Yes, Chief Atleo, it's time we talked

AFN National Chief Shawn Atleo has an op-ed on the CBC website, posted this evening, where it appears his organization is debuting its "priorities" regarding this election.  They are further outlined in this .pdf file from the AFN website.  This article from the Toronto Star yesterday served as a good primer.

Who exactly does he want to talk to?  In this article, he isn't directly addressing any one individual or organization or constituency.

My thoughts:

1. Most Native people do not vote.  If we believe our treaties are valid, should we be voting for the "side" that we're hoping will acknowledge their end of the bargain?  When Canada spent the 90's fighting with the US over softwood lumber, Canadians weren't expected to vote in US elections.  Same thing.

2. Regular ol' Canadians don't know enough about our issues, particularly in a tangible way that forces them to demand their government take those issues seriously.  (See that AFN document for what those issues are.)  For example, everyone involved will agree that improving our eduation rates should be an enormous priority, yet nobody seems concerned that increased funding for educating Aborginal people has been capped at 2% since 1996.

During that time, our population has exploded, due both to a growing youth population and the reinstatement of "status" Indians under Bill C-31 and (coming soon) the McIvor decision.  People are being turned away, and walking away from opportunity, in probably every reserve.  Imagine how many people don't even apply for education funding because they've heard so many stories about others who've been denied it?

3. I would argue that Canadians in general do not seem concerned because they have no idea.

4. I use the word "tangible" in point number 2 because it seems important that we should be humanizing our issues.  People -- Canadian voters -- become concerned about an issue when they know somebody who's directly affected by it.  Not when we're described to them as faceless, unidentifiable populations: those are easy to ignore.

In a sort of related note, I was browsing the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation website yesterday and was surprised to see profiles of bursary award recipients from this area.  There are Native people from Bancroft and Consecon -- direct neighbours to voters (and may even be voters themselves) -- who are affected by what I've taken to labeling in this post "our issues."  We get so caught up in "Indians on the reserve" or "homeless Indians on the streets in Toronto" that it's easy to forget that we're everywhere else, too.

5. The AFN has always had an undefined relationship with its stakeholders.  To the Canadian government: is it a lobby organization?  To Native people in Canada: does it represent us or only our chiefs who elect the national chief?

During this federal election, and long after it's over for that matter, I believe the concerns of the AFN will not be heard because even it doesn't know -- as this article asks, ironically -- who it wants to talk to.  On the surface, the AFN has no political clout for two reasons: it's entirely funded by whichever government is in power, and it has no direct relationship with regular ol' Indians.

Will it ever be self-funded?  I don't see how.  I just don't see it.  Who or what organization would contribute to it?  We're not known for our vast wealth, or disposable incomes.  Nearly all of our organizations are "human services" in nature and entirely reliant upon government or charitable donations themselves.  There is, strangely (or not), no self-directed organization of Aboriginal business owners and professionals.  Out in the big world we're an uncoordinated group, many of whom do not choose to identify as Aboriginal ... because of "the effects of residential schools" (see my previous blog post regarding what this phrase actually signifies).

Due to point number 1 (above), the AFN will never be able to tell Canadian politicians that we will en masse make change at the polls.

So what can the AFN do?

It can organize us.  They're heading in the right direction with these virtual summits (next one scheduled for this Thursday; video intro here), but there's an insular nature to these events.  The point shouldn't be for Atleo to take what he learns from these summits so he can further speak to them on our behalf.  If the AFN wanted to truly create a PR opportunity now, this summit would only be considered "research," in the sense that it would be the starting point for developing an awareness campaign that:

a) tells stories about specific individuals -- humanizing us -- to the greater world.

b) asks us regular ol' Indians to help spread those stories about specific individuals.

c) provides us an opportunity -- and an avenue (this is the Internet 2.0 right?) -- for us to tell our own stories in relation to these issues.

I believe Canadians truly would support us, but they're not being given the tools to do it.  They don't know why they should demand more of their elected officials.  And we're not helping when we only talk to politicians and each other.  Or when we rely on one single individual to represent us all.