Four arrows Newsletter on FNEA

8/13/2019 Four arrows Newsletter on FNEA

1/36

e-notes> [email protected] February 2014 Edition

A Tweaked Education Act Readied for Passage;

High-Level Government Attempts to Co-opt Support

Canadas Federal Budget 2014

and the New First Nations Education Act

Thanks to APTN National News for [email protected] @APTNNews

Ottawa, 11 February 2014 Federal Finance Minister Jim

Flaherty began his 2014 Budget message with a tribute to

the settlers, the men and women who carved this great

country of the wilderness nearly 150 years ago.

As for First Nations, there is no new funding for education

or anything else for the 2014-2015 fiscal year.

But the message prominently promised that if Parliament

passes a bill calledFirst Nations Control of First Nation

Education Act there is a promise of money in 2016.

Deciding if that package is stick or if it is carrot is not

easy. Apparently if First Nation chiefs do not support

proposed legislation governing the operation of on-reserve

schools. No Act, no money.

Federal officials said the $1.25-billion has already been

set aside in the fiscal framework, but it wont be

released until after the legislation passes.

As the message put it, We have invested in apprentice-

ship programs and measures to increase the numbers of

people with disabilities, young people and Aboriginal

Canadians in the workforce by helping them find the jobtraining they need. But there is more we can and will do ...

that is why the Prime Minister announced more than $1.9

billion in new funding to implement theFirst Nations

Control of First Nations Education Act.

And that was the beginning and end of any mention of

aboriginal people in the budget.

The budget offered no new details on the education

agreement announced Friday thus far only spoken about

but with neither the government nor the AFN releasing a

copy of the Agreement.

The biggest chunk of new money, $1.25-billion for core

education funding over three years, will only begin

flowing in 2016 after the next federal election.

If the legislation is passed, First Nations will get the

money in addition to the roughly $1.5-billion Ottawa

already spends yearly on core education funding,

according to federal officials speaking on background.

The additional money will amount to roughly $417-

million per year for three years. In addition, a 4.5%

escalator will apply to the total amount after the first year,

federal officials said.

The funding will also be enshrined in the legislation,

providing stable and predictable statutory funding.

Critics point that even those numbers will still not providefunding for First Nation students equal to what the same

students would be provided for in the provincial systems.

Federal officials said existing education program funding

from sources like the New Paths for Education, First

Nation Student Success Program and Education

Partnership Program, will be rolled into an overall core

funding stream.

The budget is silent on when the new legislation is

expected to surface for tabling. Previously, the

government had said it wanted the Bill whisked through

House committees and debate, then Senate committeesand debate, all before March 31 so it would apply with the

opening of the school year in September.

The federal budget also repeated Fridays announcement

of a $500-million over seven years First Nations

Education Infrastructure Fund Ottawa is promising for

the building and upkeep of schools beginning next year.

The infrastructure funding is a continuation of the $175-

million over three years announced in last years budget.

The infrastructure dollars still fall far short of estimates

that range a little over $2-billion a year to get reserve
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/36

PM Harper Calls Weird Lightning Meeting at Kainai To Annou nce Agreement With AFN on Education -2-

an informative by fourarrows@rogers .com13 February 2014 E dition

schools up to acceptable standards, according to a

Parliamentary Budget Office report from 2009.

As previously announced, Ottawa will also provide $160-

million over four years beginning in 2015 for anEnhanced Education Fund transitional funding to

implement the proposed legislation.

Part of that money will be used to create First Nations

Education Authorities. The creation of these authorities

has created concern. The First Nations Education Council,

which includes 22 Quebec First Nations as members,

called these authorities federal agencies and said the

proposed bill would not really give First Nations control

over their education.

The proposed bill still carries some of the main aims of itsprevious incarnation, known as theFirst Nations

Education Actwhich was strenuously opposed by many

chiefs, including the creation of minimum education

standards consistent with provincial standards and

establishing roles for First Nation education

administrators while requiring annual reporting on

outcomes and performance.

First Nations already agree to meet provincial standards in

existing financial contribution agreements with Indian

Affairs.

Federal officials said the fine details of the proposed neweducation bill still need to be worked out through

discussions between the Assembly of First Nations and

Indian Affairs.

AFN National Chief Shawn Atleo, however, said Friday

that he believes that the agreement that gave birth to the

renamed bill signals a turning point in the relationship

between First Nations and the Crown.

Ottawa sees it in a similar vein. For this young and

fast-growing population, this is a game-changer, said the

budget document.

The federal government is also pledging to invest $323

million to improve and construct water and waste-water

infrastructure on reserves over the next two years.

Ottawa will also be investing $40 million over five years

beginning in 2015 to improve disaster management and

mitigation on reserves. The budget also includes resources

for broadband connectivity in rural and northern

communities, the First Nations Commercial Fisheries

Initiatives, a two-year renewal of the Aboriginal Justice

Strategy and resources aimed at ending violence including

violence against Indigenous women and girls.

The AFN Take on the Budget

An AFN media release after the budget message

welcomed the announcement of new, significant and

secured funding for First Nations education as afoundation for building stronger First Nations citizens,

communities and governments.

National Chief Atleo stands with all First Nations in

continuing the press for investments in other priority areas

that will achieve success for First Nations and all

Canadians based on fairness and opportunity.

He called the February 7 Kainai announcement coupled

with the budget as the beginning of a new era in First

Nations education.

"First Nations have rejected unilateral control by thegovernment and are ready to articulate their vision of First

Nations control of First Nations education," said the

National Chief.

Thanks to Jorge Barrera, APTN National News

Rosemary Barton, CBC Power and Politics

Bill Graveland,, Canadian Press;

Mark Kennedy, Postmedia

Karina Roman, CBC NewsOlesia Palaki, iPolitics

and many others

is published as a service of Four

Arrows/Las Cuatro Flechas, providing

communications among First Nations of the

Americas since 1968. Names may be added to

the distribution list on requests; names will

be removed on request. Four Arrows

receives no funding to provide this service.

Readers are invited to send material for

publication in .
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/36



There was a lot of whistling in the dark at Kainai High

School on the Blood Reserve in Treaty 7 Territory on

February 7.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper chose a Friday location in

an out-of-the way location to set out what he called a

great day for Canada. The occasion was historic.

For his part, AFN National Chief Shawn Atleo said,

Today is about fairness, opportunity and hope for

First Nations children, youth and students, said Atleo.

The beginning of a new era for First Nations children!

Today is a victory!

Hooray! Horray! Horray!

The details were far less shiny. There would be no

increase in funding until 2016. Then there would be three

years of $417-million each.

And the money seems to be connected with passage of a

First Nation Control of First Nation Educationwhich

looks pretty much like the almost universally rejected

draft proposal tabled by Minister Bernard Valcourt last

October.

The gloss, glamour and glitter seemed not to have fooled

the public, nor First Nations nor television media, which

seemed aggressive and caustic in questioning the

statements of the three proponents.Print media, on the other hand, generally reprinted the

governments media release without reading further to see

if the contents were the same as what was on the label.

The event took place at a high school on the Blood reserve

in southern Alberta, a two-hour drive south of Calgary.

Watching the pageantry were some 300 federal officials,

police, media and invited guests. The invitations bore the

names of Prime Minister Harper, National Chief Atleo,

and Minister Bernard Valcourt.

The governments announcement claimed it had unveileda retooled education plan for First Nations which it says

recognizes aboriginal control over schooling.

The plan calls for reserve schools to have minimum

standards consistent with provincial standards off-reserve.

It also says students will have to meet attendance

requirements and teachers will have to be properly

certified. There was no mention about what will happen to

students who play hookey, but the Act will provide that is

a school doesnt meet the standards set by the Minister, he

can send in a third-party manager to take over the

education system until there is compliance.

Ottawa is to provide funding for core education, which

includes language and cultural instruction, of $1.25-billion

split over three years and not starting until 2016. Theres

a provision for a cap of a 4.5% annual increase in place of

the 2% cap imposed in 1996.

Another $500-million divided up over seven years is to go

toward infrastructure and $160-million over four years is

set aside for implementation.

The first problem with analyzing these numbers is

compared to what? How much is being spent now oncore education? There are 518 schools with 120,000

students to divvy up the money, a third of it for each

year.That would be $3,475 per student, on average.

As for the infrastructure, the money would provide

$138,000 on average for each of the seven years for each

school, $600 a year per student.

Atleo called the deal the beginning of a new era for First

Nations children.

Today is a victory for First Nations leaders and citizens

who have for decades, indeed since the first generation ofresidential school survivors, called for First Nations

control of First Nations education.

"Today is about ... fairness, opportunity and hope for First

Nations children, youth and students," said Atleo.

Outside the school Friday, nine protesters carried signs

from the Idle No More movement. Inside, one woman

briefly interrupted a ceremonial paddle-signing by Harper

and the national chief.

Shannon Houle said she represented people of Alberta's

Saddle Lake Cree Nation and of Treaty 6.

photo by Enn Collins, CBC

Pr ime M iniste r Stephen Ha rper & Friends at Kain ai High Scho o


4/36



"We object to this agreement and I must make that public

to let Canada know that not every First Nation has been

consulted or has been part of these negotiations," shestood up and yelled.

Atleo took the interruption in stride.

"Your words are heard and respected," Atleo said. "What

has been said here is correct. I am not the prime minister

of Indians. My role is to support, acknowledge and respect

that all First Nations have their rights."

The Blue Dot Movement

Actually, such inconvenient moments were not supposed

to occur. Admission at the door was carefully controlledby security. Those wanting in were divided into two

groups: one which would find themselves in the main

room within the presence of the Prime Minister, and the

others would be shuffled over to a gymnasium where they

could watch the spectacle on a huge LCD screen.

Those directed to the inner sanctum were given ID with

yellow dots. Everyone else was given a blue dot, which

they would find out as they headed to see the event would

get them to the gym. Cell phones were not permitted, so

no news could go out.

When artist Christi Belcourt heard about this social triage,she began posting blue dots on old photographs of

indigenous people. She said it was a gut reaction. I'm

claiming the blue dot for us as a mark of pride. We are the

uninvited and I reject the essence of what that means in

its entirety within my being.

I'm disgusted,"she said. That is why I started that blue

dot series for grassroots people to reclaim their right to

speak out, for the masses of people who are not able to

influence decisions. For all of us who disagree, who wantchange, who stand up for change. Throughout history we

have been considered the rebels for protecting land and

speaking out.

Ms. Belcourts idea struck a responsive chord. A blue

dot movement has taken the Twittersphere and Facebook

by storm as photographs of Indigenous people with a blue

dot on their chest are being posted on social media.

Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations Opposes

The $1.25-billion announced by Prime Minister Harper is

not coming fast enough. First Nations education programs

are experiencing a $355 million shortfall now. They

cannot wait till 2016, Bobby Cameron, FSIN vice chief.,

told GlobalNews.

She said FSIN wanted a commitment in writing, signed by

the Prime Minister, clearly stating the amount that First

Nations students will now receive per school year on our

Treaty Territories.

She also insisted that the unaddressed 2% cap on post-

secondary funding be lifted it was put in place in 1996.

Children would hardly be inspired to study harder if theyknew there wouldnt be money for them to go on to higher

learning.

We will all prosper from the honouring and implementa-

tion of treaties and advancement of our rights as

indigenous peoples that are recognized globally and our

inherent rights of self-determination, said Cameron.

The Yellow Dot Room at Kainai


5/36



The Torturous Road of Decolonizing Education:

Ancient History:

1887:Sir John A. Macdonald tells Parliament, The greataim of our civilization has been to do away with the tribal

system and assimilate Indian people in all respects with

the inhabitants of the Dominion as speedily as they are fit

for the change.

1920:Regarding a Bill for the compulsory removalofIndian status from any Indian who became

educated, Deputy Superintendent General of Indian

Affairs Duncan Campbell Scott tells Parliament Indians

should be removed from a state of tutelage when he or

they are able to take their position as British citizens or

Canadian citizens, to support themselves, and stand alone.That has been the whole purpose of Indian education and

advancement since earliest times . . . Our object is to

continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that

has not been absorbed into the body politic, and there is

no Indian question, and no Indian Department.

1950: Walter Harris, Minister responsible for the IndianAffairs Branch of the Department of Mines and

Resources, reiterated the policy: Ever since

Confederation the underlying purpose of Indian

administration has been to prepare the Indians for full

citizenship . . . The ultimate goal of our Indian policy isthe integration of the Indians into the general life and

economy of the country.

1969: Federal government announces the colonizingprocess has been successful. There is no longer a need to

have Indians. All references to Indians will be

removed from Canadian law. There will be no more

Indians, no more Indian reserves, and no more Department

of Indian Affairs.

1972:National Indian Brotherhood led by George

Manuel and strong support from across Canada tablesIndian Control of Indian Education manifesto with

Parliamentary committee. Minister Jean Chretien accepts1

it and says if will be implemented.

1982:Canada patriates Constitution, agreeing torecognize and affirm First Nation rights and treaty rights.

The Tortured Recent History

The Kainai Announcement was surprising for two reasons

its abrupt suddenness, and the participation of the AFN. Ithas been coming down the tubes for some time now.

When the obsessive compulsion of the settlers to

assimilate the Indians turning out to be an impossible

dream, Canadian political forces have in recent years

demonstrated a similar obsessive compulsion to have an

education act passed through Parliament.

The Government initiatives have been met by an almost

unanimous vocal condemnation on the part of First

Nations. The initiatives pattern is unilateral

announcement, vigorous opposition, the Act being on the

brink of collapse, and then resuscitated for another try.

2010:December National Chief Shawn Atleo andIndian Affairs Minister John Duncan announce

appointment of a National Education Panel,.

2011: On 9 June 2011, Minister John Duncan andNational Chief Shawn Atleo announced a Joint Action

Plan. It a paragraph about a joint engagement process

which would make recommendations on a framework

providing the basis to deliver quality K-12 education to

First Nation children living on reserve. There would be a

national panel to hold a series of roundtables across thecountry and set up other activities to engage parents,

students, teachers, elders, educators and all those with an

interest in improving First Nation education.

The panel will make recommendations to the Minister

and the National Chief on options to make concrete and

positive changes for First Nation students, including the

possibility of new legislation to improve the governance

framework and clarify accountability for First Nation

elementary and secondary education. The panel will report

by the end of the 2011 calendar year.

There were complaints the panel had no mandate torecognize Inherent or Treaty Rights. It did not address

First Nations education issues of funding, languages or

cultures. Federal First Nations education legislation was

the focus of the consultation guidelines. The consultation

process did not meet legal requirements.

In April, Angus Toulouse, the regional chief of Ontario,

announced Ontario Chiefs had rejected the national panel

process. What the First Nations have said is that the

national process fails to provide a clear understanding or

agreement with Canada on how First Nations will control

the decision-making over our education.1 http://64.26.129.156/calltoaction/Documents/ICOIE.pdf
mailto:[email protected]://64.26.129.156/calltoaction/Documents/ICOIE.pdfhttp://64.26.129.156/calltoaction/Documents/ICOIE.pdfmailto:[email protected]


6/36


7/36



support of First Nations lifelong learning.

The Chiefs in Assembly also rejected the creation of a

National Education Steering Committee, reaffirming therole of the CCOE as the national body on education and

recognizing and respecting the authority and autonomy of

all First Nations to direct and implement their own

decisions on education for their peoples

2013: January 8-11 AFN meeting ends with a rally insidethe auditorium against attending Prime Minister Harpers

Chiefs meeting that occurs with some Chiefs attending

and some Chiefs boycotting it

February 8, 2013: Indian Affairs holds consultations in

Saskatoon with many First Nations reject federal

legislation and boycott morning session while other First

Nations reject federal legislation but attend the afternoon

session. Either way, there was no consultation.

July 2013: Indian Affairs issues its the First Nation

Education Act Blueprint to stake-holders for

additional consultation and feedback.

July 16-18, 2013 AFN passes a resolution rejecting

federal First Nations Education legislation and supporting

First Nations Control of First Nations education. FSIN

release by Vice-Chief Bobby Cameron:We continue to

urge First Nations to take control of our childrenseducation by asserting our sovereign right to educate our

children by creating our own Education Acts and ignoring

any federal legislation that is unilaterally imposed on us.

In reply to the clamour for equitable funding for First

Nation schools, Valcourts predecessor, John Duncan, had

said there were no problems with funding, and that instead

of funding, there would be legislation. Valcourt modified

that same tact by saying that first the reserves would have

to demonstrate they were following the Act, and then there

would be funding.

Discussions with First Nations on the deal were difficultfrom the get-go. Chiefs and grassroots membership,

carrying brutal memories of residential schools, bristled at

the idea of federal government involvement in their

educational outcomes.

Initially, Valcourt dismissed the criticism by saying the

Act has still not been finalized how could something be

criticized when its contents were not known?

Then Dr. James Anaya, United Nations special rapporteur

on the rights of indigenous peoples met with indigenous

groups across Canada. Before he left the country, he

issued a statement. I have heard remarkably consistent

and profound distrust toward the First Nations Education

Act being developed by the federal government, and in

particular deep concerns that the process for developingthe Act has not appropriately included nor responded to

Aboriginal views, said Anaya.

I urge the government not to rush forward with this

legislation, but to re-initiate discussions with Aboriginal

leaders.

He also called for increased funding to put on-reserve

education systems on par with province-run systems. Dr.

Anayas full report will be presented to the United Nations

early this year, 2014.

Buoyed by the Anaya comments, First Nation voicescontinued to make strong and loud demands to reveal what

was being plannned. Valcourt relented and in October

2013 distributed a proposed draft of the Departments

Education Act .

The draft seemed to make matters worse and there was

wide if not universal condemnation by First Nations.

National Chief Atleo said the draft Bill was unacceptable

and insisted that five conditions must be met. They

included First Nation control of education, guaranteed

funding, protection of languages and culture, joint

oversight of the new system, and meaningful consultation.

Then the government set out broad flashy brush-strokes

about how the a new Act would take the criticism into

account and it hadtweaked the Bill. First Nation voices

say bringing a dead horse back to life would take more

than tweaking.

Valcourt responded with more positive noises, signals of

compromise including those in a letter he sent to Atleo.

In the letter, Valcourt addressed some of the AFNs

concerns and insisted he wants to meet on an urgent

basis. Although he had previously said he wanted a new

system in place by the start of the school year in

September 2014, the minister shifted tack, saying there is

no deadline.

Nonetheless, the considerable uproar in response

continued. On December 10 in Gatineau, Quebec, across

the Ottawa River from Parliament Hill, hundreds of Chiefs

from across Canada engaged in dramatic debate and

passed a resolution which not only trashed the

Governments approach, but it also set out the criteria

which must be met if any government initiative was to

pass scrutiny. [The resolution appears below.]


8/36



National Chief Atleo was not present at that meeting of

Chiefs because he was travelling with the Prime

Ministers delegation to attend the ceremonies on thepassing of Nelson Mandela, who was held in high esteem

by indigenous peoples in Canada and around the world.

Just days before Christmas, Atleo told Postmedia News in

an interview that he was optimistic progress was being

made on the education front. The chiefs are being heard,

said Atleo. The educators are being heard. And thats

really important that there be an expressed willingness

on the part of the federal government to say to First

Nations: We recognize that your rights are real.

At the same time, Atleo said there had been a consensus

forged by First Nations chiefs to find a solution. There isa sense among First Nations that we have to seize this

moment. This is not about pressing or pushing this down

the road. It is about moving on the clear plan that we have

right now.

It has been reported that within the federal cabinet,

several ministers were getting restless, feeling there was

little political benefit to Harper continuing discussions.

Just do it.

Surprise!

And thus Harpers unilateral, sudden and unexpectedannouncement at Kainai on February 7 it was only onth

Wednesday February 5 that the invited guests wereth

abruptly summonsed to the Friday February 7 Kainaith

event.

The National Chief seems to have been isolated by the

chain of events. On the day before the invitations went out

bearing his name along with the Prime Ministers, the

AFN Council of Chiefs on Education had been meeting at

Kahawake, the Mohawk community near Montreal.

Present and chairing the meeting was the AFN vice-chief

who carries the education portfolio on the Executive

Committee, Morley Googoo. Also present was the CEO of

the AFN. No mention was made of any upcoming

announcement.

The Chiefs attending that meeting are not happy.

The next day, February 5, the National Chief issued a

Special Bulletin on First Nation Education expressing

hope that in his unveiling of the Federal Budget on

February 11, the Finance Minister might have some

positive news that there would be new and sustainable

investments in the upcoming budget.

Not a hint of the Kainai meeting is in the letter.

When did the National Chief know there was going to be

an Announcement at Kainai? Was he told told of the

Kainai meeting only on Wednesday the 5 ? If not then,

th

when? It was on that Wednesday that for the first time, the

National Chief had informed his Executive Committee of

regional chiefs in an email that there has been

agreement from the federal government to meet their

conditions.

Details continue to evolve, wrote Atleo, who invited the

chiefs to attend the announcement.

This is a significant shift and I believe it results from our

strong direction from chiefs to take all steps necessary to

secure the future of First Nations children.

Perhaps it was unwarranted optimism which caused him to

speak too soon. But Harpers unilateral move had left the

National Chief with two alternatives. He could express

outrage and refuse to attend, and then have government

and perhaps the public and even some First Nations dump

on him for not accepting the half-a-loaf-with-a-hook the

Harper Government was enticing him with. Or he could

paint on a smile, declare all the Chiefs conditions had

been met, go celebrate with the Prime Minister, and

prepare to face the music from the Chiefs.

Or maybe he had been a part of the whole plan. No one

seems to know. Who knew what and when? remains acritical question.

On February 7, the day of the meeting at Kainai, the

National Chief issued a second special nationwide

announcement: I know everyone is considering today's

announcement and wondering what this means for the

future of First Nations education. He apparently still did

not know what would be in Harpers announcement or if

he did, he wasnt telling. Theres not a detail of it is in the

letter.

It was like Treaty Time all over again. The parties left the

event each with a totally different version of what had

happened.

And whether he liked it or not, National Chief Shawn

Atleo had been used as a prop at the Prime Ministers gala

event.

And The Blood Tribe Opposed

The Prime Ministers Legislative Initiative!Another interesting incongruity. The Prime Ministers big

announcement was hosted by the Blood Tribe. The Blood


9/36



Tribe is opposed to any federal legislation on education.

Hearing that the Prime Minister was about to descend

upon them, the Tribe put out an official media release on

Thursday afternoon, February 6.

Blood Tribe Reaffirms Position

on First Nations Education Act

The Blood Tribe is firm on their position

The Government of Canada [has] drafted legislation that

will impact education for First Nations students across this

land. The Government maintains that this proposed

legislation bill is necessary because it is the central

recommendation of their National Panel on First Nation

Elementary and Secondary Education for students on

reserve.

It also purports that extensive consultations have been

completed with First Nations parents, students, leaders

and educators, as well as Provincial Governments, and all

have been integral to the development and drafting of this

proposed legislation.

It is the position of the Blood Tribe and Kainai Board of

Education that this one-sided development of the proposed

legislation has not met the Crowns legal duty to consult

and accommodate, as established by the Supreme Court of

Canada. Given that education is a treaty right, Canada is

obligated to meaningfully consult with the Blood Tribewhenever there are proposed changes that adversely affect

those aboriginal rights as re-affirmed by Section 35 of the

Constitution Act.

The proposed First Nations Education Act is being forced

onto the Blood Tribe without proper consultation. It is

similar to how the Government tried to assimilate Blood

children through Indian Residential Schools. The concerns

and recommendations submitted by the Blood Tribe and

Kainai Board of Education take the position that the

proposed First Nations Education Act has been drafted

unilaterally and takes away from the guiding principle of

Indian Control of Indian Education.

True consultation would allow us to work with Canada to

enhance education for our members, in fact we have made

every effort to ensure this is available on the Blood

Reserve to our members. But we are underfunded as

compared to other jurisdictions and this failure to provide

adequate funding is a major contributor to the gaps

between the education which our students receive in

comparison to non-First Nations students, gaps that the

proposed FNEA purports to resolve. However, the FNEA

does not address the fundamental issue of funding.

It is the view of the Blood Tribe and Kainai Board of

Education that the proposed First Nations Education Act

will see a gradual off-loading of responsibility to the

Government of Alberta from the Government of Canada,

in all matters relating to elementary and secondary

education.

The Aftermath

Atleo still faces much anger in some First Nations circles

for his decision to work with Harper.

The mistrust also extends to the Official Opposition.Speaking to reporters outside the House of Commons

Friday, NDP House leader Nathan Cullen said it was

curious Harper announced the changes with a last-minute

announcement on a Friday from a distant location when

the attention of Canada and the world was diverted to the

opening of the Winter Olympics.

One suspects that theyre not going to follow through on

their commitments with First Nations people, Cullen

said. If they were, trust me, theyd have lots of balloons

and confetti and be celebrating and be doing something

else. Lets see, when are they coming out with it on a

Friday afternoon, the opening day of the Olympics.

NDP Aboriginal Affairs critic Jean Crowder applauded

Ottawas investments in First Nations schools, but

criticized the fact that the money for core funding wont

start flowing until 2016.

They are promising money for future governments,

Crowder said, adding the federal government has a

history of broken promises on the First Nations

education file.

So Thats How It All Came to Pass

At Kainai on February 7, 2014

CBC Power & Politics


10/36



Sticking to a carefully crafted script, the Harper Govern-

ment today revealed it was moving ahead with its new

freshly-tweaked and retooledFirst Nations Education Act.

Taking credit for the victory was National Chief Shawn

Atleo. The Prime Minister proclaimed it a great day in

history, They both claimed the new plan would give

First Nations control over schooling.

Both talked about an agreement, but it was never stated

then or since what that agreement was.

Prime Minister Harper described it in general terms, butthe National Chief described it in other terms. It was

almost as of they were talking about too different things.

Federal media comments say the plan calls for teachers on

reserves to be certified with equal education standards to

schools off-reserves and students will have to meet

attendance requirements.

TTotal funding runs up to $1.9 billion for the Act over

several years, with $500 million for infrastructure on

reserves.

It said the Act itself would only be part of the new

approach. Once the Act was passed, the government

would impose a whole set of regulations which would

have to be followed by First Nations. The regulations

become law without parliamentary scrutiny.

.

Iroquois Caucus Unanimous Rejection

During a two-day meeting at Kahnawake, the Iroquois

Caucus announced February 6 that it had passed aresolution unanimously rejecting the Harper governments

proposedFirst Nations Education Act. The Caucus

involves seven Iroquois communities with a population

totallying 55,000 persons.

Kahnawake Grand Chief Mike Delisle told Christopher

Curtis of the Montreal Gazette that if Stephen Harper isnt

prepared to scrap theFirst Nations Education Act, he can

expect members of the Iroquois Caucus to mobilize on

Parliament Hill en masse.

This is a political fight and were going to take it to

Ottawa. Were going to be heard on this. We are willing to

work with Ottawa as equals, its time they started working

with us.

Theres a serious funding problem in schools right now,

we cant afford to delay fixing it, said Ava Hill, grand

chief of the Six Nations territory, referring to the fact that

there will be no new money flowing until 2016.

Our kids want to learn, they want to go out there and get

jobs and contribute to society, Hill said. This benefits

all Canadians, not just First Nations. We can do a better

job educating our children than the government can. We


11/36



want (the children) to know about their language, about

their culture so they can get a sense of who they are before

stepping out into the world.

Chief among the concerns of the caucus members is a fear

that the bill could make it legal for the federal government

to take over local education if a school doesnt meet

certain federal requirements. Delisle said the mere

mention of a federal government takeover reminds him of

Canadas dark history of forcing aboriginal children to

attend residential schools away from their homes.

I dont think this would be nearly as bad but you can

understand how people are reluctant to hand over

education to the government, Delisle said.

TheFirst Nations Education Acthad also been rejected bya summit of Chiefs from across Canada in December at

Gatineau. However, apparently National Chief Shawn

Atleo has been having side conversations with Minister

Valcourt.

I think its time that we control our own destiny,

Akweshsne Chief Bill Sunday told Kahnawake

Television. Were capable of developing our own

education programs.

All the leaders present said that the Iroquois stand as one

on this issue. We believe in Indigenous education by and

for Indigenous people and we have that skill-set in ourmidst, said Wahta Council Chief Billy Hay. We outright

oppose [the bill] in all of its components.

Mikmaq Education Leader Not impressed

New federal funding for First Nation education isn't

enough to pay on-reserve teachers at the same rate as

provincial teachers, a Cape Breton Mi'kmaq leader says.

Eleanor Bernard is the executive director of the Mi'kmaw

Kina'matnewey, a Membertou-based organization that

provides education funding and advice to Mi'kmaqs.

Mi'kmaw Kina'matnewey means "the whole process of

learning."

Ms. Bernard told CBC News Stephen Harpers

$1.25-billion deal would still leave First Nations schools

behind other Canadian schools.

"It's over a three-year period and when you are talking

nationally, it's not a lot of money. We're still not going to

be able to pay our teachers provincial pay scales, still not

going to be able to do a lot of programming," Bernard

said. "It still does not provide equity."

The plan requires education standards on reserves to be

consistent with schools off reserves. But Ms. Bernard said

Nova Scotia First Nations schools already meet those

standards for teachers and for students.

"We have an 87% graduation rate, which is really good,"

she said. "Now we need to work on the improvements in

literacy and numeracy."

She added that teaching Mi'kmaq was also a priority. "Our

language is suffering because we don't have funding tied

specifically to improvements in language," she said.

Ms. Bernard believes Nova Scotia First Nations schools

will not be required to adopt the new plan. She predicts

many will not.

An Interview With Ms. Bernard is at

http://www.cbc.ca/informationmorningcb/2014/02/10/first

-nations-education/

How To Understand the Debate

When the Prime Minister called the Kainai meeting with

less than 48 hours notice, adding National Chief Atleos

name alongside his own as the hosts of the meeting, the

National Chief of the AFN declares victory, and says the

Government has agreed to our conditions, calls the

governments ew positiona significant shift which he

believes results from our strong direction from chiefs totake all steps necessary to secure the future of First

Nations children,"

However, so far, most First Nations say they cant find

anything like that in the statements of the Prime Minister

and Minister Valcourt.

The Minister says that "the government of Canada agrees

that First Nations must have control over their education,"

and that his proposal is intended to empower those who

know best what their children need First Nations,

parents, communities and administrators to determine

what is most effective for their success."

The reply from the grassroots more or less said they

already were empowered and always had been

empowered. The problem since Confederation was federal

imposition and interference designed to block and

frustrate its empowerment and the new Act is more of the

same.

The federal government apparently wants its new Act to

be in place before March 31 so that adherence to the Act

will become a condition woven into the contribution

agreements which will provide First Nations with money


12/36



to run their schools in the next school year.

The only way that could happen would be if the

Government imposed closure in both Commons andSenate. It is counting on First Nations to agree with

pushing the Bill through because it has tied the bill to the

new funding which is supposed to come in 2016. No Bill,

no funding, even funding over two years away.

Just months ago, Indian Affairs Minister Valcourt was

saying that before there was any new funding, First

Nations would have to prove they had improved their

schools. First Nations have always maintained poor school

conditions and educational results were because their

students received only about half of what provincial

schools were receiving in federal payments for First

Nations students.

Schools on the hundreds of reserves across Canada are

underfunded and there are clear gaps in the quality of

education between First Nations and non-Native students,

according to a 2013 report by Aboriginal Affairs andNorthern Development.

Aboriginal Affairs spends about $2 billion on First

Nations education every year, but annual funding

increases have been capped at 2% since the 1996.

Meanwhile, First Nations are the fastest growing

demographic group in Canada, the number of new students

combined with increased costs and inflation cause the gap

in funding to increase annually.


13/36

A Twealed Education Act Ready for the Parliamentary Railroad; PM Tries To Co-opt the AFN -11-

an informative by fou rarrows@rogers .com8 February 2014 Edition

First Nations Control

of First Nations Education Act

Stand Off, AB

7 February 2014

Prime Minister Stephen Harper today announced an2

historic agreement between the Government of Canada

and the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) to proceed with3

the final drafting and introduction of theFirst Nations4

Control of First Nations Education Act. This agreement5

is the result of years-long, unprecedented process of

consultations and discussions.6

The Government of Canada and the AFN are committed to

improving K-12 education outcomes for First Nation

students, and providing First Nations children on-reserve

with a high quality education, just like every other

Canadian. To this end, the Government of Canada also

announced today that it will make a significant financial

commitment of over $1.9 billion to support theFirst

Nations Control of First Nations Education Act.Funding

will account for language and culture programming.

What will the bill do?

The legislation will ensure First Nations control of First

Nations education while establishing minimum education

standards, consistent with provincial standards off-reserve

For example, the legislation will require that First Nation

schools teach a core curriculum that meets or exceeds

provincial standards, that students meet minimum

attendance requirements, that teachers are properly

certified, and that First Nation schools award widelyrecognized diplomas or certificates.

These requirements do not currently exist. This has

resulted in situations where First Nations youth graduate

from education institutions on-reserve but cannot

demonstrate a recognizable diploma to a workplace or

post-secondary institution and are therefore required to

return to school.

The legislation will also improve transparency and

promote accountability by establishing clear roles and

responsibilities for First Nation education administrators,

and annual reporting requirements. The bill will also allowfor the establishment of First Nation Education

Authorities. These Authorities will act like school boards

in the provincial education system to provide the key

secondary support to help ensure that First Nation schools

are meeting their requirements under the Act, and are

providing a quality education for First Nation students.

Following on our Governments 2010 commitment, the

First Nations Control of First Nations Education Actwill

also repeal the provisions in the Indian Act related to

residential schools. This measure is of great symbolic

importance and aligns with the purpose of this bill;namely, to turn the page on the dark chapter of the

Residential School system, and provide the framework for

First Nations to develop and implement a quality

education system under the control of First Nations.

What is new?

The First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act

will contain a number of significant changes to the

October 2013 draft legislative proposal shared with all

First Nations Chiefs. These include:

All footnotes a ttached to th e governments media s tatem ent2

are editorial comm ents by and of cou rse did not

appear with the governments own docum ent.

There is no information as to what this agreement says, when it3

was made, by whom it was made.

Final drafting implies the Bill is all but rea dy to go just4

some tweaking to do, as the Prime Minister put it.

An Act by the Parliament of Canada to be administered by5government officials which will provide for First N ation

Control of First Nation Education is classic doublespeak at its

most insidious best. As Wikipedia defines it, Doublespeak is

language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the

meaning of words. It may also refer to intentional amb iguity in

language or to actual inversions of meaning (for example,

naming a state of war "peace"). In such cases, doublespeak

disguises the nature of the truth. Doublespeak is most closely

associated with political language.

There has been no consultation and no accommodation even to6

the minimum legal requirements set by the Supreme Co urt of

Canada. Neither has there been consent.


14/36

A Twealed Education Act Ready for the Parliamentary Railroad; PM Tries To Co-opt the AFN -12-

an informative by fou rarrows@rogers .com8 February 2014 Edition

Creating a Joint Council of Education Professionals to

provide advice and support to the Government of

Canada and First Nations on the implementation and

oversight of theFirst Nations Control of First NationsEducation Act.

Outlining our Governments commitment to adequate

stable, predictable and sustainable funding. This

funding will replace the complex structures now in

place with three funding streams: a statutory funding

stream that will have a reasonable rate of growth;

transition funding to support the new legislative

framework; and funding for long-term investments in

on-reserve school infrastructure.

Enabling First Nations to incorporate language and

culture programming in the education curriculum, andproviding funding for language and culture

programming within the statutory funding stream.

Committing the Government to work in conjunction

with First Nations to develop the Acts regulations.

Education Funding

Core Funding (includes language and culture) + 4.5%

escalator

$1.252-b over three years, beginning in 2016-17 and

increasing annually thereafter, per the escalator.

Infrastructure

$500-m over seven years, beginning in 2015-16, when

Budget 2012 investments expire.

Implementation Fund/ Education Enhancement Fund

$160-m over four years, beginning in 2015-16.

Major milestones

December 2010 - The Government of Canada and the

AFN announce the creation of the National Panel on First

Nation Elementary and Secondary Education.

June 2011 - The Government of Canada, together with the

AFN, officially launch an engagement process.

February 2012 The National Panel releases the FinalReport.

December 2012 The Government of Canada launches

consultations for development of aFirst Nations

Education Actand releases a Discussion Guide.

July 2013 The Government of Canada releases the

Blueprint for Discussion with all Chiefs; a document

outlining what the Government heard during the

consultative process.

October 2013 -The Government of Canada releases a

draft legislative proposal.

November 2013 The National Chief of the Assembly ofFirst Nations sends an Open Letter to the Government of

Canada.

December 2013 The Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and

Northern Development sends an Open Letter to the

National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

For a more detailed chronology of activities to date please

visit: Chronology of First Nations Education at

http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1358799301258/1358799341720 .

The Path Forward:

The Government of Canada and First Nations agree towork together on the passage of theFirst Nations Control

of First Nations Education Actand on the joint

development of necessary regulations to follow. The

partnership does not end with the introduction of a bill.

The overriding goal of the legislation is better outcomes

for First Nation students. First Nations and the

Government of Canada agree that this is best achieved

through First Nations control over First Nations education

http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2014/02/07/first-nations-control-f

irst-nations-education-act#sthash.NahGPHMX.dpuf
mailto:[email protected]://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1358799301258/1358799341720http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1358799301258/1358799341720mailto:[email protected]


15/36



This Is The Resolution Passed in Gatineau

By Chiefs from Across Canada on December 12, 2013

Moved by Doug Kelly, B.C.,Seconded by Chief Joe Miskokomon

Carried by Consensus

WHEREAS:

A. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of

Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in Article 14 recognizes

the right of First Nations to develop our own education

institutions and systems, reflecting our languages, cultures

and identities, including language immersion initiatives

and institutions, and requires state governments to seek

the free, prior and informed consent of First Nations

governments prior to enacting measures which impact ourrights.

B. First Nations education is a key foundation for

strengthening our cultural identity, ensuring the

transmission of our languages, and ultimately

strengthening our families, our clans, our communities,

and our nations.

C. First Nations are united in advancing education that is

child-centred, respecting the diversity across regions but

coming together always in understanding that all

initiatives, approaches, and potential agreements in

education must place the child at the centre.

D. The Assembly of First Nations (AFN) has a Chiefs

Committee on Education (CCOE), supported by the

National Indian Council on Education, which has regional

representation and continues to provide advice and

recommendations to the AFN National Executive.

E. First Nations Control of First Nations Education 2010,

which incorporates the originalIndian Control of Indian

Education 1972 paper, is the official education policy for

the Assembly of First Nations.

F. On October 22 2013 the Federal government released:Working Together for First Nation Students: a Proposal

for a Bill on First Nation Education. First Nations across

all regions have reviewed this proposal and reached

consensus that the current proposal is unacceptable and

has been rejected. Resolutions from Nations and regions

set out the following as essential for achieving success for

First Nations students and schools:

a. Any proposal must respect inherent and Treaty

rights and contain First Nation jurisdiction of First

Nation education as the overriding, paramount

principle and not be imposed unilaterally by the

Aboriginal and Northern Affairs bureaucracy.

b. Canada must recognize its obligation and provide a

statutory guarantee for funding of First Nations

education that is sustainable and reflects actual costs.

c. First Nation education systems must be enabled,

supported and funded in a way that supports full

immersion and grounding of all education in

Indigenous languages and cultures.

d. First Nations are diverse, and this diversity must be

fully respected and enabled in the variety of ways in

which First Nations choose to advance First Nations

Control of First Nations Education.

G. First Nations have affirmed that there must be an

agreed-to process that fully respects and reflectspartnership, consistent with Treaty relationships, and the

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous

Peoples to support implementation and achievement of

First Nations jurisdiction over education.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED

that the Chiefs-in-Assembly:

1. Reject the October 22, 2013 draft Working Together

for First Nations Students: A Proposal for a Bill on First

Nation Education as is.

2. Call upon Canada to negotiate to advance First Nations

Control of First Nations Education, Assembly of FirstNations policy framework 2010.

3. Are resolute and determined to achieve justice, fairness

and equity for First Nations children, through strong,

culturally-grounded education, and committed to working

together and providing child-centred solutions.

4. Guided by points 1, 2 and 3 above, direct the National

Chief, National Executive, and First Nations to take all

necessary steps to press Canada to respond to the

conditions required to achieve success for First Nations

children including:a. Respect and recognize inherent rights and title,

Treaty rights, and First Nation Control of First Nation

Education jurisdiction. First Nations must retain all

options to advance their education and all such

agreements must be fully respected, enabled and

supported.

b. Provide a statutory guarantee for funding of First

Nations education as a precondition that is sustainable

and reflects needs-based costs consistent with Canadas

obligation.

c. Enable and support systems to provide full


16/36



immersion and grounding of all education in

Indigenous languages and cultures.

d. Develop mechanisms to oversee, evaluate, and for

reciprocal accountability and to ensure there not be

unilateral federal oversight and authority.

e. Ensure a meaningfully supported process to address

these conditions through a commitment to working

together through co-development, fully reflective of

First Nations rights and jurisdiction.

5. Direct the National Chief and National Executive toadvocate urgently and strongly for Canada to commit

immediate investments in Budget 2014 to address the

current funding gap, and advance a statutory guarantee for

the future of First Nations education systems.

What the National Chief Wrote on February 4: No Mention of Kainai

National Chiefs Special Bulletin on First Nations Education

As noted in last months Bulletin, the Government of

Canada is tabling the federal budget on February 11, 2014.

In advance of every federal budget, the AFN presses

forward specific priorities as set by First Nations in

resolution and by the National Executive through the

pre-budget process. This year, additional efforts have

been made to continue our advocacy for action on First

Nation education through direct correspondence to the

federal Finance Minister and the House of Commons

Committee on Finance.

Fairness for First Nations children has been our shared

priority since the early 70s through our push for Indian

control of Indian education. In 2009, at my firstAssembly as National Chief, we reaffirmed our support

for our youth and students and set education as a top

priority.

In June 2010, we stood together at the Nipissing First

Nation to launch the Call to Action on First Nation

Education. The Call to Action built on our national

strategic plan and resolution, calling for support and

partnership to recreate learning environments within our

communities, recognizing the critical need for full First

Nation community participation, engagement and control.

It set clear principles on the need for Canada to respect

our rights and responsibilities, establish a statutory

guarantee for funding for our youth, support for systems

development and curriculum on language and culture.

Our advocacy efforts included a major rally in September

2010 where we joined student walkers from Kitigan-Zibi

Anishinabeg, marching together to Parliament Hill,

honouring the tremendous leadership of our youth like the

late Shannen Koostachin. Dozens of organizations across

the country supported our call to action including

universities and colleges, student and teachers federations,

chambers of commerce, business, unions, civil society,

and even provincial and territorial governments.

There have been a number of milestones including

successive Auditor-General reports, Senate reports and

important consensus motions in Parliament, such as the

one in 2013 supporting Shannens Dream and fair,

equitable funding for First Nation students.

I look as well to the interim report of the Truth and

Reconciliation Commission that highlighted the words of

survivors speaking to their own healing journeys, clearly

expressing their hope for change so that all First Nations

children will have the opportunities in education that weredenied to them: to be nurtured in their language and

culture and to be supported within their families and

communities.

While our Nations are diverse, we all agree that the status

quo is not acceptable. We agree that fundamental reform

is required based on our vision and framework for First

Nations control of First Nation education. And we all

agree that this generation of children must not wait.

Weve seen increased attention and increased mobilization

of our peoples across the country. First Nations clearly

rejected the current federal proposal on First Nationseducation and called for a vigorous effort to advance

reform through First Nations control supported by fair,

sustainable funding.

In an Open Letter to the Federal Minister on November

25th, 2013, sent to all First Nations, I reiterated our firm

opposition to any initiatives or efforts aimed at unilateral

control. Referencing the apology and commitment to

reconciliation, we set clear conditions grounded in

resolutions and mandate to achieve the change First

Nations envision and demand.


17/36



(February 4 Special Bulletin, Continued)

At our 2013 December Special Chiefs Assembly,

extensive dialogue and debate took place over severaldays resulting in national consensus that First Nations

will put our children first, equipping them with the

systems and supports they need, that we will demand

fairness and that we have a clear plan of action, our

policy framework of First Nations Control of First

Nations Education. . Resolution 21/2013 affirmed a)

our rejection of the October 2013 federal proposal and

mandated a clear path forward based on a) respect for

First Nations jurisdiction and Treaties and rights, b) a

statutory guarantee of funding, c) resources for

language and culture, d) reciprocal accountability and

e) ongoing meaningful dialogue.

On December 13, 2013, Minister Valcourt sent an Open

Letter to all First Nations acknowledging that change is

long overdue and it must be done together. He wrote: The

government agrees that First Nations must have control

over their education.

The Chair of our Chiefs Committee on Education,

Regional Chief Morley Googoo together with the mover

and seconder of resolution 21/2013, Grand Chief Doug

Kelly and Chief Joe Miskokomon, pressed for clarity from

the Minister on moving forward on the resolution and

setting a clear way forward in mutual respect andpartnership.

A meeting occurred on January 27 with a follow-upth

report that same day to the National Executive of the

AFN.

Today, February 4 , a meeting of the Chiefs Committeeth

on Education took place as well to keep advancing the

terms of our resolution and our advocacy to achieve

reform consistent with First Nation control of First Nation

education.

Let me be clear: achieving this change requiresinvestment, it requires recognition of rights and it must

enable every First Nation, every Treaty area and region to

advance and negotiate education systems that reflect their

languages and cultures while ensuring that every First

Nation child has the benefit of systems and supports

enabling their success. There is no one size fits all model.

Respecting and reflecting diversity is essential.

I want to thank all of you who have been reaching out,

responding and engaging in this important work. There

have been conversations and contributions with so many

citizens, leaders and experts. So many have helped as

well to reflect back on where we have come from,

pointing to our successes and helping us see the way

forward. Reflections by people like Verna Kirkness,

Leroy Littlebear, Lorna Williams, Elinor Bernard, and

Diane Longboat are captured in the framework discussed

at the Chiefs Committee on Education and will serve as

the foundation for upcoming discussions on how you and

your First Nation want to drive change in education.

In closing, let me reiterate the appreciation I feel for all of

the voices and all of the efforts underway in our

communities every day. During my time as National

Chief I have travelled to nearly one hundred schools

across all regions and have had the chance to sit with our

educators and our students. This has confirmed a deep

resolve to keep pressing no matter how difficult. Our

work as leaders is strengthened by the clarity of direction.

The status quo has been rejected. A unilateral approach of

government has been rejected. Now, First Nations are

driving the way forward and we do so, in accordance withthe United Nations Declaration on the Rights of

Indigenous Peoples standards that call for a process of

mutual respect and partnership between states and

indigenous peoples and as in articles 14 and 15 confirm

the standard of First Nation control and full and equitable

access to meaningful education opportunities for our

children.

We will take every opportunity to stand up for fairness for

our children. We will continue to find the ways to work

together. There is a growing consensus and support

throughout all sectors and regions of Canada thatinvestment is needed for our kids right now. First

Nations have a clear plan and we will, together, achieve

change for our children.


18/36

ONION LAKE CREE NATION DENOUNCES THE DEAL ON EDUCATION

For I mmediate Release

Onion Lake Cree Nation, Treaty No. 6 Terri tory, February 11, 2014 The Onion Lake Cree Nationopposes the recent announcement made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Indian Affairs Minister

Bernard Valcourt, and Assembly of First Nations National Chief Shawn Atleo relating to First NationsEducation released on the Kainai Nation, Treaty No. 7 territory, February 7, 2014. Onion Lake Cree

Nation was forced to watch this historic announcement through media outlets as advance notice about

the event was not supplied to our Nation. We condemn the way in which this announcement came aboutsince we were not included in any discussions or negotiations of such a deal that affects our Treaty

promise to Education. I want to remind the successor state of Canada that it has no authority to enterinto negotiations with any other party in matters relating to Treaty that affect the peoples of Onion Lake,

including Education, as it impacts our children and future generations stated Okimaw Wallace Fox,Chief of the Onion Lake Cree Nation.

Our Nation has never given up our authority to another party, such as the Assembly of First Nations, to

speak on our behalf or make decisions for us, especially when it impacts our Treaty. We are not willingpartners in any political process that undermines our inherent jurisidiction to control how we educate our

children. We ask the Assembly of First Nations National Chief Shawn Atleo and the Executive of AFNif they knew of an Education deal being struck; if they knew of any negotiations taking place to agree tothe contents in this announcement and when these discussions took place? said Okimaw Fox.

The newly named First Nations Control Over First Nations Education Act (FNCFNEA) is nothing new

and continues the top down dictatorial approach in addressing First Nations issues by the state of Canada

under Prime Minister Harper. In fact, the contents of the announcement leave us with more questionsthan answers and appears to impose more burden on our Education system. Despite announcing an

increase in funding steeped in uncertainty; it will not come into force until after the next federal electionin 2015 as it is to be rolled out in 2016. Our Nation has consistently rejected the proposed First Nations

Education Act (FNEA) through various forms of written communication to the state of Canada and theAssembly of First Nations.

Our Nation has developed our own Education Law to govern our Cree ways of passing knowledge to ourgenerations of learners and we continue to exercise our inherent jurisdiction over Education as intended

by the original instructions from our Kise-Manito (Creator), stated Okimaw Fox. We will continue to

reject unilaterally imposed agreements by the state of Canada and invite the federal government

to a bilateral discussions under our Indigenous legal framework; a nation to nation table based onthe Treaty made between our ancestors and the Crown. Onion Lake Cree Nation will continue to

enact its own laws, exercise our form(s) of self-determination, honour the Treaty, and ensure the

international communitiy is kept apprised of the actions taken by Canada in breaching its legal

obligations under Treaty, thus bringing dishonour to the Crown.

The Onion Lake Cree Nation is within the Treaty No. 6 Territory, near the city of Lloydminster.

Onion Lake has its own Cree Indigenous Governance System and has over 5,500 citizens.

For media inquiries:

Winston Walkingbear, Director for Operations (OLCN)

Phone: (780) 870-7228


19/36


20/36



While all the events at Kainai were taking place,

a delegation of First Nations were in Geneva, Switzerland,

holding meetings with members of the UN Committee

on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD).

The following document is its submission to the Commtitee.

Submission to the 89th Session

of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

With Regard to Canadas Failure to Comply

With Human Rights Conventions, Declarations and General Recommendations No. 21 and 23

of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

3 February 21 February 2014

Geneva

While Canadian political observers were trying to figureout what had happened and not happened regarding the

mystery-laden Kainai Conference Announcement on

February 7, a First Nation delegation was in Geneva,

Switzerland, meeting with members of the United Nations

Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

The topic: violations by the Government of Canada of the

human rights of indigenous peoples.

The submission is put forward by the Onion Lake Cree

Nation, Ermineskin Cree Nation, Ochapowace Cree

Nation, Saddle Lake Cree Nation, Alexis Nakota Sioux

Nation, Thunderchild Cree Nation, Piapot First Nation,Nigigoonsiminikaaning First Nation, Seine River First

Nation and the 64 First Nations of Treaties 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

and 10 represented by the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs.

These are Indigenous Peoples and Nations as understood

within the international jurisprudence , and as such we5

further declare that we are also a peoples as articulatedby the same jurisprudence. Being understood as a

peoples within the international jurisprudence the

Nations have an inherent right by such status to self-

determination.

The Nations for this submission accept that the working5

definition of indigenous peoples as found in the sem inal work

of Special Rapporteur, Martinez Cobo in his report on the

Study of the Problem of Discrimination Against Indigenou sPopulations (Cob o Report), and submits that they meet the

criteria as set out in this definition, The definition from the Cob o

Report reads as follows:

Indigenous communities, peoples and na tions are those

which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and

pre-co lonial societi es tha t developed on the ir terri torie s,

consider themselves distinct from other secto rs of the

societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them.

They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are

determined to preserve, deve lop and transmit to future

generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic

identity, as the basis of their continued existence as p eoples,

in accordance w ith their own cultural patterns, social

institutions and legal system.

This historical continuity may consist of the continuation,

for an extended period reaching into the present of one or

more of the following factors:

Occupation o f ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;

Common ance stry with the original occupan ts of these

lands;

Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as

religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an

indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood,

lifestyle, etc.);

Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-

tongue, as the habitual means of communication at hom e

or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual,

general or normal language);

Residence on ce rtain parts of the country, or in certain

regions of the world;

Other relevant factors.

On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who

be longs to these indigenous populatio ns through s elf-

identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is

recognized and accepted by these populations as one of

its members (acceptance by the group).

This preserves for these communities the sovereign

right and power to decide who belongs to them, without

external interference. [UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1986/7

and Add. 1-4].


21/36



We assert our Nations inherent right to self-determination

to freely determine our political status and to freely pursue

our economic, social and cultural development without

interference from foreign nations.The Nations not only assert that such an inherent right to

self-determination is recognized and consistent with the

treaty relationship that the Nations entered into with the

British Crown, to which the Canadian state is the

successor, but that also the implementation of the treaty

relationship is an important means in which the Nations

exercise such a right.6

The Nations assert that the Canadian state has failed to

implement its obligations under the treaty relationship

with our Nations by consistently imposing their laws,

policies and procedures on our Nations based on thepremise that we, as Indigenous Peoples, are unable to

govern our lands, resources, communities or our people.

The Nations submit that such a premise is based upon

colonial beliefs and attitudes that hold the Nations, as

Indigenous Peoples, to have presumed inadequacies based

on race as expressed through images of stupidity, poor

decision-making, and childish, irresponsible and

frequently irrational behaviors.

These colonial attitudes and beliefs also hold that the

Nations and our members are stuck in an unprogressive

and non-evolving past that is associated with maladaptivecultural characteristics. Although the Canada state has

premised its relationship with our Nations on this basis

and created its structure upon it, the Nations have never

participated in the creation of this Canadian state

structure, and as such the Canadian state continues its

attempts to colonize our Nations and Peoples contrary to

international jurisprudence.

Though pervasive in much of Canadas law and policies

relating to our Nations, the most recent example of

Canada states colonial beliefs and attitude can be

demonstrated in its unilateral attempt to impose upon ourNations the proposedFirst Nations Education Act(the

Act). The Act purports to not only provide First Nations

children with an educational system equal with provincial

standards, including standards of accountability and

transparency, but to also include First Nations in the

administration of such a system.

However, such purposes are false, as ultimate authority to

determine the content of the education, the manner inwhich it is to be delivered and the financial resources to

be provided for the administration of such education is left

with the federal Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and

Northern Development (the Minister).

Given the ultimate authority of the Minister, particularly

the control over the financial resources for the educational

system, the actual role of our Nations is superficial at best,

and certainly not in keeping with the Treaty relationship

between the Nations and the Crown, nor our inherent right

as peoples to self-determination of which control of the

education of our children is a component of its expression

Accordingly, the Act is nothing more than a continued

attempt by the Canadian state to paternalistically control

our Nations childrens lifelong learning, despite

consistent opposition by the majority of Indigenous

Peoples and Nations.

Assertions and Requests

The Nations assert that as Indigenous Peoples and Nations

and peoples as recognized within the international

jurisprudence, we have the inherent right, as a component

of self-determination, to develop, control and manage ourchildrens education, and that such a right was not

relinquished through the treaty relationship.

Further, we assert that the treaty relationship recognized

our Nations right to develop, control and manage our

childrens education, and that the same treaty relationship

only requires the Canadian to maintain schools to allow

us to exercise our right.

The Nations assert that Canadas treaty obligation to

maintain schools requires it to provide the necessary

financial resources as required by the Nations to develop,

control and manage our childrens education. The Nationsfurther assert that the Canadian state racially discriminates

against us by its continued adherence to racist colonial

beliefs and attitudes based upon the premise that we, as

Indigenous Peoples and Nations, are unable to govern our

lands, resources, communities or our people as other

peoples and Nations are capable of accomplishing.

The Nations respectfully requests that the UN Committee

on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination under its

urgent action procedure find:

For the purp oses of this submission, the Nations agree with the6

findings of Special Rapporteur, Miguel Alfonso Martinez in his

Study on Treaties, Agreements and Other Co nstructive

Arrangements between States and Indigenous Populations

E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/20 (Martinez Report).


22/36



1. The presence of a significant and persistent pattern

of racial discrimination within Canadas continued

unilateral imposition of laws and policies regarding our

Nations education based on colonial beliefs andattitudes that holds racial and negative stereotypes of

our Nations and our members, and that views our

Nations as incapable of governing, our lands and

resources, our communities or our people, as other

peoples and Nations are capable of accomplishing,

and as a result interferes with the Nations ability to

exercise our inherent right to self-determination;

2. Canadas attempt to unilaterally impose theFirst

Nations Education Acton the Nations, despite wide-

spread opposition to such legislation from all of

Canadas Indigenous Peoples and Nations, is acontinued manifestation of the Canadian states racist

colonial beliefs and attitudes that is contrary to the

Nations inherent right of self-determination and/or

their treaty right to education as set out in the treaty

relationship between the Nations and the Canadian;

3. A lack of effective mechanisms for our Nations to

exercise our inherent right to self-determination within

the current Canadian states political landscape, and

that such a lack of effective mechanism is a result of

the Canadian states continued use of ideologies that

hold Indigenous Peoples and Nations as unable togovern our lands, resources, communities or our people

as other peoples and Nations are capable of

accomplishing.

Such a premise is based on racist colonial beliefs and

attitudes that held the Nations, as Indigenous Peoples,

to have presumed inadequacies based on race as

expressed through images of stupidity, poor decision-

making, and childish, irresponsible and frequently

irrational behaviors.

Further these racist colonial attitudes and beliefs also

hold that the Nations and our members are stuck in anunprogressive and non-evolving past that is associated

with maladaptive cultural characteristics; and

4. A lack of a national effective mechanism for the

Nations to bring complaints regarding this persistent

pattern of racial discrimination within Canadas

continued unilateral imposition of laws and policies

regarding our Nations childrens education, as the

Canadian state strategically aligns itself with certain

Aboriginal non-governmental organizations that do not

politically represent our Nations and neither possess

the inherent right of self-determination nor are they

bound by the Treaty relationship that Canada, as a

successor state, has inherited.

Finally, the Nations request the UN Committee on theElimination of Racial Discrimination in so finding the above

take the following measures to ensure that the Canadian state

takes positive action to ensure our Nations free exercise of

our inherent right to self-determination and that the

Canadian state meets its obligation in the implementation o

the treaty relationship as set out in the recommendations

found in the Martinez Report:

1. To request the Canadian state to make an urgent

submission of information on the situation as described

in this submission under the early warning and urgent

action procedure;

2. To request the Secretariat to collect information

from field presences of the Office of the High

Commissioner of Human Rights and specialized

agencies of the United Nations, national human rights

institutions and non-governmental organizations on the

situation as described in this submission and more

specifically to appoint and direct UN Committee on the

Elimination of Racial Discrimination Co-Chairperson

Noureddine Amir to investigate and collect information

regarding the allegations contained in this submission

and to report back to UN Committee on the Eliminationof Racial Discrimination with recommendations;

3. The adoption of a decision including the expression

of specific concerns, along with recommendations for

action, addressed to the Canadian state, and the Special

Rapporteur for Indigenous Peoples;

4. To offer to send to Canada one or more members of

the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial

Discrimination in order to facilitate the implementation

of intern

Four arrows Newsletter on FNEA

Documents

Transcript of Four arrows Newsletter on FNEA