Global and Local Perspectives on Colonized Minorities in Developed Countries

PREAMBLE: Colonized racial, cultural or religious minorities exist throughout the world, and are to be found nested within powerful societies. For examples, consider Tibet now within China, the Ainu of Japan, the Dalits of India, Amerindian enclaves in the Caribbean, tribal minorities in Africa, Boznian Muslims in former Yugoslavia, the Kurds of Iraq, others in all continents and among the Pacific islands. In choosing to highlight the situation of indigenous minorities in western industrialized countries, our example is Canada only because this is our home base. The issues here apply to several economically advanced western countries where it is sometimes said that one may find “3rd world conditions in 1st world settings”. Because these countries claim leadership for human rights, they also must live up to these principles.
[For a flavour of Canadian politics, scan column at right.]

 GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE ON COLONIZED MINORITIES
“Continuing disparities between the health of indigenous people and the non-indigenous settlers of Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States … is a matter of major concern within each country. In each country the legacies of colonial dispossession, land alienation, forcible relocation, suppression of indigenous cultural practices, values and beliefs, loss of language, disruption of families, violations of indigenous inherent sovereignty and right to self-determination, treaties, international law and indigenous cultural law, and other factors, have resulted in indigenous peoples experiencing a deplorable health status compared to non-indigenous settlers.”

Source: International Network of Indigenous Health Knowledge and Development http://www.inihkd.org/ Accessed Feb 4, 2007

 LOCAL PERSPECTIVES - CANADA’S FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE
Education: 44% of Aboriginal people aged 20-24 lack high school education, compared to 19% for Canada as a whole. Only 23% of Aboriginals aged 18-29 had completed post secondary education, compared to 43% in the rest of Canada.
Health: Infant mortality 20% higher than Canada; Type 2 diabetes 3 times more frequent; Suicide 3 to 11 times more frequent.
Housing: On-reserve, the estimated shortage is 20 to 35,000 units, and growing by 2,200 units per year. Off-reserve, the housing need is 76% higher than non-Aboriginal households. In northern Canada, housing needs are 130% higher.
Economic Opportunities: The unemployment rate among Aboriginal peoples is 19.1%,; the national rate is 7.4%. On reserves, unemployment is about 29%. Median employment income is two-thirds of the average for non-Aboriginal Canadians.

Reference: Government of Canada - Background information for the Kelowna Accord.http://www.pco.gc.ca/default.asp?Language=E&Page=archivemartin&Sub=newscommuniques&Doc=news_release_20051125_661_e.htm

 The KELOWNA ACCORD – a 2-Act Play or a 3-Act Play?
“Act 1”– A New Beginning
The Kelowna Accord (Nov 25, 2005) seemingly bound the Canadian government, provincial governments, and Canada’s First Nations to invest $5.1 billion over 5 years to close the gap between Aboriginal and other Canadians in education, health, housing and opportunities.[1] An operational plan contained 5-year targets over 10-years to ensure focused and accountable actions. Former Prime Minister Paul Martin acknowledged the Assembly of First Nations for taking the important step of proposing the establishment of a First Nations Auditor General and an Ombudsman.[2] He stated: "With this plan, we have made an important step forward in honouring our commitment to close the gap in the quality of life that now exists between Aboriginal peoples and other Canadians."[1]

“Act 2” - Another Broken Promise
Despite this promising start, on gaining power in January 2006, a new minority federal Conservative government (receiving only 36% of the popular vote) reneged, ostensibly because the Accord had not yet found its way into the federal budget, the election having intervened. Their own budget (despite a big surplus) cut the initiative by 80%, the residue going to a limited number of programs and housing provisions. Reflecting public opinion across the country, mostly favouring the Accord, the BC First Nations Leadership Council released an open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Hon. Jim Flaherty, Minister of Finance and Hon. Jim Prentice, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.[3] B.C. provincial Premier Gordon Campbell, at an inter-ministerial meeting, stated: "… the least that any Canadian can expect is when a government makes a commitment of resources, that those resources are going to flow."[4]

“Act 3” – Will there be one?
The Harper government will launch a new federal budget on March 19. Although there have been no statements to indicate a change in thinking that would reflect renewed respect for the Accord, this may be the last real opportunity for the “new” government to act in good faith towards it.

References: 1. Privy Council Office. Government of Canada. Press Release Nov 25, 2006http://www.pco.gc.ca/default.asp?Language=E&Page=archivemartin&Sub=newscommuniques&Doc=news_release_20051125_661_e.htm
2. Patterson LL. Aboriginal roundtable to Kelowna Accord: policy negotiations 2004-5. May 2006 http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/prb0604-e.htm
3. Union of BC Indian Chiefs. Open Letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Hon. Jim Flaherty, Minister of Finance and Hon. Jim Prentice, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. May 4, 2006. http://www.ubcic.bc.ca/files/PDF/FNLC_NR_2006FedBudget_openletter.pdf
4. Aboriginal leaders seek to revive Kelowna Accord. Canadian Press. July 26 2006 . http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060725/aboriginal_mtg_060725/20060726?hub=Canada&s_name=

EDITORIAL COMMENT: Although our "new" government (when viewed from a politically Conservative perspective) may well have the best interests of Canada at heart, there is no doubt that the initial excuse not to implement the Kelowna Accord is no longer valid. About to launch a new budget in March, with a massive surplus in hand (thanks to a continuing strong economy), if the Conservatives do not now address the intent of the Accord at proper scale, this will confirm a steady drift to the political right, consistent with odd examples of out-dated thinking expressed on behalf of this regime (see: review of Canadian political flavours in column at right). It is therefore both timely and critical for Stephen Harper to show leadership on the situation facing aboriginal Canadians, and to emerge from the current policy fog as a Prime Minister for all Canadians. We will monitor the situation and comment further after the budget.