I see a heated debate looms over this matter. Debate is always good – it makes us critical thinkers and debating our views or ideologies either assists us from seeing things from another perspective or assists us in changing our views. Just a short word of caution – we can do it respectfully and with the appreciation that we all have different views … its’ allowed.
To JJ Carroll - I am not suggesting that Aboriginal people in the upper house is not a good thing – but I will not share the view that because an Aboriginal person is appointed to a position he is above discussion, debate or review. My entire point is that Patrick was given the appointment due to his criticism of the other political leaders and their lack of accountability. I do not pretend not to support this view myself .. you would only need to read past posts to know that I have some of those very criticisms about some of the Aboriginal leaders across Canada. My issue is “Do Not Be A Hypocrite!”
The first hypocrisy in this appointment is Prime Minister Harper’s. Senate reform in the upper house is going to require people who "Walk Their Talk". The debate around Senate reform has gone on since 1874. The first indicator that Harper was not committed to his party’s ideology on Senate reform was when he appointed Michael Fortier when he first got elected so he could bring him into the Caucus without running for election in a democratic process. Senate Reform requires Constitutional changes … as we have seen since Meech Lake and the Charlottetown Accord no government has wanted to tackle the debate on real Constitutional change.
Unfortunately a recent poll identified that most Canadians are completely unaware of the governmental structures and the context of the Canadian Constitution. We seem to have very few incidents that help Canadians understand the structure of the Constitution and its’ meaning never mind the role and responsibility of the Senate.
The next hypocrisy – which is where this debate started is Patrick Brazeau – those who don’t live in glass houses – shouldn’t throw stones or be willing to hear the cracking glass if someone points it out. Patrick is engaged as a leader of an organization that is entrenched with its’ own accountability issues. Integrity – politically and fiduciary – have been sighted in the Congress of Aboriginal People. I am not the first person to point this out – nor will I be the last.
I also would like to clarify that I quite frankly do not care what he makes as an income – My issue is with him continuing to collect a salary from CAP and the Senate – it is a Conflict of Interest. In fact, the Prime Minister can double the salary of the Senate if he would like but you can not be the leader of the Congress of Aboriginal People and the Conservative Senator and serve two masters.
The other issue that I would like to bring clarity to at this point is there have been many Aboriginal people that sat in the Senate of Canada – Patrick Brazeau is not the first.
- Adam Willies is an Inuk Member of the Senate and is one of the longest standing members of the upper house at this time. Liberal
- Senator Lillian Eva Dyck is a member of the Gordon First Nations in Saskatchewan and has been in the Senate since 2005; New Democrat
- Senator Nick G. Sibbeston is an Aboriginal person from the Northwest Territories has served in the Senate since 1999; Liberal
- Senator Gerry St. Germaine is a Métis man from British Columbia who was appointed in 1993; Progressive Conservative
- Senator Charlie Watt from Fort Chimo, Quebec has served in the Senate since 1984. Liberal
- Senator Sandra Lovelace Nicholas is a First Nations woman from New Brunswick that was appointed in 2005. Liberal
Some of the Past Aboriginal Senators were:
- Senator Richard Charles Hardisty was a Métis man from the Northwest Territories and was the first Aboriginal person appointed to the house in 1888; - Conservative
- Senator William Boucher - Métis man from Saskachewan - Liberal
- Senator James Gladstone – First Nations man from Alberta - Independent Conservative
- Senator Guy Williams – First Nations man from British Columbia - Liberal
- Senator Leonard (Len) Marchand – First Nations man from British Columbia - Liberal
- Senator Walter Twinn – First Nations man from Alberta - Progressive Conservative
- Senator Thelma Chalifoux – Métis woman from Alberta (First Métis woman appointed to the Senate) - Liberal
- Senator Aurélien Gill is a First Nations man from Quebec that was appointed in 1998; - Liberal
Now it is an impressive list of past and present Senators who have a variety of experiences and backgrounds. This once again brings me to the point – we do not have to have a party because an Aboriginal person gets an appointment deserved or otherwise – we have many honourable Aboriginal people who make us proud each day.
18 comments:
Chances are that most of these "Aboriginal Senators" were appointed by a Liberal government so they're ok.
Agree with Metis Mama. If Patrick Brazean, in fact, wishes to keep his day job with CAP that in and of itself is a conflict of interest. How can anyone do justice to two positions that should be full time given their salaries and benefits packages?
This would suggest three options:
1. Give minimum effort to both
2. Favour the Senate over CAP
3. Focus exclusively on CAP
So what's it going to be Mr. Patrick Brazeau who doesn't represent me rather himself?
Frank 9 of the 14 are Liberal Senators. This would stand to reason being the Liberals have had more opportunity to appoint Senators since 1864.
Frank,
Do your homework like Metis Mama before going off on yet another tangent.
More importantly, give us back our Bell of Batache or David Chartrand won't give you any more money for Veterans and travel to Russia. We know you've got it!
Mama said « My entire point is that Patrick was given the appointment due to his criticism of the other political leaders and their lack of accountability. I do not pretend not to support this view myself .. you would only need to read past posts to know that I have some of those very criticisms about some of the Aboriginal leaders across Canada. My issue is “Do Not Be A Hypocrite!”»
If your ENTIRE point is based on hypocrisy, then all I can say Métis Mama is that you are missing the BARE FACTS this time. Hypocrisy is exactly what Mr Brazeau has gotten rid of at CAP since the Dwight Dorey years. During the Dorey reign, I too, like you used to think that CAP did not represent me, but Patrick Brazeau has cleaned up CAP and has now taken a righteous route. Hypocrisy is now what Mr Brazeau is asking the 600+ chiefs and 3000+ councillors (most of whom are making 6 figured salaries) across Canada to clean their act up. The true problem lies within AFN. They cannot ask the same thing from THEIR own 600+ chiefs, so what do they do instead? They lead a soiling image campaign against one of our/their own and some people like Mama belive their falsehoods and lies. I ask you now, who are the real hypocrites? Before you answer, think of this : is Patrick Brazeau the only band card carrying aboriginal who knows how to count in Canada? For 2 years now, he has been stating that the government spends more than $8 billion per year for on-reserve aboriginals versus $1 billion per year for off-reserve aboriginals. Roughly speaking, that's an average of close to $30000 per year for on-reserve aboriginals compared to $1500 per year for off-reserve. I have lived on a reserve and I have NEVER senn 30 grand go my way. I now live off reserve and the $1500 amount sounds about right after dentist, optician and medicine bills. Yet Mr. Brazeau is the only aboriginal leader speaking his mind. Yet he is the only leader out there that doesn't have his palms out, demanding more money. He says there is plenty of money out there, but the problem is that there is a bunch of hypocrites handling it. Other leaders past and present have laid out their palms and most of the time for no specific reason. Who are the hypocrite now? But wait...Mr. Brazeau has now understood that it is time to work WITH the govt and not against it if we are to evolve as aboriginals. Status quo sounds too much like the lazy fat guy sitting on his couch, watching the same TV shows day after day while waiting for his check to arrive. Patrick Brazeau is trying to reform aboriginal politics and laws and is QUITE mistakenly being called a hypocrite for it. I know that he will continue his quest for reserve accountability as a senator. That is exactly why we NEED Patrick Brazeau BOTH as a senator and a our great leader.
JJ Carroll
My, my, my JJ Carroll how nice it is to be without hypocrisy in YOUR life! What's it like? Maybe it's you who are missing the BARE FACTS. At least Metis Mama has a blog and is contributing - a lot more than can be said for you.
As soon as I'm finished here I'm going to take that plastic baseball bat Jules Morin gave me to give you a good whack on the left kneecap to exorcise all its hypocrisy. Next it'll be Frank Godon to get him to return our Bell of Batoche.
Finally, aren't C-A-N-A-D-I-A-N senators supposed to represent everyone not just Abroiginals? Maybe Frank Godon and you should both be appointed to the Upper House so you too can feed at the trough.
JJ Carroll, as I've stated to Mr. Godon, this issue goes far beyond Senator Brazeau and a few despotic chiefs. What do you think think the Conservatives stand to gain by the senatorial appointment of Brazeau, and I'm not just talking about the 'common knowledge' of lacking accountability? Here we have the Conservative appointment of an aboriginal senator, who seems to embrace the overall Conservative concept of aboriginal assimilation - which brings me back to his Conservative buddies. The Conservatives know that land claims and treaty rights are the only constitutional levers standing in the way of corporate investments e.g. oil companies. With Barack Obama proposing substantial limits on his country's dependence on oil, coupled with a rock solid plan at reducing emissions, it would only seem logical that our Conservative government would pursue senate reform in preparation to mount constitutional challenges aimed squarely at aboriginal and treaty rights.
To anonymous who asked me not to go off on another tangent - 9 of 14 isn't MOST???? think before you write.
JJ Carroll - you said it!!!! Basically its the whole anti-Harper thing going on here - whether he would have or wouldn't have appointed Patrick as a Senator they'd still act like someone pissed in their porrige. To them it ok for the Liberals to stack the senate, but a shame for the Conservatives.
Metis Mamma - "This would stand to reason being the Liberals have had more opportunity to appoint Senators since 1864." This (Liberals having more opportunity) is also the reason Aboriginals are where they are and not a major productive part of society - they have been kept from being absorbed into Canadian culture because the Liberals have always taught them (and other cultures) that they are "special" and don't have to play by the rules like the rest of Canada.
This issue goes far beyond political ideologies. But while we're on the subject, don't you think that your beloved Conservatives might actually be wrong? The truth is somewhere in the middle; the Liberals hug us into submission, and the Conservatives choke us into submission. I'm really starting to see why my uncle Rod Bishop ran as an independent, and my grandfather Alex Bishop turned down an offer from the late Tommy Douglas to be a Justice of the Peace; Now, I'm even more proud of the fact they didn't sell-out.
Name dropper! That's stating the obvious. Of course the truth is always somewhere in the middle.
And that's why I consider you to be my hero, mentor, role model, spiritual leader and intelectual guru. You replaced Frank Godon as soon as I learned what he'd done to the Bell of Batoche.
Anonymity on the internet is changing the face of politics, publishing and journalism. You see, Jules, people really don't care about the identity of someone rather it's how good is their information? Do their ideas make sense.
So keep being unafraid to back up your every word and a hero in your own mind.
It's easy to see the Harper bashing here. Apparently the Prime Minister "hates native" people. Let's see what the prime Minister has done for native people:
- $300 million for northern housing;
- $300 million for on reserve housing;
- $300 million for off-reserve housing;
- signed agreement to speed up the specific claims process;
-legislation so ALL FIRST NATIONS have access to human rights here in Canada;
-introduced legislation on matrimonial real property to give women equal rights in the case of marriage breakdown on reserves;
-signed a protocol agreement with the Metis National Council;
-gave a speech at the CAP Annual Assembly in 2007;
-provided increased funding for economic development.
Yep, really sounds like a guy who doesn't give a rats ass. Fact of the matter is that Harper acheived more in 2.5 years than the Liberals did in 13-14 years.
The ultimate question becomes, if Harper is so bad for aboriginal people, why are there 4 elected members of parliament in the Conservative government(1 inuit cabinet minister) and only 1 liberal elected member? If Harper is so bad for aboriginal people, please share how "his policies" have changed your life for the worse?
I can tell you, I am happy that as a native, I now have the same human rights as other canadians and I could file complaints against inac and that, thanks to Harper and CAP who had a campaign across the country.
Tansi
Remaining anonymous is the right of an individual. My only point with one of the anonymous posters is that there is a difference between remaining anonymous to present articulate points of view, and hiding behind anonymity to stonewall constructive debate.
You call your debate with Frank Godon constructive? What has it acheived?
Anonymous forgot to mention the Residential School Apology - which the Liberals refused to do for years. The text was largely written by the Prime Minister himself (notwithstanding concentrated efforts by both INAC and the AFN to draft the text and put words in his mouth). The sincerity and honesty of his own words touched us all.
Post a Comment