To the Editor:
Recently NDP leader Dwain Lingenfelter announced a policy proposal for natural resource revenue sharing between the province of Saskatchewan and First Nations governments. (He failed to take account of off-reserve Indians and Metis.)
Lingenfelter noted the disparities between basic public services on and off reserve. Statistics Canada and former Auditor-General Sheila Fraser have also noted infrastructure discrepancies between reserve communities, Aboriginal citizens, and "other" Canadians.
Discouragingly, Premier and Saskatchewan Party leader Brad Wall responded negatively, demonstrating ignorance of the historical context for Aboriginal poverty and Saskatchewan's wealth. Implying that the economic status quo is already based in equality, he said: "We fundamentally reject the notion of a special natural resource revenue sharing deal for First Nations or any other group in the province."
Then Greg Ottenbreit, Sask Party candidate for Yorkton, in response to a question about such revenue sharing, made comments in an all-candidates forum that are at best mindbogglingly stupid. The CBC reported a news release from Ottenbreit apologized for the comments, saying "I don't remember my exact words, but I said something like, 'What I have been told by some of my First Nations friends is that sometimes when there are handouts or the money comes free and easy, it can be used for alcohol and drugs'."
Given the economic evidence, there is no "free and easy" money for Aboriginal people, and the difficulties in Aboriginal communities are caused by the same colonial processes that make Saskatchewan so wealthy.
The fact is, Saskatchewan is one of the wealthiest jurisdictions in Canada, itself one of the wealthiest states in the world. That wealth is based primarily on expropriation of Aboriginal lands and exploitation of its resources. Those measures were accomplished by governments who legislatively and by force prohibited Aboriginal political and economic equality for nearly a century. One consequence has been the structural institutionalization of what can only be described as "white privilege," so often mistaken for merit. The wealth has not been "shared" with First Nations and Metis peoples, and quality of life indices demonstrate the disparities. The third-world poverty and social immiseration in Aboriginal communities has been noted by several United Nations committees as constituting violation of Canada's obligations at international law, and of the human rights of Aboriginal peoples. And provincial governments hide behind the fig leaf of constitutional jurisdictional arguments to avoid spending on status Indians.
Lingenfelter's proposal is a welcome initiative, much in need of detail and budgetary commitment. The erasure of Aboriginal marginalization and poverty should be a matter of collective political commitment. It is essential for justice, and it is a net benefit to our society. All our political leaders should bring themselves up to speed on this most urgent item on the provincial agenda.
Joyce A. Green, Regina, SK.
