karynpugliese.com

The Kelowna accord was introduced in the last moments of the last days of the last government. It is important to look at it for what it is and for what it is not.

The first ministers meeting in Kelowna, held almost exactly one year ago, was the culmination of a process that began in April 2004 through the convening of the Canada aboriginal peoples round table process. This undertaking was a significant one and was an effort that sought to avoid the prescriptive “made in Ottawa” approach to aboriginal affairs, which has virtually ensured the failure of previous attempts at dealing with the reform of Canada’s aboriginal affairs.

A new approach was called for, one that promised collaboration, cooperation, and accommodation. I cannot sit before this committee and say that our organization did not welcome this news at that time. In our view, there is no aspiration more noble than to commit to ending aboriginal poverty.

There can be no better goal than to ensure that all of Canada’s aboriginal peoples are able to stake their share in our nation’s abundant prosperity. We all have an obligation to provide hope for our youth and the next generation of aboriginal peoples to come. Given this, we must end the rhetoric and act now.

On the basis of this promised partnership with the government of the day, and with the full hope that the congress and its member communities would be equal participants in this historic undertaking, we set forth on an 18-month process that promised to yield results for a generation. Thus, at least at the outset, what Kelowna was to CAP was an offer of inclusion and accommodation and a pursuit that aimed to rise above partisan politics, both at the parliamentary level and across the aboriginal horizon in conjunction with the five national aboriginal organizations.

CAP also viewed the round table process and the first ministers meeting as an opportunity for outreach and education to politicians and officials alike, providing them with the facts around the off-reserve, including status, non-status, and Métis realities in respect of Canada’s aboriginal affairs.

The numbers around this constituency are very telling. l’d like to share them with you today, as I have been doing for months now, and will continue to do with other parliamentarians, senior officials across the bureaucracy, and members of the parliamentary press gallery.

The Government of Canada census indicates that 79% of Canada’s aboriginal people live off reserves. Of the status Indian population, 51% live off reserves. Yet, despite these figures, out of the over $9 billion spent yearly by the federal government on aboriginal programming and services, for every $8 spent on reserve, only $1 is spent off reserve.

Surely the Canada aboriginal peoples round table process would have addressed this. Certainly the investments that were to have flowed from the Kelowna commitments would have reflected this obvious demographic reality. The answer to both of those questions is, sadly, no.

——————————————————————

Go to Blog Post | See full document