Treaty rights are crucial to indigenous

Re: Handout or hand up, Letters, Dec. 12

Letter writer Ed Ries fails to recognize the importance indigenous peoples attribute to treaties.

In the 1870s, Prairie First Nations asked for, and received, a treaty promise of farming equipment and instructors. But when natives became successful, the plug was pulled.

Pressured by settlers, the Department of Indian Affairs quickly segregated natives on reserves and economically isolated them by instituting a permit (permission to sell produce) and a pass system (permission to leave the reserve).

When First Nations begged Indian agents to be allowed to buy the new machine technology with their own funds, requests were denied. Instead, natives were ordered to use hoes and scythes.

Food became a problem. Dr. John Kittson of the North West Mounted Police reported rations to First Nations were inadequate. He pointed out state prisoners in Siberia received twice the amount of daily food than natives. Yet starving Indians were accused of being the author of their own misfortune.

By 1904, the official attitude toward natives was summed up by minister of the interior Clifford Sifton: “He has not the physical, mental or moral getup to enable him to compete.”

Today, aboriginal and treaty rights are guaranteed by the constitution. Will they ever come to fruition, to achieve the vision indigenous leaders articulated in the 19th century of self-sufficiency, of aboriginals and non-aboriginals sharing resources and coexisting as political equals?

BOB BURGEL

Surrey