How can Canada right the wrongs done to First Nation peoples?
Canada cannot right the wrongs. The only way to right the wrongs is to go back and undo the past. That is impossible.
Many of the victims are long gone, forever removed from any apology, never mind righting a wrong. And the repercussions of the abuse are still with the First Nation peoples.
The rates of poverty and unemployment are intolerable, as are the rates of crime and addiction. To set things right is beyond herculean.
But this does not mean we should do nothing. It means that we need to sharpen the focus on what is a realistic yet optimal approach. It is done with the realization that with all the goodwill and maximum effort, we will never right the wrongs. But we can hopefully secure for the First Nations a future that holds great promise.
A promising future starts with education. Assuring that every First Nation child has access to education, free education going as far up the education ladder as is possible, would seem to be a good first step.
As to those for whom education at this stage is not realistic, job training, combined with the guarantee of a good job, might be the best alternative.
Encouraging and enabling investment in the resources of the First Nations and giving them the dignity of putting their own resources to good use would also be of immense value.
There is a limit to what government can do, and there are matters pertaining to your question that go beyond government. They have to do with us.
We all can do more to integrate the First Nations into the nation’s fabric, on a personal and local level. Representative events should integrate First Nations, and not as a mere tokenism. Going out of our way to befriend someone from the First Nations is also vital.
We may not be able to right the wrongs, but we all can certainly do what is right.
My opinions concerning First Nation peoples (FNP) have profoundly affected by my eight years pastoring in western Manitoba.
At any given time, my Sunday morning crowd of 400 was comprised of at least 80 to 100 FNP. Our connection to the reserves in the area was strong. Our congregation’s FNPs were such a delight. However, when we’d have our inevitable discussions regarding solutions to political issues, their statements shocked me.
The toughest lines of thinking I’ve ever heard expressed came from my native friends in Manitoba. What was shocking was that they were not the typical politically correct solutions that we constantly hear bandied about here in Ottawa.
Their vitriol was two-fold. First and foremost, against their tribes, who they saw as taking advantage of white guilt and refusing to accept any responsibility for their sad social state. Secondly they were cynical, having zero confidence with white-led governments who never took the time to really understand them. They would tell me in their own words; “throwing truckloads of money at us makes for good headlines, but it never gets to the root of our struggles.”
These are not typical FNP opinions. These are the opinions of FNP who would identify themselves chiefly as Bible-believing Christians. In other words, they considered themselves “followers of Christ,” even more than FNP.
Unanimously they confessed that their convictions concerning the need for personal responsibility were the result of the spiritual transformation that took place when they embraced a life of truly following Christ. Not just being a “Christian,” but passionately patterning their life after Him. If I had a dollar for every FNP who said to me “the only hope for natives in Canada is Christ,” you and I could enjoy a wonderful night on the town together.
There seems to be a general acceptance of the wrongs done to First Nation peoples among Canadians. The impact of these wrongs is many-dimensional, and are both evident and well-documented.
For example, one of the major problems from which the First Nation peoples suffer is widespread and persistent poverty. This and other problems which they have continued to endure over a very long time will not be resolved by a simple acknowledgment.
More important, these problems will persist as long as we consider them “their” — the First Nation peoples’ — problem and not a “Canadian” problem.
This acceptance of the responsibility must encompass the people of Canada including, of course, the First Nation peoples, the political parties in the country and the various levels of government. The subject should be discussed among different population groups, and it should form a permanent part of the platforms of different political parties.
People should demand that their elected representatives discuss this issue in a non-partisan way in the provincial legislatures and the federal Parliament. The resolutions adopted should allocate, in addition to other practical measures, a specified annual percentage (one or two per cent) of national income. Annual progress reports should be published.
It should be recognized that the wrongs were done a long time ago and the consequent problems have been festering during the subsequent years. Therefore, the solution will not occur overnight but will take honest and persistent efforts for the foreseeable future.
We cannot right wrongs without knowing and naming those wrongs as fully as possible.
Between roughly 1820 and 1969, Anglicans administered some two dozen residential schools for aboriginal people. Canadian governments saw the schools as a means of controlling and ultimately assimilating aboriginal people.
Since the late 1980s, many residential-school survivors have told of their experience of the impact of their loss of language and culture, as well as instances of physical and sexual abuse.
On Aug. 6, 1993, Archbishop Michael Peers, then Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, issued an apology for the Church’s participation in the system. He said, in part, “I am sorry …. that we were part of a system which took you and your children from home and family. I am sorry, more than I can say, that we tried to remake you in our image, taking from you your language and the signs of your identity. … I know how often you have heard words which have been empty because they have not been accompanied by actions. I pledge to you my best efforts, and the efforts of our church at the national level, to walk with you along the path of God’s healing.”
The Anglican Church set up an Indigenous Healing Fund to support local work toward healing. Churches and the federal government reached a settlement in which the churches would provide satisfactory compensation to survivors. The settlement led to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and research centre.
Aboriginal Anglicans today are an important and vigorous part of the Church’s life. We have a national aboriginal bishop, as well as diocesan bishops of First Nations or Inuit ancestry.
This is but one part of the Canadian story, but it is one that shows that truth and reconciliation are costly but possible.
There are ongoing efforts to help the Inuit, Métis and First Nation peoples of Canada through government programs aimed, for example, at increasing access to education and at improving living conditions in communities that have had varying levels of success. In addition, numerous agencies, churches, and other groups have projects supporting local populations and providing more personal attention in smaller projects.
To continue to move forward we need to encourage genuine dialogue that hears and respects everyone’s experiences and that fosters co-operation in finding solutions to the current problems. In the 1995 brief to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops presented to the Commission that, despite struggles: “the Church has walked with Aboriginal Peoples, shared their joys, their sufferings, and their aspirations, and supported their struggles for recognition of their rights for personal and collective growth. Then and now, the Churches provide a place where Native and nonNative Peoples may find common ground. Non-Native Church members have accompanied Native Peoples on their journey — sometimes leading, sometimes following, sometimes side-by-side.”
As a society, we cannot today undo the wrongs done in the past, and while we must acknowledge the wrongs done. we also need to remember the positive developments both in the past and the present. It is difficult to have a single solution to the complex problems facing indigenous peoples, but an indispensable component is respectful dialogue and co-operation among all the parties involved. Improvements cannot be made without everyone’s input and engagement.
Pope John Paul II said: “A society will be judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members.” Even today we see revelations about nutritional experiments on aboriginal children while the efforts of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission are impeded by lack of access to official documents.
It will be hard to determine an appropriate response, let alone suggest corrective action, when we have not even understood the extent of historical wrong; reconciliation needs to be preceded by truth.
What we have is racial discrimination and violations of rights by successive governments and trusted institutions on a massive scale. Our responses will reflect differences in processes. Truth and reconciliation is only a moral realignment which does not require “righting wrongs” in the judicial sense. Therefore, concepts of remedy, in legal terms, or compensation in financial terms must be included, parallel to this shattered trust.
When addressing events that span such a long time and involve so many, we would be naive to expect that the causes or environments that produced those wrongs have disappeared. Justice will take many forms and must penetrate deep into our official structures and attitudes.
Within institutions, but also in our own attitudes, we are well advised to examine how we may be setting the stage for future wrongs. At the government level we must begin by demanding a commitment to real self-determination for aboriginal peoples, ending the patronizing attitudes and structures that fostered past wrongs. This takes us beyond mere bureaucratic management, into serious nation building, and this is where we need to be going.
At the personal and private level, we need to be examining our own views of aboriginal peoples to see how our belief of what constitutes a Canadian and our vision for Canada may still be blind to the situation of First Nations peoples.