Post on 14-Dec-2015
POVERTY, EXCLUSION AND DISCRIMINATION: THE LEGACY OF COLONIALISM
First Nations Health Forum, Hotel Pur, February 24 to 26
Poverty in the world
1%: percentage of the population that possesses more than half of the world’s wealth
The income of 80 of the wealthiest people in the world is equal to that of 3.5 billion of the poorest people…
Poverty and inequality: issues of rights
The issue of poverty is essentially a human rights issue.
Therefore, poverty should be defined as a denial of basic human rights.
Continued
Charters, at both the national and international levels, have been developed to protect citizens from all forms of systemic and social discrimination.
It has been proven that poverty is closely associated with different forms of discrimination.
At the national level
The Royal Proclamation of 1763 Section 25 of the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms (cultural rights) Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982
(ancestral rights and/or treaty rights) Quebec Charter of Human Rights and
Freedoms (Chapter IV)
At the international level
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD)
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Disparities between First Nations and non-aboriginals
The Community Well-being Index (CWI)
Canada
0
50
100
Ab
ori
gin
es
Tra
nsfe
rs
EarningsAfter Taxes
Individual
Family
Services
Empl
oym
ent
Part
icip
atio
n Activity
35 to 64 yr
25 to 34 yr
15 to 24 yr
Feminity
DependancyMed
ian
Age
0 t
o 1
4 y
r Population
EducationActivity
Income
Community of Opitciwan (n = 1785)1 785)
0
50
100
Ab
ori
gin
es
Tra
nsfe
rs
EarningsAfter Taxes
Individual
Family
Services
Empl
oym
ent
Part
icip
atio
n Activity
35 to 64 yr
25 to 34 yr
15 to 24 yr
Feminity
DependancyMed
ian
Age
0 t
o 1
4 y
r Population
EducationActivity
Income
Community of Wemotaci (n = 1075)
0
50
100
Ab
ori
gin
es
Tra
nsfe
rs
EarningsAfter Taxes
Individual
Family
Services
Empl
oym
ent
Part
icip
atio
n Activity
35 to 64 yr
25 to 34 yr
15 to 24 yr
Feminity
DependancyMed
ian
Age
0 t
o 1
4 y
r Population
EducationActivity
Income
Community of Manawan (n = 1845)
0
50
100
Ab
ori
gin
es
Tra
nsfe
rs
EarningsAfter Taxes
Individual
Family
Services
Empl
oym
ent
Part
icip
atio
n Activity
35 to 64 yr
25 to 34 yr
15 to 24 yr
Feminity
DependancyMed
ian
Age
0 t
o 1
4 y
r Population
EducationActivity
Income
Community of Misipawistick (n = 1140)
0
50
100
Ab
ori
gin
es
Tra
nsfe
rs
EarningsAfter Taxes
Individual
Family
Services
Empl
oym
ent
Part
icip
atio
n Activity
35 to 64 yr
25 to 34 yr
15 to 24 yr
Feminity
DependancyMed
ian
Age
0 t
o 1
4 y
r Population
EducationActivity
Income
Municipality of Saint-Séverin (n = 860)
0
50
100
Ab
ori
gin
es
Tra
nsfe
rs
EarningsAfter Taxes
Individual
Family
Services
Empl
oym
ent
Part
icip
atio
n Activity
35 to 64 yr
25 to 34 yr
15 to 24 yr
Feminity
DependancyMed
ian
Age
0 t
o 1
4 y
r Population
EducationActivity
Income
Municipality of Saint-Roch-de-Mékinac (n = 325)
0
50
100
Ab
ori
gin
es
Tra
nsfe
rs
EarningsAfter Taxes
Individual
Family
Services
Empl
oym
ent
Part
icip
atio
n Activity
35 to 64 yr
25 to 34 yr
15 to 24 yr
Feminity
DependancyMed
ian
Age
0 t
o 1
4 y
r Population
EducationActivity
Income
Food insecurity
Food security65.1%
Moderate food insecurity9.8%
Severe food insecurity21.4%
Missing data3.7%*
Index of food safety for individuals living with children
* Data to be interpreted with caution (coefficient of variation > 16,6% and < 33,3%)Source: RHS 2008
Continued
Males Females0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
14,1% 13,0%
12,8%9,7%
Index of individual food security by gender
Severe food insecurity
Moderate food insecurity
Source: RHS 2008
Continued
Zone 1 (urban) Zone 2 (rural) Zone 3 (isolated) Zone 4 (difficult to access)0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
11,4% 15,0%9,5%
34,4%10,3%
16,7%
11,5%*
4,6%*
Index of individual food security by geographic isolation
Severe food insecurity
Moderate food insecurity
* Data to be interpreted with caution (coefficient of variation > 16,6% and < 33,3%)Source: RHS 2008
Continued
Food security65.1%
Moderate food insecurity9.8%
Severe food insecurity21.4%
Missing data3.7%*
Index of food safety for individuals living with children
* Data to be interpreted with caution (coefficient of variation > 16,6% and < 33,3%)Source: RHS 2008
Continued
Zone 1 (urban) Zone 2 (rural) Zone 3 (isolated) Zone 4 (difficult to access)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
10.3% 8.5%* 7.5%* 10.8%*
17.2%27.7%
18.1%*
38.9%
Index of food safety for individuals living with children by geographic isolation
Severe food insecurity
Moderate food insecurity
* Data to be interpreted with caution (coefficient of variation > 16,6% and < 33,3%)Source: RHS 2008
Continued
Males Females0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
10.1%* 9.6%
22.9%20.1%
Index of food safety for individuals living with children by gender
Severe food insecurity
Moderate food insecurity
* Data to be interpreted with caution (coefficient of variation > 16,6% and < 33,3%)Source: RHS 2008
Why?
Government expenditures
The weight of history
The root of the problem
European colonization of North America From independence to dependence: the fur trade The decline of the fur trade The end of strategic alliances
Imposition of the Indian Act: racism and structural discrimination
The “Indian problem” and the solution: assimilation Integrate Aboriginal peoples into the new economic
and political order: alliance between the State, capital and clergy
Cheap labour for agriculture and the natural resources industry?
A series of amendments to the Indian Act: the example of 1911
Continued“Kill the Indian in the child ”
Settlement and Christianization: the development of reserves and Indian residential schools
Political and cultural incarceration
The notion of “inferior” peoples
Geographic boundaries: the creation of reserves
Social and economic exclusion: limited access to resources
Political exclusion: denial of the right of self-determination
Attempts at assimilation
The objective of assimilating Aboriginal peoples was far from hidden.
“Our objective 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, that is the whole objet of this Bill” - 1920, Duncan Campbell Scott, Deputy Superintendant of Indian Affairs from 1913 to 1932 (concerning the amendment to the Indian Act).
Parallel between Apartheid and the reserve system
Apartheid (Afrikaans word meaning “separation or apartness”) was a policy of segregated development that affected populations based on racial or ethnic criteria in defined geographic areas. With apartheid, territorial connection and social status depended on the racial status of the individual.
The concept of apartheid involved the political, economic and geographic division of the territory of South Africa and its population broken down into a hierarchy of four distinct racial groups. The black population of South Africa was confined to limited geographic enclaves known as Bantoustans.
A prelude to the White Paper?
“Indian reserves in territories under the jurisdiction of provincial governments constituted solitary splendours where isolated groups lived, subjected to federal government jurisdiction. The solitary splendour of their isolation was geographic, economic, political and cultural, and the special legal regime based on the Indian Act reinforced this isolation.” [unofficial translation] - Hawthorn-Tremblay - A Survey of
Contemporary Indians of Canada, 1967.
1969 White Paper
In 1969, the federal government published the Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy. The goal of the federal government was to address discrimination towards First Nations by absorbing them into the body politic of Canada. For First Nations, it was another policy aimed at their assimilation. The paper recommended: The abolition of reserves and the status of
“Indian” The administrative takeover of communities by
the provinces
From self-sufficiency to dependence: some examples
The Naskapi, people of the caribou: the undesirable consequences of the fur trade
Exclusive-rights areas of the North Shore
The famine of Ekuanitshit (Mingan) (1873)
The Malecite of Viger
Aboriginal farmers of Western Canada
Illegal cultural practices (potlach)
Beaver reserves: restrictions on this right
Development of the Gouin Reservoir (La Loutre Dam) (1914)
Exclusive-rights areas of the North Shore: examples
The appropriation of salmon rivers and the establishment of exclusive-rights areas:
Mishtashipu (Moisie River)
Mingan River
Development of the Mauricie region in the 19th and 20th centuries
Logging operations in the region
Massive influx of Anglo-Saxon capital
Emergence of private clubs
Construction of the railway
Waterpower development
Waterpower development
In 1911, the Hudson’s Bay Company abandoned its post in Kikendash and rebuilt it in Opitciwan.
Difficult beginnings: flu and measles epidemics
In 1914, the Quebec Streams Commission enters Nitaksinan and begins preliminary work to built the La Loutre Dam.
Continued
In 1915, the Fraser Brace Company began to build the dam: The Atikamekw were not informed, consulted
or compensated for work that would transform their ancestral lands forever.
The dam was completed in December 1917. Rising waters forced the displacement of the
Atikamekw once again because of the flooding of Opitciwan.
Promises regarding reconstruction would be broken many times.
Continued
The construction of the dam and flooding of the land deprived the Atikamekw of their resources:
Banks along the reservoir were inaccessible. Navigation was dangerous. Water pollution was significant and aquatic
wildlife threatened. The work also had a negative impact on the
fur trade, trapping and hunting. More than 20 years would go by before the
issue of hunting territories was resolved.
La Loutre Dam
Continued
Continued
Log drive on the St-Maurice
Discrimination today:
Reports by the Auditor General of Canada
Housing on reserves (2003) Drinking water in First Nations communities (2005) Management of programs intended for First
Nations (2006) First Nations child and family services (2008) Land management and environmental protection
(2009) Programs for First Nations on reserves (2011)
Continued
United Nations reports Visit by Miloon Khotari, UN Special
Rapporteur, on housing (2007) Visit by Olivier De Schutter, UN
Special Rapporteur, on the right to food (2012)
Visit by James Anaya, UN Special Envoy, on the rights of indigenous peoples (2013)
Tools to address the problem
Community development
Community development approach
Carry out WITH members of communities: mobilization and consultation projects
Solidarity alliance between the MESS and the FNQLHSSC
First-line services Agreement with Avenir d’enfants and the FNQLHSSC FNQLEDC pilot project on community action Development of a social economy Partnerships with national organizations Development within regions (MRC, etc.) Action research project on poverty