![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Chief Theresa Spence began her hunger strike on the side of the angels. As we grapple with our collective guilt and shame over past horrors like residential schools and sexual abuse, almost all of us are willing to concede that she has some legitimate grievances. But sadly, she is likely soon to be consorting with the angels (not to mention the martyrs of yesteryear) if she persists in her futile quest to starve herself until a weeks-long meeting with Harper (that would be Stephen, not Elijah) actually takes place.
Although I'm certainly no fan of Stephen Harper and his omnibus bills, it looks to me from what I've read as if the portions of Bill 45 pertaining to aboriginal lands actually represent a reasonable compromise between, on the one hand, leaving alone land currently owned by small private landholders (remember that poor farmer who was hounded off his land in Dwyer Hill when JTF2 became his neighbour?) and public lands that are heavily used (like the core of Algonquin Park) and, on the other hand, ceding to First Nations land that is NOT currently occupied or heavily used by the public, or that IS privately owned and occupied but some sort of reasonable compensation or land-swap can be arranged. All that said, the PROCESS can be every bit as important as the product, or result - in this case it is probably more so - and I think it behooves Stephen Harper, perhaps with a little help from his friend Shawn Atleo (as was suggested by Michael Van Tandt in his column in the Citizen) to at least arrange a brief humanitarian visit with Chief Spence and offer concerns for her health (much as Pierre Trudeau did back when his pal Jacques Hébert was on a hunger strike over the cancellation of Katimavik) and outline a few of the steps his government plans to take towards positive and fruitful consultations with aboriginal chiefs in the New Year.
Meanwhile, Chief Spence should agree to meet with the aboriginal affairs Minister; she should recognize that she is just one chief amongst many, with varying viewpoints; and she should continue to emphasize that she does not endorse some of the Idle No More demonstrations that have seriously inconvenienced everyday citizens and travellers who are not direct parties to her dispute and whom she is alienating and causing to lose sympathy with her cause.
Although I'm certainly no fan of Stephen Harper and his omnibus bills, it looks to me from what I've read as if the portions of Bill 45 pertaining to aboriginal lands actually represent a reasonable compromise between, on the one hand, leaving alone land currently owned by small private landholders (remember that poor farmer who was hounded off his land in Dwyer Hill when JTF2 became his neighbour?) and public lands that are heavily used (like the core of Algonquin Park) and, on the other hand, ceding to First Nations land that is NOT currently occupied or heavily used by the public, or that IS privately owned and occupied but some sort of reasonable compensation or land-swap can be arranged. All that said, the PROCESS can be every bit as important as the product, or result - in this case it is probably more so - and I think it behooves Stephen Harper, perhaps with a little help from his friend Shawn Atleo (as was suggested by Michael Van Tandt in his column in the Citizen) to at least arrange a brief humanitarian visit with Chief Spence and offer concerns for her health (much as Pierre Trudeau did back when his pal Jacques Hébert was on a hunger strike over the cancellation of Katimavik) and outline a few of the steps his government plans to take towards positive and fruitful consultations with aboriginal chiefs in the New Year.
Meanwhile, Chief Spence should agree to meet with the aboriginal affairs Minister; she should recognize that she is just one chief amongst many, with varying viewpoints; and she should continue to emphasize that she does not endorse some of the Idle No More demonstrations that have seriously inconvenienced everyday citizens and travellers who are not direct parties to her dispute and whom she is alienating and causing to lose sympathy with her cause.
