Natives:Throwing Good Money After Bad

Throwing Good Money After Bad

Once again the federal government is throwing more good money after bad, rather than fixing the problem. As indicated in the federal budget, the government will provide $295 million over 5 years for native reserve housing.

The money will pay for 6,400 new houses and renovate 1,500 existing homes. But money isn’t the problem. Over the past decade, taxpayers have spent $3.8 billion on housing for 97,500 native households.

So if money isn’t the problem, what is?

The Department of Indian Affairs and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) transfer money directly to native band councils. From there it is up to the chief and council to determine who gets a new house or repairs. There is a fundamental problem in this relationship. The three main players – Indian Affairs, CMHC and native bands – cannot agree on their roles and responsibilities. To make matters worse, according to Department of Indian Affairs internal audits, some native governments fail to account properly for existing responsibilities and funding.

One of the responsibilities of band councils, for example, is to ensure any new housing meets National Building Code standards. The auditor general, in a recent report, notes that bands often have no competent way to ensure new housing meets codes, which may explain the high percentage of houses in desperate need of repair.

Land on a native reserve is held in trust by the Crown and is controlled collectively by the native band council, not by individuals. As a result, native Canadians living on reserves do not own their houses in fee simple. This leads to a lack of desire on the part of native Canadians to maintain, repair or renovate their houses.

Developing workable systems of private property rights on native reserves is required. This will empower individual native Canadians and facilitate market transactions necessary to attain widespread prosperity on native reserves. Private property rights that are stable and transferable are the foundation for wealth creation the world over and communally held property that produces wealth is the very rare exception, not the rule.

That said, the federal government isn’t likely to implement a system of private property ownership on native reserves anytime soon.

As a step toward securing individual private property for native Canadians, the use of certificates of possession should be better utilized. Certificates of possession, outlined in the Indian Act, do not take the form of fee simple ownership. However, the land held under a certificate of possession can be subdivided, left to an heir or sold to another person having a right to reside on that reserve. Canadian courts will settle disputes and enforce the rights generated by these certificates.

To achieve this, a holder of a certificate of possession transfers the certificate to the band as collateral. The band then signs a ministerial guarantee with CMHC in which it agrees to assume the mortgage in the event of a default. Once the mortgage is paid off, the certificate is transferred back to the individual. The process of paying for ones house promotes pride of ownership which results in individuals maintaining, repairing and renovating their property, thus saving taxpayers millions of dollars.

To end the merry-go-round of spending on housing for native reserves as perpetuated in this year’s budget, workable systems of private property need to be established and maintained. Through the establishment of private property on reserves, pride and prosperity will be recognized.



--30--


For further information contact:
Tanis Fiss, Director, Centre for Aboriginal Policy Change
Ph: 1-403-263-1202

Feds plan to make West foot bill for Kyoto fiasco

November 7, 2005

Bull's-eye on our backs
Feds plan to make West foot bill for Kyoto fiasco
By Ezra Levant

While the nation's eyes were on AdScam, federal Environment Minister Stephane Dion quietly made an announcement about the Kyoto Protocol.

Quebec, he promised, will only have to bear 7% of Canada's pain to implement the pact.

Quebec makes up 24% of Canada's population, but it is guaranteed 33% of the seats on the Supreme Court. Quebec receives 45% of Canada's equalization payments. Fully 62% of the Liberal MPs from Quebec are cabinet ministers or parliamentary secretaries. The Canadian prime minister has come from Quebec for 96% of the last 37 years and 100% of the last 12 years.

But when it comes to lifting the load, well that's another story. That's why Dion announced -- in Quebec and in French of course -- that Alberta and Saskatchewan would be picking up most of the tab on Kyoto.

Dion aide Brigitte Caron, expanded on the theme. "The minister wants to demonstrate that no-one wants to demand more from Quebec (than of other provinces)." Well, he demonstrated that -- by painting a bull's-eye on the back of each Albertan and Saskatchewanian.

What's ironic is Quebec has been one of the loudest voices for the Kyoto Protocol. Its premier, Jean Charest, was once a pro-Kyoto federal environment minister. The Bloc Quebecois has been one of the biggest pro-Kyoto tub-thumpers in Parliament.

Yet, when it comes to implementing Kyoto, they expect the burdens to be borne by others -- others who oppose Kyoto. It's the same logic of most green activists: They demand lower use of fuels, but squawk when the price of gas goes up. They want to be environmental, but at someone else's expense. Scratch that: They don't even want to be environmental -- they just want to be environmentally self-righteous.

This, by the way, is the second part of the National Energy Program two-step. The first part is the desire to grab the West's oil wealth; the second is the means.

The first part was also articulated in French, in Quebec, by a Liberal cabinet minister. In August, Quebec's senior Liberal, Jean Lapierre, announced the intention to "even things out" with Alberta.

"The federal government has the duty to be a real partner (to Quebec), especially since as a government we benefit from the West's wealth," Lapierre told the Sherbrooke Tribune. "So we have to redistribute the wealth. After all, the good fortune of the West could become a disaster for the East."

That's the desire -- the envy. If you need more convincing, ask the federal Liberal campaign co-chair in Quebec: Marc Lalonde, Trudeau's energy minister from the NEP days.

The means to achieve this desire is the Kyoto Protocol. When listening to Liberal denials that they plan to bring in another NEP, it's best to listen as one would to, say, Bill Clinton. Look at the precise choice of words.

When Clinton claimed he "did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky", he pretended he was telling the truth, because he didn't consider what he and Lewinsky did to be "sexual relations".

When today's Liberals say they would never bring in the National Energy Program again, they make the same mental reservation. They'll bring in a National Environmental Program that has the same effect. But it will be about Kyoto, they'll say. Totally different, they'll say. They weren't lying, they'll say.

In August, Lapierre explained the desire: Take the West's money. Last week, Dion explained the plan: Make Alberta pay for Kyoto. Anyone still think they don't mean it?

Levant is Publisher of the Western Standard

Clear out the bullies

November 16, 2005

Clear out the bullies
By CHRISTINA BLIZZARD

How ironic that, at the beginning of a week set aside to fight bullying, a horrific story emerges of a young teen who has allegedly been brutalized at her school for as long as 18 months before she finally told a teacher who called in police.

And much as we may all be shocked by such allegations, anyone who has a child in an inner city Toronto school knows that there is an undercurrent of violence in many of them that needs to be addressed. Forget all those namby-pamby, anti-bullying programs. What these thugs need isn't a group hug and a round of Kumbaya. Many schools need a full-time cop.

Frankly, I'm getting just a bit tired of the politically correct wall you run into any time you dare suggest we get tough on the hoodlums who terrorize our schools.

First, there was the Safe Schools Act brought in by the previous Tory government. That is now under review. Why? Because some parents complained it was "racist," in that it disproportionately targeted black youths. Another criticism is that it arbitrarily expelled youngsters and left them on the streets with no place to go. The first point is a pretty sweeping condemnation of teachers and school principals, since they are the ones enforcing the law. I don't think for a moment teachers are, as a profession, racist. And there are programs for expelled students to go to. If they are full, then the government needs to get more up and running.

The allegations in this case make it crystal clear: Victims need protection -- not the bullies. You need to get the perpetrators of violence out of the schools. It may be a hard lesson. But here's a handy guide to avoid expulsion: Behave yourself. Don't threaten other students. Don't fight. Keep your fists to yourself. Don't use abusive or profane language. Don't assault your teachers or other students. Don't bring guns or knives to school. While we're at it, parents might try to enforce these rules, instead of excusing their little darlings. Apparently, they're not, "bad," they're just "misunderstood." Or so they'd have you believe. Well, follow my rules and I guarantee you won't be expelled.

At the other end of the scale, on Monday two teacher unions held one of the more self-serving news conferences I have attended recently. The Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association (OECTA) and Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (OSSTF) hauled out a study showing an estimated 30% of teachers have been bullied by parents or guardians, 24% of teachers have been bullied by school administrators and 15% of teachers have been bullied by other colleagues. The unions want legislation to outlaw psychological bullying in the workplace.

Well, here's an idea. When a group of adult employees who belong to some of the strongest unions in the province can't handle a few nasty words from a co-worker or a parent, then it isn't a new law you need. It's a spine.

Don't get me wrong. I have nothing but sympathy for the average teacher. In some schools in this city, they have to deal with weapons and violence on a daily basis.

But this week, the biggest news story was about awful allegations of a child who has been terrorized in a school for a year and a half. Yet the biggest concern these union bosses have is psychological abuse? Give me a break.

Kids learn from example. One of the unions, OECTA, was involved in an incident almost three years ago when then-Tory Education Minister Elizabeth Witmer had water poured over her by union members at a convention.

Okay, the union apologized. The College of Teachers resolved it through a "dispute resolution," process rather than through a disciplinary hearing. But when teachers set that kind of example, how do you expect to control schools?

Meanwhile, the real victims are the kids who daren't go to school because they fear violence. Every child has the right to an education in peace and security. We've already lost control of our streets to a violent element. Let's not let our schools go the same way. We need cops in them -- now.