Native Extortion

Moonbox · January 24, 2012

I did not coment on the relative worth of six billion. It is a lot of money spent specifically on a small number of people with results that are dreadful, shameful. I am not sure that spending another six billion or 10 billion or 20 billion annually would make much difference.

Very articulately stated. Good post.

Topaz · January 24, 2012

Harper only has himself to blame on this. When is came to PMO, he get rid of the Accord that Martin had create which was a start to mending relationship between FN and the government. I've heard the FN will go back to Britain where the treaties and promises were first made. I think the GG is going to be busy this year. Any non-native who is quick to judge, could perhaps go live among the FN and then come back and tell the rest of us what is was like for them.

msj · January 24, 2012

Perhaps the immediate issue isn't the amount of money, but how it's being managed. Once handed off to the reserves, the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development doesn't seem to have much knowledge of what's being spent on what. Then again, the chiefs often seem highly reluctant to reveal how the money is used and regard federal government questioning on the matter as intrusive and demonstrative of a colonial attitude.

People keep saying this but on what basis?

FN's get the money and then have to submit audited financial statements to DAAND/INAC.

DAAND/INAC ask for budgets, reports, invoices etc...

They also ask for a list detailing amounts spent on salary/honoraria/travel for chief and council and key employees (which they don't share with the public).

I should know - I audit 3 bands in BC.

Jack Weber · January 24, 2012

Ottawa Citizen

What nonsense is this? It's extortion. The Canadian State is a democratic federal regime with constitutional guarantees for minorities. It must stand up to this mob, mafia play.

This is rich coming from a guy who soft-pedals Quebec seperatism as often as you do...

Extortion much?

Army Guy · January 24, 2012

Is $6 Billion per year too much? What are you comparing that to?

in 2010 the federal goverment spent 7.5 Bil with INAC eapenditures with another 980 mil promised for other projects

another tidbit, over 50 chiefs are paid more than PM,160 paid more than Premiers, while 634 made over 100 k per year.tax free.one chief in the maritimes made over 1 mil , he has almost 400 on his reserve.

First Nation's communities administer more than 80% of the Indian Affairs Program’s annual budget.

Total population in 2006 was 1,176,000

SO in compared to what, lts say homeless people in 2005 was 3.2 mil federal portion of budget was 1.4 Bil in affordable housing.

There is plenty more I think the money is being mismanged...

fellowtraveller · January 24, 2012

People keep saying this but on what basis?

FN's get the money and then have to submit audited financial statements to DAAND/INAC.

DAAND/INAC ask for budgets, reports, invoices etc...

They also ask for a list detailing amounts spent on salary/honoraria/travel for chief and council and key employees (which they don't share with the public).

I should know - I audit 3 bands in BC.

with respect, so what?

None of that has any impact on the flow of money. There are no consequences for bad management, and few consequences for good management.

Please, let us not pretend that there is any sort of business acumen applied to the process by either side.

That is why I wonder if there is any amount of money that is enough to fix the woes of First Nations?

cybercoma · January 24, 2012

Perhaps the immediate issue isn't the amount of money, but how it's being managed. Once handed off to the reserves, the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development doesn't seem to have much knowledge of what's being spent on what. Then again, the chiefs often seem highly reluctant to reveal how the money is used and regard federal government questioning on the matter as intrusive and demonstrative of a colonial attitude.

With all due respect, this is dishonest and at some points simply not true. That amount of money isn't actually forwarded directly to the Reserves for the Chiefs to control. Any money that they do receive can only be spent on things that are approved by the Ministry. Many, if not the majority, of Reserves are also audited regularly. The fact is that the amount of money that they do end up forwarding to the Reserves for their control is wholly insufficient for what they need to cover with it. The same sized communities receive far more government funding when you combine what the three levels of government need to spend to deliver the standard that our government has agreed to ensure for the First Nations.

Edited January 24, 2012 by cybercoma

cybercoma · January 24, 2012

They have some exemptions but your post is inaccurate.

Yeah... I'll say.

cybercoma · January 24, 2012

I did not coment on the relative worth of six billion.

You're doing just that in the following sentence.

It is a lot of money spent specifically on a small number

How do you know it's a lot of money spent on a small number of people? How do you know those results are piss poor for that amount of money? The amount of money the government actually spends on the First Nations per person is considerably less than they spend on everyone else. How could that be "a lot"?

cybercoma · January 24, 2012

in 2010 the federal goverment spent 7.5 Bil with INAC eapenditures with another 980 mil promised for other projects

another tidbit, over 50 chiefs are paid more than PM,160 paid more than Premiers, while 634 made over 100 k per year.tax free.one chief in the maritimes made over 1 mil , he has almost 400 on his reserve.

First Nation's communities administer more than 80% of the Indian Affairs Program’s annual budget.

Total population in 2006 was 1,176,000

SO in compared to what, lts say homeless people in 2005 was 3.2 mil federal portion of budget was 1.4 Bil in affordable housing.

There is plenty more I think the money is being mismanged...

So you look at one portion of the federal budget alone and think it's comparable? The first nations have to cover everything with that money. Not just building new housing. They need to cover municipal, provincial, and federal expenditures... and not just housing.

cybercoma · January 24, 2012

There are no consequences for bad management, and few consequences for good management.

There are no consequences for the government managing money poorly either.

msj · January 24, 2012

with respect, so what?

None of that has any impact on the flow of money. There are no consequences for bad management, and few consequences for good management.

Please, let us not pretend that there is any sort of business acumen applied to the process by either side.

That is why I wonder if there is any amount of money that is enough to fix the woes of First Nations?

No consequences?

Why do you think INAC/DAAND send in their own people when things go south?

They take control, set up remediation, and set the financial ship right (or, at least, improve things).

Rocky Road · January 24, 2012

Why don't most reserves try to build their reserves into towns and attract businesses, that way it would be a stimulus for their own people.

guyser · January 24, 2012

There are no consequences for the government managing money poorly either.

...except every four years or thereabouts.

cybercoma · January 24, 2012

...except every four years or thereabouts.

Yeah right. Just like they'll undoubtedly be thrown out if they're so brazen as to be found in contempt of parliament, right?

guyser · January 24, 2012

Yeah right. Just like they'll undoubtedly be thrown out if they're so brazen as to be found in contempt of parliament, right?

No, if enough people think they have been poor w money they will get tossed (assuming of course the other guy looks hopeful)

cybercoma · January 25, 2012

So now we qualify it. It really has nothing to do with how they manage money. Instead, it has to do with the public perception of their fiscal responsibility, as well as the presence of a compelling and suitable alternative. In other words, there are only consequences for their actions if the conditions are right.

fellowtraveller · January 25, 2012

There are no consequences for the government managing money poorly either.

yes, I cover that very thing when I say that neither side has any business acumen. They jointly mismanagwe astonishing amounts of coin.

Why do you think INAC/DAAND send in their own people when things go south?
They take control, set up remediation, and set the financial ship right (or, at least, improve things).

No, they very rarely do that. When they do, they are racists and interfering in self govt initiatives. They are not welcome unless ebaring money. I don't blame the First Nations at all for this, the quality of DIAND mgmt is frightful for the reason I explained earlier in the thread. I know you audit bands, but auditors just make sure everything adds up to zero.

How do you know it's a lot of money spent on a small number of people?

Because I divide $7 billion spent by DIAND the number of people served by DIAND and come up with a big big number per capita. The results or lack of results speak for themselves in the health and social crises faced by many First Nations.

How do you know those results are piss poor for that amount of money?

Because I have lived in First Nations communities in three provinces and two territories for most of my adult life and have eyes in my head. Duh.

The amount of money the government actually spends on the First Nations per person is considerably less than they spend on everyone else. How could that be "a lot"?

Because there are more than thirty million fewer non First Nations people than there are First Nations people. None of them have acess to any DIAND money. On the other hand, all first Nations peoplehave access to those DIAND funds in one way or another by virtue of status. That's how.

sharkman · January 25, 2012

So now we qualify it. It really has nothing to do with how they manage money. Instead, it has to do with the public perception of their fiscal responsibility, as well as the presence of a compelling and suitable alternative. In other words, there are only consequences for their actions if the conditions are right.

It has everything to do with how they manage money because when they run out then things don't get maintenance or people don't get paid or you have heating issues. That's when the public sees a money management problem. But the FN people directly suffer from this mismanagement. So they think it's Canada's fault because they are probably told nonsense and we have another round of protests.

Scotty · January 25, 2012

What entitlements are you talking about exactly? Clean water? Education?

Two thirds of the land mass of Canada...

At least that's what they think they're entitled to...

Edited January 25, 2012 by Scotty

Scotty · January 25, 2012

So you look at one portion of the federal budget alone and think it's comparable? The first nations have to cover everything with that money. Not just building new housing. They need to cover municipal, provincial, and federal expenditures... and not just housing.

I suppose it's too much to expect them to say, get a job and contribute something to their communities, huh?

cybercoma · January 25, 2012

I suppose it's too much to expect them to say, get a job and contribute something to their communities, huh?

That's a pretty racist thing to say. You think because a person is Aboriginal they're unemployed. Nice.

msj · January 25, 2012

No, they very rarely do that. When they do, they are racists and interfering in self govt initiatives. They are not welcome unless ebaring money.

With the exception of the recent case in Ontario, no one ever hears about a band who is in remediation.

Once again - how would you know when all you hear is what is in the media? Which is nothing.

I don't blame the First Nations at all for this, the quality of DIAND mgmt is frightful for the reason I explained earlier in the thread. I know you audit bands, but auditors just make sure everything adds up to zero.

Yes, it is a financial audit. Nevertheless, reports are filed with the government. They know what the money is being spent on - water infrastructure, sewer, health, etc... They can and do use that information.

Not very well, perhaps, but they do use it much more than people realize.

charter.rights · January 25, 2012

No consequences?

Why do you think INAC/DAAND send in their own people when things go south?

They take control, set up remediation, and set the financial ship right (or, at least, improve things).

That's a myth.

When reserves get put into third party management, the third party managers triple the FN budget and put them so far into debt that they won't be out of third party management for 15 to 20 years. The reality is the managers end up proving that the feds are deliberately underfunding the FN since with all their expertise they can't make things any better.

msj · January 25, 2012

That's a myth.

When reserves get put into third party management, the third party managers triple the FN budget and put them so far into debt that they won't be out of third party management for 15 to 20 years. The reality is the managers end up proving that the feds are deliberately underfunding the FN since with all their expertise they can't make things any better.

Then I guess the times that I have seen it being successful was just a fluke.