sliced bread #2

Some look at things that are, and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not.

Friday, November 04, 2005

walking eagle

--------------------
Prime Minister Martin was invited to address a major gathering of the Assembly of First Nations last weekend in Alberta. He spoke for almost an hour on his future plans for increasing every Native Canadian's present standard of living. He referred to his career as Minister of Finance how he had signed "YES" 1,237 times -- for every Indian issue that came to his desk for approval. Although the Prime Minister was vague on the details of his plan, he seemed most enthusiastic about his future ideas for helping his "red brothers".

At the conclusion of his speech, the Chiefs presented the Prime Minister with a plaque inscribed with his new Indian name - "Walking Eagle". The proud Prime Minister then departed in his motorcade, waving to the crowds. A news reporter later inquired to the group of chiefs of how they came to select the new name given to the Prime Minister. They explained that "Walking Eagle" is the name given to a bird so full of crap it can no longer fly.

Only in Canada can a national tragedy run behind an account of the winners of a lottery windfall and a possible visit from a royal in terms of news importance. The evening newscasts on Oct. 27 featured the abysmal conditions of the Kashechewan reserve in third place behind Lottery 649 winners and Prince Charles's possible visit to Canada.

The people of Kashechewan are Canadians and had this scenario been played out anywhere else in this country, the reaction would have been swift and decisive and the media would have swarmed to cover it. Whenever a group of people suffers a lack of fundaments rights, whenever the quality of a Canadian life is threatened, it is the country's conscience that is called to the fore. To view it as merely a sad state of affairs is like saying that Walkerton was merely a boo-boo.

Who is to blame for this?

Certainly the media that cover Native issues only when Indians are dying or complaining. Certainly the federal government that patriated the Canadian Constitution 23 years ago and thus became responsible for the lives of members of First Nations. And certainly, the Assembly of First Nations, the proclaimed voice of Canada's First Nations, needs to accept its share of blame as well. National Chief Phil Fontaine stated the there are 100 or so reserves that are on a boil-water advisory. If the AFN knows about them, then it was the organization's duty to their own people and to Canadians everywhere to make the deplorable conditions known.

It was embarrassing to see the finger-pointing and the woe-saying before any action was taken. The CTV newscast featured NDP MP Charlie Angus talking about the necessity to "haggle" with the federal government over decisive action. He went on to talk about how the feds needed to "hammer" conditions into place before the agreement was signed. Essentially, the feds agreed to move a reserve but refused to own up to any responsibility for the problem. Nowhere else but in dealing with an Indian reserve would there be "haggling" or "hammering" going on before the situation was dealt with. Nowhere else but in dealing with an Indian reserve would the government be able to move a mere 300 residents from a crisis area after two days. Nowhere would the conditions that bloomed into the crisis be allowed to gestate unnoticed and unproclaimed.

Kashechewan is a national tragedy.

The Assembly of First Nations has a communications department that should have made Kashechewan a household word long ago. The Canadian media should have understood that the politics of Canada demands continuing coverage of Aboriginal affairs. The government should have lived up to the promises it assumed when it took over responsibility for Aboriginal people in 1982.

The people of Kashechewan are Canadians. They are our neighbours. They are the heart and blood and fibre of this country, just as we all are. A well-known First Nations credo says that the honour of one is the honour of all. It follows, of course, that the dishonour of one is the dishonour of all.

-- RICHARD WAGAMESE, Globe & Mail (2005-10-29)
--------------------

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home