Chiefs criticize accountability legislation

Page 10

While accountability specialists in Canada's capital city focused on the limitations of the Conservative Party of Canada's recently announced accountability legislation, First Nation leaders launched several strikes immediately after the act was tabled on April 11, saying it goes too far and in the wrong direction.

Assembly of First Nations (AFN) National Chief Phil Fontaine and several other chiefs took aim at the section of C-2, the Federal Accountability act (FAA), that proposes to allow greater federal government access to First Nation governments' affairs.

"Generally, the enhancements to federal government oversight and accountability announced today are positive steps forward and are worthy of our support," he said in a prepared statement released after the act was tabled. "We have no criticism of the steps taken regarding election financing, conflict of interest, lobbying, government appointments, the budget process, procurement, polling and advertising, protection for whistleblowers, or internal audit capacity within departments."

But Fontaine said the section that would allow greater access to First Nations' information is a "significant flaw in the legislation."

The Treasury Board action plan released with the 170-page proposed FAA "will give the auditor general authority to inquire, at his or her discretion, into the use of funds that individuals, institutions, and companies receive under a funding agreement with any federal department, agency or Crown corporation."

Fontaine said the AFN had "no objection whatsoever to this expansion of the auditor general's mandate."

But the national chief said the AFN did have a problem with a government statement that this enhanced authority "would not extend to transfers or transfer payments to other governments or international organizations, or to recipients that have received, in total, less than $1 million over any five consecutive fiscal years. Other governments and international organizations, including foreign governments, provinces, local, regional, and municipal governments, and self-governing First Nations will therefore be exempted from these audits."

Fontaine said that singled out the vast majority of First Nations and was disrespectful and unfair.

"Given that only about two per cent of First Nations have full self-government agreements, this section of the legislation has the effect of singling out almost all First Nation governments.

Provincial and municipal governments that receive cash transfers from the government of Canada will not be subject to the same scrutiny from the auditor general under the proposed legislation," he said. "And there is no justification given in any of the documentation presented by the government of Canada as to why the majority of First Nation governments would be singled out for the application of this aspect of the legislation. If the government of Canada is truly committed to recognizing First Nations rights in accordance with Canada's Constitution and maintaining the government-to-government relationships we have worked so hard to build, they will ensure this double standard is not included in the final version of the legislation."

Saying that the AFN has already been working with the auditor general to improve accountability processes and has proposed the creation of a First Nations' auditor general and ombudsperson, Fontaine said the Conservative approach was "a step in the wrong direction for First Nations."

In Ottawa, during the AFN special assembly on renewal, before C-2 was made public, Fontaine told Windspeaker that if it turned out to be true that municipal and provincial governments were exempt from increased scrutiny while First Nation governments were not, it could lead to lawsuits alleging a violation of the charter's equal treatment provisions or based on Section 35 protection of Aboriginal rights.

Roseau River Chief Terrance Nelson nominated Fontaine for national chief backin 2003. He is known for taking hard-nosed stands and has occasionally caused the national chief some embarrassment. But Nelson said he "is backing the Harper government's call for accountability" but "it should work both ways."

"As Indigenous people we should demand accountability from governments on resource management. With oil now being $63 a barrel, up from $10 a barrel in 1999, it is time Indigenous people demand an accounting from the immigrants on how they use the money they receive from oil and other resources," he said.

"The minister of Indian Affairs is elected in Calgary and Calgary is awash in oil money. Canadians gleefully rub their hands when talking about the potential 1.4 trillion barrels of oil in the tar sands," Terrance Nelson said. "The problem is that the treaties, which gave the immigrants access to the lands and resources, only gave them access to the top six inches of lands, 'only enough to ensure the depth of a plough.' It may be time for the Indigenous people to get tough. To borrow a phrase from the Conservatives, 'It is time for some tough love' for the immigrants, who have had a free ride on the wealth of the Indigenous people."

That kind of talk brings to mind the rhetoric employed in the fight against former Indian Affairs minister Robert Nault's First Nations Governance act (FNGA) which was abandoned by former prime minister Paul Martin after the chiefs launched a major campaign against it.

Union of Ontario Indians Grand Chief John Beaucage was asked if something resembling the all-out fight against the FNGA would soon break out.

"I think it might be a little too soon to ask that because the AFN has already had a proposal to have our own auditor general to do the work in communities. Now whether or not this particular issue can be worked in with the Accountability act, we aren't sure. But what we're saying is that we don't want the federal auditor general coming in. There's already enough people coming in. But if we hd our own process within the self-government framework, that may work. But for them to come in and be looking over our shoulder every time we turn around would be completely paternalistic and big brother-ish. We don't want that."

But grassroots activists say over and over again that any claims that First Nations are truly accountable to their members are just not true. Alan Isfeld, a Waywayseecappo First Nation (Manitoba) citizen who lives in Winnipeg, obtained copies of policies developed very recently by his chief and council. He faxed those policies, complete with revisions he was suggesting, to this publication. Over and over, the chief and council reserved all discretion unto themselves and sought to keep information out of the hands of the membership.

Waywayseecappo found itself in the middle of a scandal last fall that sparked an ongoing police investigation when band member Margaret Clearsky noticed a deficit in the band's video lottery terminal account while looking through the band's audit at the band office. As a band employee, she was looking for additional funding for a project she was working on. She said at the time that the audit can not be copied or removed from the band office. That is a practice common to many First Nation governments.

The "Band Council Policy Manual approved and in effect as of Feb. 8, 2006 by [Waywayseecappo] chief and council ... to be presented to the people through a review and ratification process," was criticized severely by Isfeld. He pointed out that since it had been declared approved and in effect by the council, it seemed pointless to ask the people to ratify it after the fact.

Section 3 of the policy covers a "Code of Conduct."

"All information regarding band council business shall be classified as confidential and shall not be released at any time to anyone without the consent of the majority of the band council," one sub-section states.

Isfeld changed that to read " All information regarding band ouncil business shall be classified as band business and shall not be released without the consent of the majority of the band membership."

Over and over, Isfeld questioned sections where the chief and council had written their policy to allow for closed meetings and non-disclosure of its own activities.

He said he got involved in criticizing his council's policy to protect his own rights.

"If I ever move back home as a First Nation member I would be very concerned that I would be moving into a situation where I would be surrendering complete control over my life," he said.

He said his main concern with the way the policies are written is that they are "too paternalistic."

"The claim of government paternalism is used by the First Nation leadership at all phases of negotiations with outside governments," he said. "At the same time, chiefs and councils have picked up on the paternalistic practices and those paternalistic practices are the major contributors to holding our people back from self-government."