With the countdown to the Oct. 14 federal election entering its final phase, there are a few things Inuit, First Nation and Métis voters might want to consider on their way to the polls.
Which party has done the most for us, which has done the least, who are the good guys, who are the bandits, who's going to win and what will that mean for you and me?
The Assembly of First Nations is encouraging Treaty Indians to vote because there are enough rural and northern ridings where the margin of victory is thin enough that a collective First Nation vote could turn the tide in favour of one candidate or another -- and in favour of one party or another. They've been saying this since 1979, but simple math makes this message essentially true, doubly so when you factor in a minority situation.
In Nunavut, the Inuit people are the majority and they'll choose whoever they want to represent them in Parliament. It's harder to say for the Métis. The Manitoba Métis Federation was vocal in its support of the Liberals in 2006 but they haven't said much this time around. Can the same be said for Métis groups in the rest of Canada?
Voting trends among non-status Indians are even harder to pin down. The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples habitually supports whichever party is in power at the moment, but it represents so few people it's not much use as a voting block.
The remaining aboriginal people have blended so deeply into mainstream Canada they are, for the most part, invisible. If the AFN says First Nation voters can determine the outcome of an election alone, they have yet to wield that power.
But aboriginal voters should vote as one.
The 2006 election resulted in a minority government where just 21 seats separated the Conservatives from the Liberals and several ridings were decided by just a handful of votes.
This minority has been good for aboriginal Canadians if for no other reasons than for actual government follow-through on residential schools. There was also agreement in the House of Commons about Jordan's principle -- to put the health of children ahead of jurisdictional wrangling by ensuring a child gets necessary medical care first and worrying about who pays the bills later.
The current campaign has offered good things for aboriginal Canadians as well.
The Liberals promise to implement the Kelowna Accord and spend $2.1 billion on alleviating First Nation poverty. They've also promised to endorse the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The New Democrats say they'll spend $5 billion and ratify the UN Declaration, too. The Conservatives have been to the high Arctic many times lately because they know they're going to need the support of the Inuit people for resource exploitation no matter which party wins on Oct. 14.
Finally, if a minority government has meant a measure of progress for aboriginal Canadians, would a majority of any kind be any better? The last Liberal majority didn't do much to settle land claims, help us get our children out of foster care, end Third-World poverty on reserves or stop our youths from committing suicide.
Since 2006, aside from apologizing for residential schools, the Conservatives have shown little more effort than the Liberals in resolving aboriginal social and economic issues. They don't support the UN Declaration or aboriginal language funding, and serious land ownership disputes like Caledonia and Big Trout Lake in Ontario are still festering. And several First Nations are blocking the path of the Alberta Clipper pipeline across Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba over resource revenue sharing.
Recognition of our sovereignty? Forget about it.
With this scenario and with partisan politics aside, it looks like strategically withholding votes from the Conservatives and the Liberals would push the next government towards another minority. It's a good thing.
Another minority would be just as beneficial for mainstream Canadians. With the most serious financial meltdown in the United States since 1929 causing economic crises around the world, a minority government in Canada would mean parliamentarians would have to work together for the benefit of all.
colleen.simard@gmail.com
PREVIOUS
