The last month
has been a rocky one – a consistent sight every decade of the deplorable state
and relationship between Canada and the Indigenous Nations who the state shares
this territory with. As my involvement has increased for the protection of my
rights, the rights of my family, community, the Anishinaabeg Nation and all
Indigenous Nations, I of course find myself being ‘attacked’ throughout social
media by those who are attached to other Canadian political parties.
If many did not yet know, I am a
Liberal by the Canadian political standards (a Moderate one who is very big on
the rule and respect of law, fiscally conservative, and so on. My view of
Indigenous rights, nationhood, and jurisdiction is one viewed not through a
leftwing lens but one through a ‘rule of law’ lens. After all, treaties are
legally binding and thus law to be followed right? (But this is another
write-up for another day). My point today is to counter some of the heavily
partisan criticisms I get shot at me over twitter and facebook by,
specifically, the NDPers who are so steadfastly seeing orange that they don’t
see anything else.
I will state now as I always state:
The Liberal Party of Canada has made many mistakes, even into the 1990s – I
acknowledge this and I don’t hide it or defend it. However, I argue that no
party – whether in forming government, as opposition, or as a third party, can
be saved from guilt of past policies and legislation that has been implemented.
Unfortunately this is just met with more partisan mantra by my ‘orange’ friends
to the left. So, after many attacks on not just me and my choice of party, but
also my family and the mindset I, and those Indigenous people who vote Liberal,
are helping to assimilate ourselves, I decided to do some research. This
research is specifically on the NDP and the hypocrisy it espouses when it
attacks another party for policy that is decades old, such as the White Paper.
I do want to
acknowledge now, this may be a long post to follow –but one of importance due
to the sheer amount of research done to shed some truth to the NDP/Indigenous
relationship.
The NDP before it was the NDP:
Prior to the
formation of the New Democratic Party (NDP) in 1961, there existed the
Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF). Before the CCF, there were the
Labours and the Progressives. It is here I want to start first. As early as the
late 1800s, the existence of Labour Members of Canada’s Parliament existed.
These MPs, which I cannot find much in regards to voting records or additional information,
were individuals who clearly were there at times of consistent pushes for
Indigenous assimilation and destruction of their places as their own nations in
their home territories on Turtle Island. The only example that is telling of
their own mentality was the vote on the Old Age Pensions Act in 1927. The
legislation, after being reviewed, had a section added to it that stated anyone
who was “an Indian as defined by the Indian Act” ineligible. The recorded
proceedings of the HOC suggests that this exclusion was of little concern to
the Labour members of Canada’s House of Commons.
The
same can be said about the Progressives who came to exist in the 1920s and
early 1930s. The Progressives were connected to the United Farmers Parties that
were in existence throughout the Prairies and Ontario. They too had MPs during
this time, a time that saw removal of Legal representation for Indigenous
people, more assimilationist policies, the time of Duncan Campbell-Scott, and
so on. Again, little can be brought forth to how these Progressives voted or
stood when it came to Indigenous people. However, their affiliation with the
United Farmers Parties of the various provinces could shed light.
During this
time, there was considerable representation from the United Farmers Parties in
various provincial legislatures, especially as the governing party. It was also
during this time that there were various restrictions that continued to be
upheld on Indigenous people. First Nations people living in the prairie
provinces required permits from Indian Agents to sell any of their produce.
This would later turn into the need for written permission to even leave a
reserve for any reason. With this being specific to the prairie Provinces one
must wonder why the United Farmers Parties allowed this if they were so
‘progressive.’ An answer could be that the provinces had no jurisdiction over
Indigenous people and that only the federal government could change that. This
leads to a further question of why the Progressive Members of Parliament (MPs) stood
by, and, at times, supported the Liberals of Mackenzie-King in imposing
additional policy? I point this out because of the consistent NDP attack on
the Liberals being solely responsible for all policy that they put forth – even
though no current Liberal MP was even of voting age, let alone born, at this
time.
This was almost
100 years ago you may say to yourself. I would agree, and acknowledge this is
true and thus move ahead to the formation of the CCF, which occurred in 1932
with the formation first occurring as a Provincial party in Saskatchewan.
The Co-operative Commonwealth Federation:
A Lack of Understanding of Indigenous Nations:
With
the birth of the CCF in the early 1930s there is little proof that the mindset
of the NDP of the 1990s was born then. In fact, through various academic sources, such
as writings by Laurie Barron and James Pitsula, I was able to examine the early
inklings of CCF understanding towards Indigenous people. This understanding, of
course, was born with the formation of government by the CCF in Saskatchewan
around 1944. At this time, the CCF wanted the Indigenous people of Saskatchewan
to have the same advantages that all Canadians had – this included the delivery
of these advantages in the same way as all Canadians. This was considered
achievable only by the transfer of jurisdiction of Indigenous people to the
provinces, accompanied by funds in order to implement such schemes of assimilation.
In other words, the CCF thought the
only way for Indigenous people to move forward was to be assimilated into the
provinces and be under provincial duty as all Canadian subjects tend to be when
related to provincial jurisdiction – which the CCF would enact while government.
As
Pitsula concluded, an “examination of Saskatchewan policy reveals congruity
with the basic principles of the 1969 White Paper” . Wait a minute,
you may say – does this mean the CCF believed in White Paperesque policy? Yes
would be the answer and the fact is it would be their stance right up to the formation
of the NDP. Additionally, with the founding of the CCF, their policy document
titled “Social Planning for Canada,” which heavily would influence CCF policy,
made no mentioned of Indigenous people, their rights, or recognition. In other
words, this new party had no opinion or policy on Indigenous people.
This viewpoint was not just in the
CCF’s provincial wings but also noticeable in the CCF federal party. In the
late 1940s the Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons commenced
hearings on revisions to the Indian Act in 1946. This provided CCF members of
the House with an opportunity to address Indigenous issues. The federal wing,
influenced by its provincial counterpart in Saskatchewan, heavily pushed the
ideals of integration for Indigenous peoples. This was considered only
achievable through education. The revisions to the Indian Act were first
introduced in 1950, with support from the CCF. The revisions were met with
stiff opposition from Indigenous peoples themselves. It would then be withdrawn
and reviewed – returning in 1951.
It was during Bill 267’s
reintroduction to the HOC that the CCF vocally expressed where they stood. CCF
MP William Bryce expressed “I think education is the crux of the question.
Indian children should be educated in the same manner as white children, so
that they will look at things the same way that we do.” The CCF leader at this
time, MJ Coldwell, further emphasized the CCF position on these revisions by
stating “I hope that in the administration of the new act, every attempt will
be made to … enable [Indians] to make a contribution to the cultural life of
our country and which will gradually bring about integration of the Indian
population.” Paternalism reared its head when the CCF MP Joe
Noseworth added “If we are aiming to educate these people, to teach them to
assume responsibility, we must give them some responsibility and not place
these matters entirely in the hands of the minister or the governor in council.”
This comments clearly show that paternalism and eurocentric ideals were alive
and well in the CFF. I
The Birth of the NDP and the Eventual
Rise of ‘Understanding’ … Or Was It?
By the early 1960s there was
discussion of a unification of the ‘left side’ of the Canadian political
spectrum. This would lead to the birth of the NDP by its first official
Convention in July/August 1961 (With its first official member – Walter Pitman
- being elected in a by-election, in my home riding of Peterborough, in 1960).
Throughout the 1960s, with former Saskatchewan Premier Tommy Douglas as its
leader, there was little attention given to Indigenous issues and/or rights. For
instance, at its first Convention in 1961 there was virtually no attention in
the policy document in relation to Indigenous peoples. By its next Convention
in 1963, this would change.
At the NDP’s 1963 convention the
party and its delegates passed policy and constitutional provisions that would
clarify and introduce an NDP view on Indigenous people. This policy paper that the NDP would pass
advocated “the repeal of the Indian Act and the elimination of all government
activities which place Indian people in separate groups; introducing
self-government to reserves; the transfer of responsibility for Indian Affairs
to provincial governments [and] launching an aggressive program for educational
integration …” Additionally, cautionary language accompanied most of the
commitments. The repeal of the Indian Act was to take place at a pace
commensurate with the needs and desires of Indian people, and the transfer of
responsibility to the provinces was to take place providing such transfers
accords with the desires of the Indigenous peoples. Other then this policy, the
NDP would have nothing to say or add on Indigenous rights, recognition, or
policy until the introduction of the White Paper in 1969.
As already stated, the White Paper
was brought forth by the Liberal government
of Pierre Elliott Trudeau. The astonishing thing when you compare the
1969 White Paper to that of the NDP’s 1963 ‘Indian Policy Paper’ is that they
are pretty much identical. Both papers pushed for assimilation and
integration into the Canadian state with all services coming through the
provinces as is done for Canadians. One would think the NDP would have been
happy to see their idea being implemented by the government of the day would
you not? However, today the White Paper is consistently used against the
Liberal Party of Canada by the NDP and others on the left. But wait, how could
this be when the NDP had suggested the same actions in 1963. They must have
changed their opinion prior to 1969 then you may think. The answer: not at all.
When the White Paper was introduced
in 1969, the NDP applauded it. Responding to the Bill The NDP Indian Affairs
Critic, Howard, stood up and stated”
“The
Honourable Member and I had the opportunity in 1959, 1960,
and 1961 of participating
in the joint Senate and House of Commons
Committee on Indian Affairs
… the report of which committee contained
the same ideas and concepts
that the Minister has now outlined. Even
though it has taken some
period of time to get a Cabinet Minister to agree
with those concepts, it is
still welcomed.”
By the next day,
it became apparent that Indigenous leaders and Indigenous people – specifically
First Nations, were heavily opposed to the White Paper. Had the NDP done their
own consultation in the 1960s, they would have found this out during their own
policy developments of 1963. However, they had not done any form of consultation or meaningful assessment at that time. With the increasing opposition of Indigenous
leaders the NDP position on the White Paper now had grown quiet and frosty.
This did not stop some NDP from showing a paternalistic viewpoint, as in any
party at the time. The NDP MP for Winnipeg North, David
Orlikow, stated
“I
hope to see the day when the Indian Affairs branch as we
have known it, and more
sadly the Indians have known it, will disappear.
But none of these things
can take place unless and until the Indian people
themselves want them to take
place and are prepared to give their
co-operation and support”
This mentality is no different then other politicians of the time who, at points of due stress over the topic have uttered "what do you want from us" and "why cant you just integrate," etc. However, due to demand from Indigenous voices the NDP did a 180 degree change on its viewpoint and turned against the White Paperesque policies. This was a good thing, however one must acknowledge the fact it wasn't until after the White Paper was introduced that they started to think more when relating to Indigenous policy - per se.
Conclusion of Part 1:
I will give
credit to the NDP for learning some of the lessons on Indigenous rights,
nations, and jurisdiction the day after the White Paper was introduced in 1969.
However, it must be acknowledged that by 1971 the Liberals began to also
distance themselves from the White Paper – permanently shelving it in 1973
following the legal ruling of the Calder Decision.
With
this review I must express that when pulling up the nasty history of a
political party: Those who live in glass houses, should be wary of casting stones.
The standpoint of the NDP on assimilationist policy for Indigenous people had
changed after the White Paper event – with the Liberals dragging their feet at first.
However, did the NDP truly come to the ‘light-bulb moment’ on Indigenous people
post-1969? The Answer again, as was the case for the Liberals, is not entirely and will be further detailed in
Part two of this write-up – The Constitutional Crises: 1979-1992.
Sources For Part 1: (As this is a blog I did not directly cite or list specifics other then the source of my Information):
Kieth Archer and Alan Whitehorn, Political Activists: The NDP in Convention (Toronto: Oxford
University Press, 1997)
Laurie Barron, Walking
in Indian Moccasins: The Native Policies of Tommy Douglas and the CCF (Vancouver:
UBC Press, 1997)
J. Brennen, ed., Building
the Co-operative Commonwealth (Regina: Canadian Plains Research Center,
1984)
The Federal Programme
of the New Democratic Party, Adopted by its Founding Convention, Ottawa, 31
July – 4 August 1961.
The Federal Programme
of the New Democratic Party, Adopted by its Founding Convention, Ottawa, 31
July – 4 August 1961, and by its Second Federal Convention, Regina, 6-9 August
1963
Gad Horowitz, Canadian
Labour in Politics (Toronto: Univeristy of Toronto Press, 1968)
House of Commons, Minutes, 27 February 1951
House of Commons, Minutes, 2 April 1951
House of Commons, Minutes, 15 May 1951
House of Commons, Minutes, 6 March 1969
David C. Hawkes ed., Aboriginal
Peoples and Government Responsibility: Exploring Federal and Provincial Roles
(Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1991)
D. Laycock, Populism
and Democratic Thought in the Canadian Prairies 1910 – 1945 (Toronto:
University of Toronto Press, 1990).
James M. Pitsula, “The Saskatchewan CCF Government and
Treaty Indians, 1944-1964,” Canadian
Historical Review LXXV. 1 (1994): 21-52)
Frank Tester, Paule McNicoll, and Jessie Forsyth, “ With an
Ear to the Ground: The CCF/NDP and Aboriginal Policy in Canada, 1926-1993, in Journal of Canadian Studies, 34.1 (1999)
Sally Weaver, Making
Canadian Indian Policy: The Hidden
Agenda 1968-1970 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981)
No comments:
Post a Comment