed frustration with INAC's methods of public consultation. "There is a definite need for everyone to be well-informed about this," she said. "A lot of people don't realize how crucial this legislation is ad how it will affect their future. The government should be communicating in a style that is relevant to the people.

"Every time there are changes happening that affect Indian people the common people are left behind," she said. "It's like a train passing by and we have to run and try to catch it if we want to have our input. They have all these technological presentations, but it takes community members a long time to decipher the information and to understand it. The government needs to consult with us in our own way and in our own language. Make us partners in the process. We don't want to have to wait for a train to come by with Bob Nault on it."

Jean Andrews Madahbee of the Whitefish River band was equally upset with the mode of public consultation. She noted that the Powerpoint presentations used by INAC representatives are alienating to many Elders. "They use all those big words and all that technology just to confuse the Aboriginal people," she said. "Then they won't even be interested in making comments (to the standing committee). Why don't they make it more simple?"

"Language and culture are the lifeline of the Anishinaabe people," added Violet McGregor on behalf of the Ojibwe Cultural Foundation Elders Advisory Committee.

"We have to hang on to our culture and our identity for the sake of the generations to come."