"3rd Party" booted out of Attawapiskat
- Thread starter jjaycee98
- Start date
This is a legal attitude, not an NDP attitude.
In any claim for damages, priority is placed on the greatest tortfeasor. Obviously there can be contributory negligence, but it's weighed up against the damages.
We don't put the focus on the party that is 10% negligent.
It has everything to do with this thread. More than a handful of people have tried to explain why an audit is needed. You, seem obessessed with tossing blame without actually waiting for an independent audit that will show accountability on all parts. This reminds me very much of the Chiefs who went to the Parliament buildings in Winnipeg and threw a bunch of body bags down and said, "This is what Ottawa thinks of us. We need money and they send us body bags." Later after all the hoopla and grandstanding it turned out that they had ordered the body bags.
If the Feds are not providing enough money a 3rd party audit will show that. If the leadership in this community was ripping off the people and living like slumlords then a 3rd party audit will show that. It seems too me that this is more about the NDP and its supporters scoring political points rather than finding out the truth. Which is the very reason that the NDP is not ready to run the country.
I'm just following the Indian Act. In that agreement, the government is supposed to be dealing with this mess, not an independent party.
I'm not against an audit, but it's clearly a second priority. They can provide the right resources now and then sue the First Nations later if they really want.
Who says that it is only the gvt that will be considered in the tortfeaser analysis.... Kinda a self-fulfilling prophecy, non?
If you actually did an analysis, you would find that the Feds are largely responsible for this mess.
The analysis is not limited to the last 5 years, nor is it exempt from critical analysis to determine where the wheels fell off.
As RCS has pointed out on a number of occasions, an independent audit will the starting-point in determining if the Federal funding was sufficient and if the expenditures were done so in a manner that was in the best interests of the people.
I am guessing that this group has been receiving funding for a long time prior to 2006 (which the NP article focuses on). You seem to ignore the reality that the real capital expenditures would have occurred at the onset of the funding program (whenever that was) during which time the capital costs would have been much higher than the present (annual) capital injections to accommodate the cost of things like initial housing construction, etc..
You have selectively focused on one or two variables and ignored the entire context in which those components interact.
Of course not. But for the chrissake, do the audit after you supply humanitarian aid.
Our primary concern should be getting these people back on their feet, not "where did the money go?"
I have no problem with that sentiment... Where I do have a problem is that your entire focus at this point is assessing blame exclusively on the shoulders of one party and refusing to accept any actions that may lead to understanding 'why' this crisis has developed at all.
If you wish to stick your head in the sand on this, that's your decision, but don't demand that everyone also follow your lead when it's their money that you're playing with.
The biggest concern is "why", unless you get off by seeing this very circumstance played over and over each year with all kinds of different groups.
No they don't know that housing money went to housing. That is the whole point of a third party audit. DO you know for a fact that it did not buy snowmobiles? I'm betting you have never been on any rez let alone a remote one. In one boat/fly in rez we are currently working on there are around 50 people collecting government paycheques as best as I can tell out of a TOTAL population of 1800.
You might also want to ask yourself why outside contractors are required to build houses other than some of the trades. Another question for you to ponder is why the residents can't do simple maintenance to their homes like painting and cleaning the garbage out of the yards.
Just because you have an irrational hatred of the current governing party does not mean they are at fault for every perceived problem in Canada. Many problems have been inherited and are entrenched in a ideological driven bureaucracy that opposes change.
Financial Statements | Attawapiskat First Nation
This is not an isolated problem. If the government truly believed an independent audit is the grand solution to a state of emergency, then they should complete audits on all First Nations reserves in states of emergency.
Manitoba chiefs in Ottawa to push for better housing
Some Manitoba chiefs are in Ottawa this week, as the Assembly of First Nations is urging the federal government to address a housing crisis on reserves across Canada.
Chiefs from the province are hoping their national leaders can convince the federal government to help provide more decent housing to First Nations people.
On Manitoba reserves like the Wasagamack First Nation and the Sandy Bay First Nation, many members live in shacks or homes that are falling apart, and some do not have access to running water or sewage systems.
"There's mould. The drywall is torn down. The floor is broken in because there's a lot of traffic," said Chief Jeffrey Naopokesik of Shamattawa, Man., in describing one of the worst homes on his reserve.
Naopokesik said he was so desperate for new homes on his First Nation, he turned to a private lender — a move that he said costs a lot more money that his band does not have.
"Sometimes it keep me up in the wee hours of the night," he said.
Severe shortage of homes
Pukatawagan, Man., Chief Arlen Dumas, who is in Ottawa this week, said his community has more structurally sound homes than other reserves, but there is a severe shortage of homes that he said is creating overcrowded conditions.
"We have 30 people living in a five-bedroom home. We have 10 to 15 people living in a three-bedroom trailer," he said.
Keewatin Tribal Council Grand Chief Arnold Ouskan, who is also in Ottawa this week, said First Nation leaders are not just asking the federal Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Department for more money.
"We know what the problem is: the department has to be more flexible with their funding," he said, adding that First Nations cannot move around the federal funds they receive.
The issue of substandard First Nations housing has surfaced in recent weeks thanks to a crisis in Attawapiskat, Ont., where some people in the community of about 1,800 live in unheated tents, condemned housing and portable trailers.
Chiefs support Attawapiskat
Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence declared an emergency in October as winter approached.
But this week, Spence criticized Ottawa's handling of the crisis, after federal Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan ordered an independent audit of Attawapiskat's finances and has appointed a third-party manager to oversee spending.
When the outside manager, Jacques Marion, arrived in Attawapiskat on Monday, he was promptly asked to leave by the band, which said his presence was unwanted.
Grand Chief David Harper of Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak (MKO), an organization that represents northern Manitoba First Nations, said his group supports the decision by leaders in
Attawapiskat to kick out the third-party manager.
If other First Nation leaders do not help Attawapiskat stand up to the federal government, they could be targeted next, Harper said.
"We have to stand with her, regardless of what people might think, what people might say," he said.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2011/12/06/mb-chiefs-housing-afn-ottawa.html
Without an audit, you don't know where those numbers come from.
Perhaps you don't understand the concept of an audit.
The Red Cross was supposed to build 5000 houses after the Indonesian tsunami. It had the money. several millions. 5 years later. No houses and lots of bafflegab from RC.
If you guys actually opened up the first document, you would see that these statements are based on an an independent audit report by Ross, Pope & Company LLP.
But if they use that money for the housing and use it to buy a Zamboni, and then say 'the government hasn't given us enough money for housing' ... thats the type of thing an audit would pick up.
They are dealing with it, MF. They appointed a 3rd party to do an audit and to TAKE CONTROL of the rez's affairs. Damn, thought there'd never be a day I'd agree with Harpo.
Suing them later is like getting blood from a stone.
Of course it would.
But for now, just pay for the damn housing and work out the audit later.
Last edited:
But if you have given X millions to group A in the past to build houses B and then houses B never get built, does it make sense to give more millions to group A to build same houses B? Good money after bad. Group A has already shown themselves to be untrustworthy. Why trust them more?