Wow. Big news out of Canada. Or is it? On November 12th, the Government of Canada formally endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Here’s the official declaration, as given by Canada’s Ambassador to the United Nations, John McNee, to the President of the UN General Assembly, Joseph Deiss.
Call me a skeptic, call me a cynic, but something just doesn’t feel right with Prime Minister Harper’s perfect 180 degree half-pirouette on this issue.
Maybe it’s because the endorsement is so riddled with “escape hatches.” Or maybe it’s because of the copious amounts of political grandstanding which saturate the endorsement that makes it hard to take seriously. Don’t get me wrong – I appreciate the sentiment, but this seems to me, right now at least, as merely a political move. On that note, perhaps this is my only opportunity to cite the lyrics of the 80s hair metal band, “Cinderella,” on Turtle Talk, and by god, I’m going to take it.
Woke up this morning on the wrong side of bed
I got this feeling like a train’s running through my head
Turned on my radio to the same old song
Some big mouth talking trying to tell us where the world went wrong
But all this talk of peace and love
It’s only for the news
Cause everytime you trust someone
You end up getting screwed
The more things change
The more they stay the same
Everyone’s your brother till you turn the other way
The more things change
The more they stay the same
All we need’s a miracle to take us all away from the pain…
One commentator has suggested that the endorsement was done to garner some Aboriginal votes in the next election. But I don’t believe Aboriginal people have ever melded into any effective type of voting bloc, so that’s likely not it.
In trying to track down an answer, I’ll just provide a cursory look at the actual text of Canada’s endorsement and offer play-by-play commentary and rhetorical questions.
“The Government of Canada today formally endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in a manner fully consistent with Canada’s Constitution and laws.”
So the UNDRIP is endorsed against the framework of the already existing Constitution and laws? The same ones which have proven over the centuries to be ineffective at protecting Aboriginal rights in the first place? Hmmm. This does not bode well.
“The Declaration is an aspirational document . . . . “
By endorsing the Declaration, Canada is only aspiring to meet its standards and requirements? Who determines if those goals are met? What happens if Canada fails?
“Although the Declaration is a non-legally binding document that does not reflect customary international law nor change Canadian laws, our endorsement gives us the opportunity to reiterate our commitment to continue working in partnership with Aboriginal peoples in creating a better Canada.”
I think this paragraph is critical; the Declaration is not legally binding and does change existing Canadian laws. Isn’t that the whole point? If ineffective laws and policies are not going to be changed to be in accordance with the Declaration, then what’s the purpose of endorsing the Declaration in the first place? Harper seems to want to have his cake and eat it too.
After some (omitted) self-congratulatory puffery, there is an interesting sentence which requires closer inspection.
“The Government’s vision is a future in which Aboriginal families and communities are healthy, safe, self-sufficient and prosperous within a Canada where people make their own decisions, manage their own affairs and make strong contributions to the country as a whole.”
Could the words “make their own decisions, manage their own affairs . . . .” be alluding to a possible acknowledgement of substantial forthcoming Aboriginal self-government schemes? On the surface it may seem possible, but it is watered down with the preface “within a Canada…” and the ending, “to the country as a whole.” Coupled with the fact that the terms “familes” and “communites” are used, rather than “Nations,” the entire paragraph is made impotent.
“In 2007, at the time of the vote during the United Nations General Assembly, and since, Canada placed on record its concerns with various provisions of the Declaration, including provisions dealing with lands, territories and resources; free, prior and informed consent when used as a veto; self-government without recognition of the importance of negotiations; intellectual property; military issues; and the need to achieve an appropriate balance between the rights and obligations of Indigenous peoples, States and third parties. These concerns are well known and remain.”
This paragraph is also incredibly significant. Harper’s government reiterates that it has placed, on the record, its concerns on numerous pieces of the Declaration, including (but not limited to) land, resources, and self-government. These three items are the holy trinity for Aboriginal peoples around the world. So while Harper endorses the UN Declaration with one side of his mouth, the other side maintains concerns with the true substance of what the Declaration is meant to stand for.
Again, why would Harper endorse the Declaration if he’s not going to fully endorse the heart of it?
The answer to that can possibly be gleaned from an analysis of the endorsement from a purely mathematical standpoint. Of the 16 paragraphs contained in it, 13 contain material which boasts of Canada’s alleged, already existing actions, progress, progressive policies, and honorable commitment to the Aboriginal people within the borders of Canada. That boils down to an incredible 81.25%. Thus, it seems, Canada’s endorsement of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is rather, an endorsement of the way things are in Canada, not the way things should be.
In closing, I’d like to quote former President George W. Bush when he stated, “Fool me once, shame on … shame on you. It fool me. We can’t get fooled again.”
Turtle Talk 