Blog

Teresa's Year-End Reflection

Artist Credit: Chief Lady Bird

 

Tansi Nîtôtemtik,

 

This year has flown by! Thank you for following along, and for all your comments, emails, and feedback. It has been a distinct pleasure to share our team’s journey with you.

 

One highlight of my year was participating in the Kawaskimhon Moot. It was an opportunity for me and my partner to push our imaginary federal response to the limits of existing policies and mandates. I learned that even working within the existing colonial system, there is so much more that the Canadian government could do to support Indigenous communities.

 

Speaking of support—as of March 31, 2021, there are still 54 long-term drinking water advisories in effect in 34 communities.^[1] From 2016 to 2019, the federal government has invested and/or committed billions of dollars to eliminating and preventing long-term drinking water advisories in Indigenous communities.^[2] The Government of Canada website states that new water treatment systems take an average of 3 to 4 years to complete.^[3] My hope is that subsequent budgets will not stall or cancel the remaining public projects. It is essential that these remaining 34 communities receive clean water infrastructure.

 

Five years after publication, only nine of the TRC’s Calls to Action have been completed.  Reconciliation is not dead (contrary to the musings of a certain national newspaper columnist), it hasn’t even begun. At times I have felt angry and discouraged, and at other times impressed by the progress on the Calls to Action. But at all times I have felt grateful to have this platform to share information about reconciliation efforts (or lack thereof) with the public.

 

Daily, we are besieged with commentaries and news, and few if any of us have the time to sift through it all. I am glad that this blog will continue next year to help the public filter out untruths and misrepresentations about reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

 

This is the final post for the 2020/2021 ReconciliAction YEG team. Please sign up for notifications below to hear from the incoming team in September 2021!

 

Sincerely,

Teresa

---

 

Be sure to stay up to date on other happenings with ReconciliAction YEG:

Follow us on Twitter at:@ReconciliYEG

Connect with us on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/reconciliActionYEG/

Check out our Instagram at: @reconciliactionyeg

-----

^[1] Government of Canada, “Ending long-term drinking water advisories”, online: https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1506514143353/1533317130660 [Ending Advisories].

^[2] Government of Canada, “Investing in First Nations drinking water”, online: https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1606477385487/1606477411854.

^[3] Ending Advisories, supra note 1.

Sarah's Year-End Reflection

(Artwork by Mo Aura Bedard & Chief Lady Bird)

Tansi Nîtôtemtik, 

It's hard to believe this is my last post for ReconciliAction YEG, and my last days of law school.  As you know, its been a year with coronavirus, the anti-racism movement, cat lawyers and zoom everything.  But I am so grateful to have spent the last 8 months as a contributor to this project.  

Exploring the progress of reconciliation was a journey for our team, and at times a painful one.  Progress five years out from the release of the report and Calls to Action has been minimal and where there has been movement, it often takes a colonial approach to reconciliation.  

One of the areas I have been fortunate to spend a lot of time on during law school is Bill C-92 which came into force last year as An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit and Metis children, youth and families. (Side note:  If anyone has any suggestions for a good shorthand name for this act, please do share, AARFNIMCYF does not exactly roll off the tongue!)

This Act is important, first because it sets out a national standard for Indigenous child welfare that applies across all provinces and second, because it acknowledges the inherent jurisdiction that Indigenous people have over the care of their children.  This new legislation is one of the more meaningful actions taken in response to the TRC, but it is also an example of what Canada is doing wrong in reconciliation.  

In this act, there is still room for a colonial interpretation of the Best Interests of the Child, and while a coordination agreement is not required for a people to exercise jurisdiction, it remains to be seen what the outcome will be in a colonial Canadian court, where a community gives notice of intent to exercise jurisdiction but where efforts to reach a coordination agreement have not been successful.

Additionally, there remains a level of ignorance in government about the types of decisions that are specifically harmful to Indigenous people.  Earlier this year, we discussed the bilingual requirement for Supreme Court Justices, and the barrier that creates for Indigenous people.  In mandating that all justices have a working understanding of both English and French, the rich language history of Indigenous people is diminished.  This also ignores the pain associated with being forced to learn a second colonial language. During the 2020 IBA conference, Justice Minister David Lametti was questioned on this policy, and gave a disappointing response that amounted to "learn french, or don't be an SCC justice".  When we consider the long history of forced assimilation, this is just another form of Indigenous erasure.

These are just two stand out examples of the way that reconciliation for Canada is not about building a collaborative working relationship with Indigenous people, but rather is a continued exertion of colonial control where reconciliation can only occur on Canada's terms, and take it or leave it.  

This makes my personal relationship with reconciliation daunting.  But the opportunity this blog project provided to read the stories of survivors in the TRC report, and feel the resiliency and strength coming through despite years of oppression, gives me some hope.  My work on this blog, and throughout law school, has provided me with an excellent foundation for recognizing the systemic issues that lead to oppressive decision making, so that I can help make space for Indigenous voices and perspectives to be considered, accepted, sought out, valued and incorporated into colonial law. 

I guess with that, it is my turn to say goodbye to ReconciliAction YEG.  I would like to applaud my teammates this year, on their incredible writing and discussion, and the passion and personal perspective each one of you brought to this project.  I would like to thank Professor Yahya and Professor Friedland, who supported us through the year and gave us free reign to tackle some controversial and spicy topics.  I would like to thank those who came before us, and provided our team with this wonderful and established platform.  And lastly, I am so grateful to our readers for following along and engaging in the discussion with us every week.  

Until next time, 

Sarah

Anita’s Year End Reflection

Tansi Nîtôtemtik,

I have had the immense pleasure of working on this blog with 4 other amazingly talented and caring people who I am sure will go on to do great things and they have made this a memorable experience premised on support and understanding. Delving into the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions Calls to Actions each week has been a journey resulting in very polarizing emotions for me as a First Nations Nehiyaw Iskwew (Cree woman). Our group was not afraid to tackle the hard topics and questions and I am very proud of what we have accomplished. Our efforts have brought awareness and been an advocate for the implementation of the TRC Calls to Action.

The issues have hit close to home for me especially because of my lived experience and the frustrations with the lack of action on so many of the Calls have been hard to reconcile with. Week after week, day after day there was one disappointment after another but yet when there was movement on a Call it was a thing to be celebrated and we did. So, while I am very grateful for this experience to learn and write on the TRC -- 5 years later. I find myself angry and sad and even more determined to be a part of the voices that demand change. To date, only 9 of the 94 Calls to Action have been completed. Nine. After 5 years with incremental movements on the others and none on way to many.

The TRC’s goal was to redress the intergenerational legacy and the ongoing impact of residential schools on survivors and their families. I wish we could have seen a better outcome by now but my hope in this is not lost. One of the routes to Reconciliation will be through education and we must all do our part when called upon, this blog, this year and this topic has been a unique chance as a law student to do that. For that I am grateful. Canada and its provinces have an urgent duty to the education and implementation of the TRC and it is failing. Alberta’s current government is a prime example of its failure to adequately do so with its new “draft curriculum”, which some argue perpetuates rather than addressing systemic racism, I would agree.

Thank you for being a part of this journey, and I truly hope you join ReconciliAction next year!

Sincerely,

Anita

Tamya's Year-End Reflection

Tansi!

It is hard to believe that the school year is drawing to a close and that this is my last post on the blog. The past year has certainly been one that will stay in our memories forever. Although the coronavirus pandemic has been extremely difficult, it has also showcased the resilience and strength of so many. 

As I reflect on this past year and what I’ve learned, a few thoughts come to mind. Firstly, if our evaluation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Calls to Action reflect where Canada is at with reconciliation, then we have made minimal progress. Some initiatives, like funding Indigenous infrastructure show small steps forward, but ultimately reconciliation simply hasn’t taken priority in Canada. 

(Photo Credit: BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35105339 Senator Murray Sinclair at the release of the TRC Report, 2015)

So, where do we go from here? Canada truly needs to “walk the walk”. There have been so many reports, committees and conferences discussing how Indigenous peoples continue to be discriminated against in economic policies, criminal justice and child welfare to name a few; but our institutions continue to respond with inaction. As noted by my colleague yesterday, when action is taken, the reasons are political rather than being grounded in a recognition of inherent rights. 

Secondly, I find hope in the increasing recognition of Indigenous self-government. For so long, Indigenous peoples have been treated like a “problem” that needs to be solved. After years of ineffective and racist policies, there appears to be a slow move towards placing power back into the hands of Indigenous communities. 

However, this is not without conflict. Questions like those raised in Dickson v Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation, 2020 YKSC 22 demonstrate the complexity in applying multiple frameworks to determine individual rights. Further, without adequate resources, self-governed institutions are being set up to fail. We must capitalize on the opportunity to work in partnership with Indigenous communities and build robust frameworks that allow them to thrive.

Lastly, I am so grateful to have been a part of this project! Learning about a different Call to Action every week has taught me so much about reconciliation and working on this team has been nothing short of wonderful. Thank you for following along with us, and I truly hope you tune in next year!

Sincerely,

Tamya

2020/2021 Reflection Posts - Tyler

 

Tansi Nîtôtemtik,

 

This week we will be wrapping up the 2020/2021 ReconciliAction YEG through reflections from each writer. Drawing the short straw and going first is Tyler, whose introduction can be found here.

Kenojuak Ashevak - National Gallery of Canada

 

Back in September, while doing the introduction posts, I wrote that ‘reconciliation’ seemed to be a malleable concept that could be little more than a feel-good substitute for damaging inaction. After reading and writing on reconciliation and the Calls to Action over this past 8 months, I feel that I am more entrenched in this position – with some caveats.

 

While I feel less optimistic than ever with the political process and its ability to engage with meaningful reconciliation, I am more optimistic that there exists a legal or constitutional approach that could be a strong avenue towards genuine reconciliation and justice.

 

The Calls to Action and the Final Report are incredibly direct in their operation and have set out detailed historic reasons why each call has been made. In my opinion, the failing grades throughout this year demonstrate that a political approach to the Calls to Action and reconciliation more broadly is not working. The best time for political leadership to have addressed the Calls to Action would have been immediately following the period in which they were made. Now - five years later, how do the Calls to Action become an increased priority?  

 

Supreme Court of Canada 

One of the very first cases that first-year law students read is the Quebec Secession Reference. It is elegantly written and forceful in its effect. In contemplating the legality of Quebec’s potential unilateral departure from the confederation, the Supreme Court explicitly sets out the big picture values which underlie the function of the Canadian constitution: federalism, democracy, the rule of law and the protection of minorities. The Secession reference places an emphasis on approaching these values through a ‘living tree’ approach – one that develops and evolves with time to meet changing needs.

 

While directly addressing the Calls to Action has been less than successful at this point, I have an optimism that just and practical reconciliatory outcomes are possible - and may exist through Canadian constitutional law and the very principles outlined in the Secession reference. While this may be a naive optimism, a strong federalism structure and constitutionally protected Aboriginal rights already exist and are unique to Canada. A ‘living tree’ interpretation of these existing frameworks could legally recognize the equal existence of Indigenous Nations within a federal structure, and I am of the understanding that this would be the proper and legally consistent interpretation.  

 

Reconciliation isn’t about federal and provincial colonial governments holding power and control over Indigenous people, acquired through historic wrongs, and returning rights when it is politically convenient – it is about building a relationship that can recognize equal party nation-to-nation relationships that pre-existed confederation. While responses to the Calls to Action haven’t been inspiring, keep court watching as the right questions continue to be asked.

 

A big thanks to the writing team this year and everyone who followed along,

Tyler

Indigenous Land Acknowledgements

Pre-1975 Treaties, Source: AANDC

 

Tansi Nîtôtemtik,

 

Indigenous land acknowledgements stand for respect, connection to the land, and better relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples.^[1] They are important for understanding the longstanding history of the place where we reside, and to understand our place within that history.^[2]

 

Unfortunately, Indigenous land acknowledgements “have become a “compulsory email footer and check mark at an event”.”^[3]

 

The Native Governance Centre offers tips for creating a successful Indigenous land acknowledgement statement. The first step is “self-reflection”, in that it is important to ask ourselves why we are delivering a land acknowledgement--if the answer is simply because we have to tick a box, or it’s required by our organization, more research and self-reflection is warranted.^[4]

 

How can you rethink land acknowledgements?

 

In a blog entry entitled “Beyond territorial acknowledgements”, Chelsea Vowel, a Métis woman from Lac Ste. Anne, Alberta, writes:

If we think of territorial acknowledgments as sites of potential disruption, they can be transformative acts that to some extent undo Indigenous erasure. I believe this is true as long as these acknowledgments discomfit both those speaking and hearing the words. The fact of Indigenous presence should force non-Indigenous peoples to confront their own place on these lands.^[5]

 

A territorial or land acknowledgement can be an act of reconciliation. By properly researching and delivering land acknowledgments, individuals and organizations recognize the ongoing oppression and struggles facing Indigenous peoples and communities. A well-thought out land acknowledgement recognizes the treaties or the fact that no treaties exist in the area, and respects the history and presence of Indigenous people on the territory.^[6] Land acknowledgements are intended to provoke further thought and reflection on improving relations with Indigenous peoples. They are an important tool for decolonizing our communities by recognizing the reality of Canada’s colonial history and how it continues to marginalize and oppress Indigenous history, culture, and peoples.

 

The next time you are tasked with delivering a land acknowledgement, ask yourself:

1. Why am I delivering this acknowledgement?
2. What is the history of this territory?
3. What are the impacts of colonialism on the Indigenous people who lived and continue to live here?
4. What will I do beyond this acknowledgement to dismantle colonialism in my area?

 

And while you’re at it, tell your organizations to stop checking boxes and get started on actually rebuilding relationships with Indigenous peoples.

 

Land acknowledgements need a serious reboot. We all share a responsibility in encouraging our peers and communities to see land acknowledgements as an opportunity for serious thought and reflection on the colonial structures that perpetuate injustice for Indigenous peoples. With continued and persistent education and decolonization, we may still see reconciliation in our lifetimes.

 

Until Next Time,

ReconciliAction YEG

-----

 

Be sure to stay up to date on other happenings with ReconciliAction YEG:

Follow us on Twitter at:@ReconciliYEG

Connect with us on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/reconciliActionYEG/

Check out our Instagram at: @reconciliactionyeg

-----

 

^[1] Odette Auger, “Land acknowledgements are about better relations, not just checking a box”, APTN News (14 March 2021), online: https://www.aptnnews.ca/national-news/land-acknowledgements-british-columbia/.

^[2] Ibid.

^[3] Ibid.

^[4] Native Governance Center, “Indigenous Land Acknowledgement”, online: https://nativegov.org/a-guide-to-indigenous-land-acknowledgment/.

^[5] Âpihtawikosisân, “Beyond territorial acknowledgements:, online: https://apihtawikosisan.com/2016/09/beyond-territorial-acknowledgments/.

^[6] Kairos Canada, “Territorial Acknowledgement as an act of reconciliation”, online: https://www.kairoscanada.org/territorial-acknowledgment.

Colonial Métis and Self Indigenization

(Artwork: "The Earth is My Governement" (2018) by Christi Belcourt)

Tawnshi kiya mataen,

Since the official acknowledgement of Métis as section 35 rights holder in the Constitution, there has been a rise in claims to Métis ancestry and nationhood.  People find Indigenous ancestry in their family tree and declare “aha! I am Métis!” Métis identity frequently gets treated as though it arises through European and Indigenous mixed ancestry, which has led to self identified Métis Nations across Canada making claim to Métis identity. However, as Adam Gaudry pointedly notes, race mixing in other forms has rarely led to the formation of a distinct culture.[1] Thus, it is not mere mixed ancestry that formed the Métis, but something more.

Métis Identity

The Métis identity is linked to a unique and collective origin story, it is premised on a shared set of laws and governance that stem from the geographical resource availability, and the languages and norms present in the place where Métis communities first became established.[2]   Gaudry points out that the development of the Métis as a distinct community, did not occur because of race mixing but rather was a choice made by historical Métis to build a community and develop laws and systems for that community.[3]  This development was inherently prairie centered, dependant on large herds of buffalo and regional proximity with Cree speakers. 

Of course, the Métis of the late 1800’s and early 1900’s were painted by Canada as inferior, as traitors and extremist rebels.  During this time the Métis suffered the loss of many great leaders, and forced displacement through Scrip. This is where Métis identity can get tricky.

Disrupted Connections

As the Métis dispersed, new communities were established in other locations.  Other Métis became “hidden”, choosing to integrate into non-Métis communities or even deny their Métis identity.  There are many Métis today who have been raised in communities under these same legal orders, and who have never lost touch with the collective set of experiences that initially made the Métis into a distinct people.  But there are others who were lost.  Stripped of their history and identity by colonial assimilation forces, bullied into hiding, victims of stolen culture.  Where do the descendants of the assimilated fit in with Métis identity?

Contemporary Métis Nations are cognizant of the disruption in continuity of many Métis people and welcome reconnection of disconnected kin.  This reconnection is more than just uncovering a genealogical link, it is a return to the Métis community.  Identifying as Métis is reciprocal, and requires a person to be claimed by a community just as much as it requires a person to claim that they belong.  Métis identity cannot exist without Métis citizenship, without belonging to a community that claims you.

Métis Colonialism

Today, we see multiple organizations across Canada claiming status as Métis Nations, but relying on early mixed race marriages rather than the intentional development of a distinct people as the basis for this claim.  In particular, this has been a problem with “Eastern Métis” where Indigenous ancestry can certainly be found, but the distinctive legal orders and kinship structures are absent. 

Intermarriage between Indigenous and European people occurred anywhere that there were both Indigenous and European people.  The primary issue with “Eastern Métis” is that there is no evidence to support that these historical intermarriages led to those people self-identifying as a distinct culture.[4]  Moreso, the term “Métis” was externally applied to these people by Europeans to denote the mixed ancestry or “half-breed” status.  A more critical issue, is that “Eastern Métis” have made repeated attempts to claim rights under Section 35 of the Constitution to the detriment of the existing Indigenous Nations of those territories which, curiously, are the same communities these “Eastern Métis” claim to be a part of.[5] 

Most recently, the question of whether the Métis have rights west of the Rocky Mountains arose, when the Métis Nation of British Columbia (separate from the BC Métis Federation) made claim to land and hunting rights on the same lands as the Secwepemc traditional territory.  There is no dispute as to whether there are Métis people west of the Rocky Mountains, however, these Métis arrived in British Columbia as settlers, and have no claim to the territory there simply because they are an Indigenous people who live on that land.[6]

This type of infringement upon the rights of First Nations is inherently colonial in nature.  Métis identity and the prosperity of the Métis as an Indigenous people cannot, as Stephen Mussell succinctly stated, come at the expense of First Nations.[7]

Supplemental Reading

Colonial claims to identity are a very large topic, that this post simply cannot cover in one of the final posts of the year.  If you are interested in learning more about Métis origins and false claims to nationhood, we would encourage you to read Distorted Descent: White Claims to Indigenous Identity by Darryl Leroux

Stay tuned for our final substantive post tomorrow, before we each reflect on our year with ReconciliAction YEG

Until Next Time,

ReconciliAction YEG

-----

 

Be sure to stay up to date on other happenings with ReconciliAction YEG:

Follow us on Twitter at:@ReconciliYEG

Connect with us on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/reconciliActionYEG/

Check out our Instagram at: @reconciliactionyeg

-----

 

[1] Adam Gaudry, “Métis Are a People, Not a Historical Process”, online: The Canadian Encyclopedia <http://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/Métis-are-a-people-not-a-historical-process>.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Adam Gaudry & Darryl Leroux, “White Settler Revisionism and Making Métis Everywhere: The Evocation of Métissage in Quebec and Nova Scotia” (2017) 3:1 Critical Ethnic Studies 116, online: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/jcritethnstud.3.1.0116>.

[5] Ibid.

[6] “Do Métis have Rights in British Columbia? Let our Métis People be heard in a Good Way”, (22 October 2020), online: Yellowhead Institute <https://yellowheadinstitute.org/2020/10/22/do-Métis-have-rights-in-british-columbia-let-our-Métis-people-be-heard-in-a-good-way/>.

[7] Ibid.