Do you know how much MPs are paid? We can't afford to pay 5000 FN chiefs MP salaries. How about we
keep all the ridings as they are and elect FN members where they have a majority...
I doubt they would accept the pay cut.
Do you know how much MPs are paid? We can't afford to pay 5000 FN chiefs MP salaries. How about we
keep all the ridings as they are and elect FN members where they have a majority...
If we were a tyranny of the majority (another description of democracy) we wouldn't even be listening to the natives. We would just lay down the law and that would be that.
There are options for how a system such as this can work effectively. We need only look to the Parliament of New Zealand, where the House of Representatives has seven (7) Māori electoral districts. These districts overlay the entire map of New Zealand (i.e., they form a kind of separate electoral map), and Māori citizens can decide whether they fall onto the general voters' list, or the Māori voters' list (i.e., each Māori citizen is entitled to one vote). Only Māori citizens are eligible to be candidates and voters in these Māori electoral districts.
The number of electoral districts created for Māori seats is proportional to the number of Māori citizens who have placed themselves on the Māori voters' list (which is they there are only 10% Māori seats, despite an 18% Māori population; nearly half of Māori voters choose to vote in the main electoral districts).
If the Parliament of Canada were to adopt a similar model, then we would have (under the new 338-seat adjusted composition in the House of Commons for the next general election) an additional thirteen seats established for Aboriginal representation.
The 388 would still crush the 13. Still tyranny of the majority. I think a separate assembly to replace the senate with maybe one representative per indigenous nation might be a better option. This way the majority could pass no law without a majority of nations agreeing.
I think the main issue is folks in FN abandoning the Little Ivory Towers for the Good of all.
The 388 would still crush the 13. Still tyranny of the majority. I think a separate assembly to replace the senate with maybe one representative per indigenous nation might be a better option. This way the majority could pass no law without a majority of nations agreeing.
That is working on the rather dubious assumption that all the non native members would vote as a block. Besides which Canada is supposed to be ONE nation, not a North American version of the EU.
Seeing that we have tended to vote as a block (more or lsee) to the detriment of human rights for First Nations, and that they do in fact have different nations, we are in fact like the EU or UN in that sense. We are not just one nation. Maybe that's part of the problem; that we don't acknowledge that.
But they negotiated the contents of your wallet as part of giving you your nation.Anyone wanting their separate nation can also find their separate funding and quit digging into my wallet.
But they negotiated the contents of your wallet as part of giving you your nation.
Anyone wanting their separate nation can also find their separate funding and quit digging into my wallet.
Ummm, you really may want to rethink that one.Then they should share equally.
That isn't taxslaves position. He's just righteously frustrated with the waste and criminality he sees.I have to laugh -- uncontrollably, really -- when people bring out the money argument.
"But it costs me so much money... I don't want my several dollars per year of tax money to go to Aboriginal issues. It's ridiculous!" Yeah, well, if Canadians want to go back on their commitment -- through the continuous institution of the Crown -- to defend Aboriginal rights and to meet the obligations that we have made as a people, then they should be equally prepared to have the land pulled out from under them. That's only fair, right? You don't get to break your contract with Telus, and stop paying your phone bill, but keep sending phone calls over their carrier.
GAH.
Well, that's a part of the problem, isn't it?
This isn't a black-and-white issue on either side.
On the one hand, the Government of Canada has an obligation to respect the treaties entered into between First Nations and the Crown. Canada has an obligation to ensure good living conditions for Aboriginal peoples. Generally, the only practical way to do this (and practicality aside, by far the preference of bands representing First Nations), is to make payments to bands to coordinate those services and conditions themselves, presumably with the understanding that self-government (or something close to it) is the most responsible model.
However, if there is no check on the rampant corruption and mismanagement at many (certainly not all) bands and their governments, then those payments may not be used appropriately. To have a situation where the Government is responsible for conditions and services, but cannot directly implement those services for fear of offending First Nations' notions of self-government, but then more money is needed because the money already being paid is not being used appropriately, and First Nations groups accuse the Government of not meeting its obligations because a considerable portion of payments was not used for what it was intended...
Well, I have no idea what the answer to that one is.
Expecting to have the obligations set out in negotiated treaties fulfilled is not a culture of entitlement.I disagree with this idea. a large part of the animosity toward FN is due to the culture of entitlement that the FN have.
It's funny you should say that, the Six Nations taught the US all about democracy Six Nations style.Teach the FN a little about merit and democracy.
I disagree with this idea. a large part of the animosity toward FN is due to the culture of entitlement that the FN have. I say no to handing them more self entitlement BS like MP positions that they haven't earned. If they want to become an MP, let them compete on a level playing field with our current MPs. Teach the FN a little about merit and democracy.
Expecting to have the obligations set out in negotiated treaties fulfilled is not a culture of entitlement.