A recipe for success

Page 5

Editorial

As accountability questions arise again and plans for more rhetoric and political posturing are being prepared, let us try to keep things from getting silly this time around.

Knowing the world of Indian Affairs as well as we do, we believe this must all begin with someone saying the things that everybody knows but nobody talks about.

One: Most chiefs don't want dramatic change. They've figured out the game and they know how to play it so their interests are furthered. In too many communities, the grassroots people are totally dependant on the good will of the chief and council for every necessity of life-employment, housing, health care, eligibility for welfare and everything else.

We hear too many stories about undue influence, intimidation, enrichment of the chief and his family and supporters. We also hear about corrupt practices that we can't prove because access to information about band council operations is practically non-existent.

And that brings us to two: The system needs dramatic change. Sunlight really is the best disinfectant. If First Nations truly aspire to be universally respected governments, they need to be completely transparent. Very little information should be kept from the press and public. Planning, legal strategizing and proprietary information is kept secret at all levels of government and that's all right as long as it doesn't go too far. But everything else should be easily accessible, so that community members know what their government is doing and so that chiefs and councillors can be held accountable for their actions and decisions.

Three: The opportunity to work and create wealth should be open to all. This will require a conscious effort on the part of everone involved and some sacrifice on the part of those at the table. Simply put, if you want to be a council member and make political decisions, do that. But while you're busy governing, you forfeit the right to be a CEO of a band-owned company.

Four: Politicians must not meddle in public administration. Sorry chiefs, but if you want any credibility at all, you cannot both make the political decisions and then control how they're implemented. In communities where family ties often have a lot more to do with who becomes the leaders than proven ability, the establishment of an arm's-length professional civil service is absolutely necessary to prevent abuses.

That's going to cost money and it's going to take time to develop. If the government wants to do this on the cheap, there's no point in even beginning. And the fact that a community is not yet ready to implement truly accountable and professionally managed self-government is no excuse to allow the human rights of the membership to be trampled.

Five: We were careful when Bob Nault introduced his First Nations Governance act because we saw a lot of merit in the legislation. What eventually persuaded us to call for the former minister to call a halt to his efforts to pass the FNGA was the top down approach and the flimsy and questionable consultation process. We saw the Chretien government's efforts at appearing to consult to be little more than an attempt to mask the belief of the government that it knew what was best.

Something is coming in the near future. We're absolutely certain that some attempt will be made by the new Conservative government to strengthen accountability in First Nations' governments.We're told it will be a legislative initiative. We're also told there is no plan to consult First Nation leaders or grassroots citizens. Mr. Prentice, that Great White Father stuff is way out of fashion. Don't even go there. Mutual respect and a sincere desire to make life better for the grassroots people should be the only objective to any process of reform. That's a crucial and a genuinely life and death point that leads us to six.

Reform is needed. Everybody involved has got to take a close look at themselves and the other stakeholderand cleanse corruption and self-interest out of the process right from the beginning. If Canada's looking to shake off a little fiduciary obligation and disguises that as a genuine desire for reform then Canada will bear almost all responsibility for every tragedy that happens in our communities while more time and money is wasted.

If the chiefs want a little cosmetic reform that allows them to keep their power and influence, see above.

As we implored several years ago when the Nault process began: Remember the people, the grassroots people. It's the only way this will work. And it's the only moral and correct thing to do.