jacee

See "Indian monies" here: https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1428673130728/1428673159469 Your comment that "aboriginal groups should be grateful ..." is disgusting. And it is Canada (not England or France) that has conducted a systematic campaign of genocide, violating every treaty of the Crown, mandating children's attendance at brutal 'Indian' Residential Schools, stealing their land and resources and trust funds, etc. You need to do more homework if you truly wish to understand these issues.

I think most people are understandably appalled, disturbed and 'unsettled' by the conditions on some FN reserves. And I think some politicians, esp Conservative ones, try to convince us that FN themselves are responsible for this. If you fall for that malarky, you are actively avoiding the facts of 150 years of Canada's genocide, including theft of Indigenous lands and resources.

The Charter applies in the sense that we no longer discriminate by race, religion, etc in selecting immigrants or refugees. Arguably, we do discriminate by wealth, education etc but these are not 'protected groups' at this time.

"doing better" at genocide is not something most Canadians would aspire to. :/ Typically, populations subjected to genocidal acts do rebound and grow more quickly when pressures ease. The 'Indian' Residential Schools, arguably the most physically and mentally heinous "acts", have eased up only in recent decades. Now our governments are focusing more on legal extinction - renegotiating treaties and including (illegal) 'extinction' clauses. Mostly our governments just try to extinguish FN by malicious neglect, underfunding, etc.

Your assumptions are wrong: Natives in fact receive less funding per capita than we do for governance, education, health and social services. Regarding where those funds come from, please see my post here, esp the part about Trust Funds starting with: "Canadians who are ... "sick to death not only of hearing about the aboriginal crap, but PAYING for it" ... don't have a very good understanding of Canada, possibly because some politicians mislead them."

" every"?! That's slander. You've provided no evidence to support those accusations.

Metis counts now. http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/indigenous/landmark-supreme-court-decision-metis-non-status-indians-1.3537419 Genocide ... The TRC concluded that "cultural genocide" occurred in Canada, using a term more palatable to Canadians. However, according to the UN, intentional destruction of cultures is genocide: "In the present [UN] Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." Certainly, Canada's intention was the destruction of Indigenous Peoples 'as such', and certainly we did some or all of the "acts" on that list. However, the UN, or its International Courts of Justice have not characterized Canada's treatment of Indigenous Peoples as genocide because they have not been asked to comment or rule on the question of genocide in Canada. But Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Commission was constructed under rules and procedures designed by the UN for Truth Commissions, with oversight by the International Centre for Transitional Justice. https://www.ictj.org/our-work/regions-and-countries/canada Do you think we should ask the International Courts to rule on that question? Protests ... When the government refuses to act appropriately, protest is a necessity. In most cases all they are asking for is what they are legally entitled to - opportunities for collaborative discussion, consultation, or negotiation instead of unilateral decisions imposed on them by our governments. When our governments stop ducking and weaving to avoid their legal responsibilities, perhaps protests won't be as necessary.

I see Sask does have "Tribal Councils", perhaps because some groups span the Canada/US border. I'm not certain whether 300 is the exact number of Indigenous Nations in Canada. They are associated with linguistic groups but not exactly the same perhaps. Eg, from your link: There are 70 First Nations in Saskatchewan, nine Saskatchewan Tribal Councils. The five linguistic groups ... Cree, Dakota, Dene (Chipewyan), Nakota (Assniboine) and Saulteaux. Six treaty groups, and 3 FN communities without treaties. --- Currently, the government does business with 70 FN communities in Sask, over 600 across the country. The number of treaty groups is smaller and likely corresponds somewhat to the traditional Indigenous Nations, although treaties were also associated with geographic areas and (eg) there are Cree peoples in the northern part of several provinces, with different treaties. Any Canadians who are ... "sick to death not only of hearing about the aboriginal crap, but PAYING for it" ... don't have a very good understanding of Canada, possibly because some politicians mislead them. Funds 'paid' to FN communities come from treaty-related trust funds (land and resource revenues) administered by the feds: IT'S NOT OUR MONEY AND IT NEVER WAS! However, because there have been cases where governments fraudulently removed money from trust funds to pay for (eg) infrastructure for us (canals, universities, railroads, etc), such cases are now subject to claims settlements to return those monies to Indigenous trust funds. In other cases, land was fraudulently taken and monies from land sales was fraudulently put into our general revenues instead of into Indigenous trust funds. There are still MANY such outstanding claims. The real fact is that Indigenous Trust Fund monies have been subsidizing us for a very long time, while First Nations communities have been underfunded compared to us, and kept in a state of poverty and deprivation. If politicians are leading you to believe that your taxes are paying for First Nations, they are lying.

Interesting ... A thread about "Native complaints" dominated by a few grumpy nonnatives with a lot of complaints. Lol Of course we all know that the overriding Native complaint is Canada's 150 years of genocide. We know that the troubling circumstances in Indigenous communities today are not a result of Indigenous cultures or people, but a result of Canada's genocidal efforts against those cultures. I hear concerns from everyone here about those circumstances, but we just differ on how to help, how to change things. I think we know that forced assimilation, forcible removal, or imposing anything without their participation are not solutions. It requires collaborative efforts, not unilateral.

Ah. Evading the question. So you are just speculating ... slandering.

"Tribe" is a US term. We don't use it in Canada. The government endorses "nation-to-nation" relationships, because that is the legal reality: Treaties are by definition 'between nations'. Always were. That hasn't changed.

The immigration points system is applied to all aspiring immigrants. The Charter of Rights also applies. My personal preferences of ideology, or yours, are irrelevant.

"We"? I haven't seen any of that. Have you? Which FN? Or are you just making it up? Speculating?

I think you're in the wrong thread. This thread isn't about the plight of women in other countries.

You are making serious allegations of fraud/theft against some?most?all? chiefs. I asked what evidence you have of that? And what are you doing about reporting it to appropriate authorities? If you can't answer those questions, you should not be slandering people.

Nobody said that.

If you have evidence of that, what are you doing about it?

There may be several communities (aka 'First Nations') that make up (eg) the Mohawk Nation. The treaties are with the original nations. They never ceded their sovereignty.

/facepalm We do decide. We don't discriminate. Look up our immigration points system: education and job skills do count. And re niqab face covering ... http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/zunera-ishaq-niqab-ban-citizenship-oath-1.3257762

The courts have already settled this question. Women who wear face coverings are admitted to Canada. Because any other action would be just stupid. This discussion is just stupid.

http://m.huffingtonpost.ca/julius-haag/right-wing-extremism_b_14629734.html

In North America, it's right wing Christian terrorists doing the most damage. It's your kids who are "most likely to be radicalized". What shall we do about that?

Omg ... I gotta do that ... not a real horse, maybe a hobby horse, drag it down Yonge St just before midnight Saturday night ... when it's still legal.

Answer: At Confederation Canada took responsibility for upholding treaties and existing laws (eg, BNA Act) on behalf of the Crown. Republic? Maybe ...

We don't need to change laws for equality of sexes in Canada.