Residential Schools Gun Registry Gun Registry Again State of Literacy First Nations Education
Hon. Nick G. Sibbeston: Honourable senators, good news has arrived in the announcement of Minister Jim Prentice in the House of Commons yesterday. He stated that a final Indian residential school settlement agreement has been approved by all the parties.
Minister Prentice is referring to the churches, the legal representatives of former students, the Assembly of First Nations, other Aboriginal organizations and, of course, the federal government.
I commend the Conservative government and Mr. Prentice, in particular, for bringing this agreement to its final conclusion. I know that Grand Chief Phil Fontaine has made it his goal and objective to initiate the process and to work with the two governments to reach a final agreement. Former Justice Iacobucci has also had an important hand in initially studying the issue, then bringing all parties together to work toward a final solution.
There is still one step to go. The court jurisdictions throughout our country must give final approval, but I believe that is a formality.
The government has announced that elders can also apply immediately for initial payments of $8,000. The website has a simple three-page application form that elderly people can fill out. My office is helping people in this process.
Some of my colleagues may still wonder: What is this all about; why is there a $2.1 billion settlement; and why is there a need for the federal government to deal with the issue of Indian residential schools in our country.
The Catholic and Anglican Churches were the first to provide residential schools as early as the 1820s. The first government involvement in residential schools was in 1884. There were 130 residential schools in every province and territory except Newfoundland, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island.
Most of these residential schools closed in the mid-1970s and the last one was in 1996. Tens of thousands of Aboriginal people have gone through these residential schools. Today, it is estimated that there are 80,000 former students still alive and the average age is 60.
In the Northwest Territories, where I come from, the residential school that I went to, the Sacred Heart School, was started by the oblates and the Grey Nuns in 1858. We have had residential schools in our part of the country for about 150 years.
In 1949, when I was six years old, my mother sent me to residential school. I stayed there for six years. I have cousins and friends who were there for 10 years without going home. This was very traumatic and difficult.
Hon. Nick G. Sibbeston: Honourable senators, I wish to state the northern view on the recent government announcement of an amnesty on long-gun registration. Most people of the North never supported the gun registry and the licensing system to buy guns and shells.
To illustrate my point, a few years ago when the gun registry issue was in the news, I visited a small community. There I visited an elderly man, a hunter and trapper in his 90s. He asked me whether he, in fact, had to register his gun. I said: "Yes. Mr. Chrétien wants you to register your guns. If you had a chance to speak face-to-face with Mr. Chrétien, what would you tell him?" He said: "I am an old man. I have hunted and trapped all my life, ever since I was 10 years old. I shot hundreds of moose and other game, and I have never aimed that gun at anybody else. I have never hurt anybody. I make a living. The gun is my tool."
Another elderly hunter and trapper in the same community had to buy shells one day. He was told, at this trading place where he had traded his furs for all of his life, that he could not buy shells because he did not have an FAC.
These examples illustrate the impracticality, inconvenience and infringement of the lives and liberty of the people in the North who live in a very tough country and depend on their guns to eke out a living.
Honourable senators, I am one senator from a remote part of our country who applauds this government's stance on the gun registry. The sooner we get rid of it, the better. Long live northern people's liberty to hunt, trap and fish without restrictions.
Honourable senators, on Thursday Senator Milne spoke about the gun registry and mentioned the high level of gun ownership in the North. She also noted that death by guns on a per capita basis is higher than it is in the United States. Both of these facts are true, but the latter is not a result of the former. Newfoundland, for example, has the third highest gun ownership but the third lowest rate of firearm deaths. The North also has unacceptably high rates of suicide, violent crime and, especially deplorable, domestic abuse.
Honourable senators, the gun registry has not and cannot reduce these statistics. There is an underlying social reality beneath these conditions. The legacy of colonialism, racism, residential schools, alcohol and drug abuse are the factors that we must address. In some areas of the North, there are severe social problems that the long-gun registry will not resolve.
Guns are central to the traditional way of life practised by Aboriginal people for generations. We use them to hunt for our food and to protect us from predators not only in the bush but also in our communities. In my hometown, it is not uncommon to see bears frequently cross our yards throughout the summer, so it is necessary to have a gun handy. People in our communities know that preserving our traditional way of life is vital if we are to overcome the social problems we face. In reality, guns are not the problem in the North; they are part of the solution. The gun registry was designed for southern people with southern problems. It may be that they need it. In the North, however, it has been a failure. It has interfered with traditional lifestyles and generated anger and defiance.
I am glad the long gun registry is being cancelled. I hope the government replaces it with something sensible — and something that is good for the North; something that will also apply to the North. That is the reality of our situation. We have such diversity in the North and it is so different from the South that we need to deal differently with the gun situation.
Honourable senators, I want to say something about the issue of literacy from a northern perspective. I have come to appreciate that the Senate is a place where we come from all regions of the country and express our concerns. Often, I am discovering, decisions that are made by government have the big majority in mind, the southern centres in mind, and so I want to show how a decision that was made by government concerning literacy has an effect in the far reaches of the country in the Northwest Territories.
Over the past few weeks, many senators have stood up and expressed their concern about the government cutting programs for literacy. On the other side, I heard Senator LeBreton say that the cuts were only to regional and local programs because the government will focus on national objectives. She said the government will spend $81 million over two years to meet these national objectives. I wonder what they mean by national objectives. How will these national objectives better the people, particularly the Aboriginal people, in communities that have concerns about literacy?
The whole thrust of government, it seems to me, is to help Aboriginal people enter Canadian society. Everyone is concerned about Aboriginal people. They are concerned about the difficulties that Aboriginal people have and one may even say that the biggest social problem, something that is on the conscience of Canadians, is the Aboriginal situation. A lot of effort has gone into helping Aboriginal people with housing, education and so forth. I am trying to show how a government, sitting so far away in Ottawa, affects people in the small remote communities of the North when the government makes decisions to cut money for literacy.
My understanding is that the Conservative government has cut funding for literacy programs in our country. The $17.7 million reduction is a real cut. Spending in other areas does not mean that real damage has not been done to good and important programs. In the Northwest Territories, $600,000 was cut from three organizations who deliver literacy programs to people in the communities. The Northwest Territories Literacy Council, the Federation FrancoTenoise and the Aurora College all had their budgets cuts. Two Aurora college programs in Yellowknife and Inuvik that provide direct training to adults were impacted.
Federation FrancoTenoise will reduce their family literacy programs for francophones and cancel plans to begin offering direct literacy training to adults. For the Northwest Territories Literacy Council, whose budget was cut by nearly 40 per cent, the reductions will affect their ability to train literacy workers and develop resources for literacy training that are directly relevant to northerners. At the same time, they will withdraw their support to small Aboriginal communities that are recently getting organized to deliver literacy programs to these citizens.
Honourable senators must appreciate the situation in the north. We have Aboriginal people who are emerging from the traditional way of life of hunting, trapping and fishing. This process has been going on since the 1960s, with people moving into towns, trying to change their way of life; working in jobs in towns instead of on the land. They come to town and they make sure their young children are educated in English.
We have made good progress, but the problem is that the cuts in literacy programs will affect adults: people who are 30, 40 and 50 years old. We have development coming to the North. We have the prospects of a pipeline. Training is taking place. There is safety training and training how to work on rigs. among other things. All these courses are given in English, which makes it difficult for those who do not know English.
This literacy program in the Northwest Territories was aimed at helping these people who are not in school, who are adults. I am reminded of my uncle who, years ago in the 1930s and 1940s, went to school to obtain a grade 3 education. He said that he went to the University of Fort Providence and received a grade 3 education. At the time, grade 3 was sufficient to make a living in the North. You could hunt and trap and talk sufficient English. This was enough and he made a good life hunting, trapping and eventually working in town. However, grade 3 now is not enough to make a living in the North, with the industrial development that is coming. That is the problem.
We are talking about a $600,000 cut from the literacy program, a cut that will have a direct impact on teaching English to adults so that they can get a job. The government says that it will direct money toward a national objective, but the teaching that needs to be done must take place in the community, right on the ground. That is why the literacy program is so important. It is for that reason that I have to express my concern as to the impact of this cut on the people in the North.
The impact of these cuts was particularly felt in the Northwest Territories, as I am sure was the case in small jurisdictions. The $600,000 cut in the Northwest Territories represented 3.5 per cent of the total program reduction; that is a big burden for a region with only 45,000 people.
The territorial government and local community governments do not have the resources to take over the programs from which the federal government is withdrawing. These cuts are real cuts, and these organizations will be severely handicapped. Some might have to close programs and shut down altogether.
There are many Aboriginal people in the North who still speak their own language. Our society was based on an oral tradition; literacy was not an issue. However, in the last generation or two, as I said, we have been getting involved in the modern economy. Literacy — that is, the ability to write and read English — is important if we are to be part of modern life. We have no choice.
That is the thinking — that we have no choice but to get on with a modern economy, because hunting and trapping is becoming a very difficult way of life. People recognize they have to get jobs. With the prospect of industrial development coming to the North, it is so important that people be given a chance to learn and write English.
This is why I express my concern. I express my concern in the name of the people in the far reaches of the North who are being affected and who have been affected by the cuts of the government. I want to make the point that government, whoever you are — whether it is a federal Liberal or Conservative government or a territorial government — in the future, when you cut programs, be very sure and know how it is going affect people in the remote parts of the country. I think too many decisions are made with Toronto, Edmonton and the big southern cities in mind, and with not enough thought about the small rural communities in the North.
Honourable colleagues, my concern is sincere. I did not suddenly just decide to speak today. I researched the issue. I obtained information, got some statistics about the organizations that are doing these programs and talked to people that are being affected. I speak truthfully and sincerely today in the hope that in the future, when cuts are being considered, the people in the more remote parts of the country will be kept in mind.
Honourable senators, I am pleased to speak briefly to support Bill C-34.
Honourable senators, Bill C-34 will implement an agreement negotiated between Canada, British Columbia and the First Nations Education Steering Committee, which represents a large number of First Nations in British Columbia. The bill would establish a First Nations education authority to ensure that schools on First Nations would operate at high standards and under the control of First Nations people.
The bill is voluntary. All those First Nations who initially come under the bill are willing participants. Provisions allow other B.C. First Nations to eventually become part of this system. First Nations that choose to take part will no longer be governed by the Indian Act with respect to education. Getting out from under the Indian Act is always a good thing.
The bill represents an important step in improving the lives of Aboriginal people. The importance of having local control over education and particularly of having Aboriginal input into Aboriginal schools cannot be denied.
Aboriginal people do know the importance of education in today's technological society. It is a world of computers and advance science. I have no doubt that Aboriginal people will take their responsibility very seriously.
In the Northwest Territories, the Tlicho people became the first Aboriginals to assume authority over education. This happened way back in the 1960s. Their visionary chief, Chief Jimmy Bruneau, recognized the importance of education early on and said that through education "the Tlicho people could be strong like two people." By controlling their schools they could get the advantage of Western education while maintaining the strength of their own culture and language. This has been a big success and underlies all the accomplishments that the Tlicho people have achieved in the last 40 years.
I am pleased to support this bill and urge senators to give it quick passage so the people of B.C.'s First Nations can get on with the important job of educating their children.