Hon. Carolyn Bennett 2013-06-19T22:10:29-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/author/index.php?author=hon-carolyn-bennett Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Hon. Carolyn Bennett Good old fashioned elbow grease. How Government Should Treat Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2956852 2013-03-26T17:21:06-04:00 2013-05-26T05:12:02-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
Liberals still believe that a full national public inquiry will be required, but the work of this special committee will be an important step in finally providing some justice for the victims and healing for the families as well as recommendations to stop this terrible tragedy.

I felt it was important to convey how the Liberal Party of Canada expects this committee will work, both to my fellow committee members and the public right at the beginning of our deliberations. Please find below the text of a letter I have sent to all members of the special committee about the appropriate scope of the study and the need for a culturally sensitive and respectful process. This is a historic opportunity to show the best of Parliament and we can not let the victims or their families down.

Dear Members of the Special Committee On Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls,

I am writing you in your capacity as a fellow member of the Special Parliamentary Committee on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. I'd like to share with you some feedback and suggestions our office has received regarding the appropriate scope of the study and the need for a culturally sensitive and respectful process for the crucial work we are about to undertake together.

There have been concerns raised by many that this committee could be hijacked by political agendas rather than providing meaningful recommendations for ending the disproportionate level of violence experienced by Aboriginal women and girls, as was the case with the 2009-2011 study of the issue by the House of Commons Committee on the Status of Women.

That committee began with a broad mandate to gain a better understanding of the extent and nature of the violence, examine the root causes of the violence, and to recommend solutions in consultation and with the full cooperation of aboriginal women. Unfortunately by the time the final report was released, after the 2011 election, the scope of the study was severely narrowed from the interim report and focused on highlighting limited government initiatives already underway. We must acknowledge that many of the 150 witnesses who provided evidence felt very let down and are still upset.

I believe that we can put those concerns to rest right from our very first meeting Tuesday night. Unlike previous committee work done on this issue, our study must reflect the unanimous will of the House of Commons as expressed in the motion creating this committee. That motion set a mandate to not only conduct hearings on the critical matter of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls in Canada, but to propose solutions to address the root causes of violence against Indigenous women across the country.

The number of Indigenous women and girls who have suffered violence, gone missing, or been murdered over the past three decades is truly appalling. This committee must work collaboratively to provide justice for the victims and healing for the families. This will mean taking the appropriate time at the beginning of the process to design the study well and get it right. We have until February 14, 2014 to conduct the hearings and produce a report. This time frame provides us with the opportunity to conduct these hearings in a creative and culturally sensitive way that can showcase the best of Parliament.

I know that we are all committed to a process that ensures that victims of violence, members of their families or others impacted by this issue, will not be victimized a second time. Evidence may deal with extremely personal and painful events and many may fear reprisal. It will be important for us to create a "safe place" for people who would not feel comfortable telling their stories and sharing their experiences and pain in a public forum.

I look forward to a discussion with the clerk and committee on possible creative solutions, such as in camera testimony when appropriate, to ensure that we can benefit from all relevant evidence while respecting the potential impact on victims. It has also been suggested that some witnesses may be more comfortable in a "talking circle" format. In order to assure cultural sensitivity, as well as safety and support for the witnesses, I propose that we consider engaging an aboriginal elder, or possibly a number of elders, to assist the committee with our work.

We will also need a full discussion about how we can optimize digital resources to help achieve the goal of making this process as open and inclusive as possible. An active and interactive website maintained by the committee will be an essential tool in reaching out to Canadians from coast to coast to coast and ensuring that committee members have the benefit of input from a broad cross section of Canadians about these issues.

It will be important that this website also serve as a comprehensive "library" of past reports and research, including the ongoing inquiry in the Senate Chamber. It will also be essential that the testimony from the Status of Women Committee hearings be available on the website as many of those witnesses have expressed reluctance to appear yet again.

I look forward to working with all of you. I believe that we can do a serious piece of work that will indeed reflect the very best of Parliament. We have been given the responsibility to appropriately honour the memory and the families of the missing and murdered women by making recommendations that will effectively bring to an end to this terrible epidemic.]]> Talking Points No More: Harper's Duty to First Nations Is Far From Done tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2480121 2013-01-16T08:01:37-05:00 2013-03-18T05:12:01-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
The impressive Idle No More movement was indeed spawned by the lack of consultation and imposition of the two omnibus bills C-38 and C-45 that have severely affected the environmental protection of traditional territories and the lakes and rivers that First Nations depend upon.

It was appalling to see the Minister start his press conference on Friday boasting about the government's "investments" which have clearly failed to begin to close the gap in social and economic outcomes. Instead of humility, we got a tone-deaf billboard. In spite of the commitment at last year's Crown First Nations Gathering to work towards this year's 250th Anniversary of the Royal Proclamation, absolutely no work has been done with the provinces to honour the treaties or to ensure that First Nations are able to share in the prosperity that is Canada. The failure of the government to even begin to deal with the imperative of sharing Canada's resource revenues fairly has resulted in relations with Canada's indigenous population reaching a dangerous tipping point. First Nations are pursuing their rights -- and winning -- in the courts. Thousands of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people are demonstrating right across Canada through the Idle no More movement. Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence, and other First Nations activists, remain on a hunger strike demanding the Prime Minister and the Crown come to the table in good faith to begin to repair a relationship that is in tatters.

We have to view last Friday's hastily organized meeting between the Prime Minister and Aboriginal leaders as trying to respond to the unprecedented expression of frustration as progress. The gravity of the crisis calls for concrete action. Beyond the moral obligation to deal with completely unacceptable social and economic gaps for Aboriginal Peoples, the Conservatives mishandling of this relationship and failure to consult could endanger what this government is hoping will be the engine of Canada's economic recovery -- natural resource development.

Unfortunately, the government's public follow-up to Friday's meeting raises some serious concerns. One of the key frustrations of Aboriginal people is the refusal of this government to fulfill its legal obligation to consult with them on matters that may impact their inherent and/or treaty rights. The fact that Minister Duncan indicated his belief the government has fulfilled its duty to consult on various controversial bills shows that the Conservatives still do not seem to grasp what true consultation means.

To suggest they have consulted with First Nations on the egregious omnibus Bills C-38 and C-45 is simply ridiculous. There were no prior consultations about changes to the Indian Act regarding Aboriginal Fisheries, First Nations land management and, in particular, major changes to environmental protection for their lands and waterways. Further, on the litany of other First Nations bills, the Conservatives have to understand that one way information sessions after decisions are made (when they rarely even go that far) do not constitute consultations.

In the same press conference, the Minister's Parliamentary Secretary followed the Minister's comments with a list of old talking points about the "progress" the government claims to have made on a host of First Nations' issues. This approach is very troubling and indicates that the Conservatives still don't understand what sparked this unprecedented grass roots movement or the profound frustration of Aboriginal Peoples across Canada. There has been no discernible progress made on the priorities set at the Crown First Nations Gathering of almost a year ago and claiming there has been only serves to further undermine the government's already tarnished credibility.

Appallingly, the very next day the Minister's remarks were followed up by a government press release of a re-announcement of an inadequate allocation of money from the last budget for water and wastewater systems on reserve. The 2011 National Assessment of First Nations Water and Wastewater Systems identifies a $5.8-billion funding shortfall ($1.2 billion immediately and $4.7 billion over 10 years) to deal with the First Nations water and wastewater capacity gap and yet the Conservative government only provided 6 per cent of the resources their own review identified -- $330.8 million spread over two years -- in the last budget. Almost two years after the federal assessment there are 117 First Nations communities across Canada under Drinking Water Advisories, an increase of over 23 per cent since 2006, and the government has no long term plan to get a handle on this crisis.

In fact, for the past year the Conservatives' response to First Nations, Inuit and Metis with legitimate grievances has been to tell them that they just don't understand how much "progress" has been made. This government refuses to understand that their rhetoric and insensitivity is dangerously undermining an already strained relationship between the government and Aboriginal Peoples.

Last October, during an Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Special Chiefs' Meeting on Education the government cynically issued a press release with misleading funding numbers to deny a funding gap for First Nations students even existed. This cynical move prompted First Nations to reject the federal government's approach to education and further eroded the Conservatives' credibility as a partner.

The Conservatives defend their failure on First Nations education by saying they have "built 30 schools across the country and renovated 200 others." The real issue is that students attending school on reserve are funded at half to two-thirds the per-student annual rate of students in provincial systems and only one third of First Nations students on reserve are graduating high school. The graduation rate is not improving and instead of fixing the disgraceful education funding gaps, the Minister is actually denying they exist.

The Conservatives explain their refusal to deal with the on-reserve housing crisis by claiming that they have "built 10,000 homes" over the last six years. The fact is that they are simply trying to take credit for falling short of what should have been 13,800 homes built under funding levels pre-dating their government. They have also failed to deal with their own February 2011 federal evaluation of First Nations housing, which concluded that the housing shortage on reserves is severe and only getting worse with 20,000 to 35,000 new units needed to meet current demand. The Assembly of First Nations has identified a gap of as much as 85,000 units and the Conservatives have no long-term plan to deal with this situation. Despite overcrowding rates on reserves six times those of off-reserve and more than 40 per cent of on-reserve homes in need of major repairs, the Conservatives actually spent 43 per cent less on housing during the last fiscal year than in 2006/07.

First Nations know the realities of what they are facing and the Conservatives' dishonest talking points, aimed and convincing average Canadians they are making progress, are further undermining what little credibility they have with Canada's indigenous population.

Given the Aboriginal population is the youngest and fastest growing in Canada -- and that almost every natural resource development currently operating or planned is within 200 kilometres of a First Nations' community and on their traditional lands -- it is in all of our interests to turn this around. The Prime Minister must understand the gravity of this situation and the potential impacts on all Canadians.

This should not be a partisan issue. This is about rebuilding the trust between Canada and First Nations. The Conservatives need to throw away their condescending and misleading talking points and their pathetic re-announcements of re-announcements of inadequate Budget 2012 commitments and deal honestly with Aboriginal Peoples to develop lasting solutions for what are very complex problems.

We need the 96 per cent of non-aboriginal Canadians to understand and support the need for economic and social justice for the 4 per cent. Idle No More is doing its best to educate us all. They want us to understand that whether we drink the water, or swim in it, paddle on it or fish in it, we all should be concerned with the omnibus bills. Their peaceful grassroots movement is inspirational.

This is an historic time. We have to eradicate the ignorance and deal with the racism. We need to use the anniversary of the Royal Proclamation to move forward on honouring the treaties that promised to share the land fairly and begin the process of replacing the Indian Act. We need to ensure that Canadian First Peoples, the fastest growing part of the population, will have the ability to lead us through these troubled times -- victims no more.

]]> Why Aboriginal Frustration Is Boiling Over tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2293312 2012-12-13T12:52:24-05:00 2013-02-12T05:12:01-05:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
He also called First Nations to action in "not rallies of a few, but a movement. A movement of peoples. A moment of nations coming together." Frustration boiled over as the assembled Chiefs rallied on Parliament Hill and tried to gain entry to the House of Commons chamber in order to be heard by Harper and his colleagues.

A tweet from Tanya Kappo of Edmonton against Omnibus Bill C-45 with hashtag #idlenomore has snowballed and inspired thousands on Monday to protest in communities across Canada against the unilateral and paternalistic approach of the Harper government.

Chief Theresa Spence of Attawapiskat started a hunger strike this week -- "I am willing to die for my people because the pain is too much and it's time for the government to realize what it's doing to us." With this government's decision to treat Aboriginal Peoples in Canada as "adversaries," Aboriginal peoples have indicated that this may well be only the beginning of their protests.

The frustration of Aboriginal Peoples is understandable given the complete lack of progress on their issues and the refusal of the government to fulfill its legal obligation to consult with them on matters that may impact their inherent and/or treaty rights.

Since the Crown First Nations Gathering the government has been ramming through legislation on First Nations' financial reporting, matrimonial property on reserves, regulation of water and wastewater, various portions of the Indian Act, Aboriginal Fisheries, land management and environmental protection -- all without proper prior consultation and without the necessary resources to implement all these changes being imposed upon them. In fact, the government has cut funding to Aboriginal councils and regional organizations, weakening their capacity to implement and the government's new rules and regulations.

We are also expecting more top-down legislation regarding First Nations education, private property ownership on reserves and a host of other issues to rain down on Aboriginal peoples from Ottawa in the near future.

The outrage of First Nations, Inuit and Métis is not only understandable, but justified.

The education gap is widening in terms of both funding and outcomes, housing shortages are becoming more acute, water and wastewater systems are in crisis and the tragic gaps in terms of First Nations health outcomes are continuing unabated. Too many resource development projects are moving forward without Aboriginal people receiving a fair share of the economic benefits or as partners in their development.

The Conservatives have promised to consult and work with First Nations in a more genuine partnership -- this was the basis for the Crown First Nations Gathering in January. Yet little has been delivered by the Prime Minister or his government. In fact Assembly of First Nations Chief Shawn Atleo has recently written to the Prime Minister and noted that an anticipated progress report due this January will, "not contain anything of substance reflective of the opportunity and our commitment to change."

We know that education is the key to success, but appallingly only one in three First Nations students currently graduates high school and the graduation rate is getting worse under this Conservative government. The Conservatives promised to close the disgraceful education funding gaps. Yet the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs has followed this promise with confrontation, actually denying the gap exists.

Almost every resource development activity currently operating or planned is occurring within 200 kilometres of a First Nations' community. The Canadian Council of Chief Executives has said Aboriginal peoples must be "true partners" in resource and energy projects, yet Treasury Board President Tony Clement alienated First Nations by dismissing their calls for a Joint Review Panel of the Ring of Fire resource development, arguing it would only bring up "irrelevant issues". Even the Prime Minister's own former senior cabinet minister Jim Prentice has chastised this government saying, "The Crown obligation to engage first nations in a meaningful way has yet to be taken up."

The Conservatives' short-sighted and confrontational approach toward Aboriginal Peoples in Canada will have serious social and economic consequences for all Canadians. It is time for the government to work with Aboriginal Peoples in Canada toward a new nation to nation relationship based on the spirit of partnership, respect, and the cooperation for mutual benefit that characterized our original relationship.]]> Aboriginal People Need Solutions, Not More Jail Time tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1923856 2012-09-28T15:06:22-04:00 2012-11-28T05:12:01-05:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
The report, entitled "Marginalized," goes on to warn that the government's current crime agenda, "will only serve to further increase the numbers and worsen the already staggering injustice experienced by Aboriginal peoples as a whole."

Canadians must recognize how the historic injustices of the Indian Act and residential schools created the systemic barriers to progress and economic prosperity that have fostered unacceptable gaps in outcomes for health, education, housing and access to basic rights like adequate food and safe, clean, drinkable water. There needs to be a complete understanding of the intergenerational trauma caused by residential schools and the deleterious effects it has had on mental health, addictions, parenting and therefore the resulting interaction of Aboriginal people with the justice system.

Aboriginal people are four per cent of the Canadian population, but 20 per cent of the prison population. Even more shocking, one in three women in federal prisons is Aboriginal and over the last 10 years representation of Aboriginal women in the prison system has increased by nearly 90 per cent. Despite only representing six per cent of the female youth population in Canada, almost half (44 per cent) of the female youth in custody are Indigenous.

Last spring when I visited the new prison for women in Manitoba, the over-representation of Aboriginal women was truly alarming. When I asked the warden the reason for the incarcerations, she told me "breeches of their conditions." She stated that the majority of women had not originally been sentenced to jail. One "slip" could result in five more charges. Five more charges on her record and jail time. This just doesn't seem right.

We need policies and programmes that ensure that youth who make a mistake don't end up as repeat offenders -- in and out of the prison system -- sentenced to a life of crime. If we can prevent their first offence, even better. So many young offenders tell the same story: "The first time that they ever felt they belonged was when they joined a gang" or that "The first time they'd ever been told they were good at something was shoplifting."

Appalling the Conservatives have slashed $35.6 million (20 per cent) of federal funding for youth justice programs to supervise and rehabilitate young offenders.

The Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS) was created specifically in response to the disproportionate number of Aboriginal persons involved in the criminal justice system, both as offenders and victims. The government's own 2011 evaluation of the AJS found that "there remains a need for culturally relevant alternatives to the mainstream justice system" and said the AJS was "effective in achieving its intermediate outcome of involving Aboriginal communities in the local administration of justice." The response of the government was to slash the funding in half from $20.8 million in 2011 to $10.3 million in 2012.

We know the profile of inmates is changing and that the level of mental illness inside the system is growing. The Correctional Investigator has told us that a modest estimate for the number of male prisoners suffering from mental health issues is 38 per cent, and that for female offenders it is 50 per cent.

Mental Health advocates and those of us concerned with the unacceptable incarceration rate of Aboriginal people in Canada don't believe that prison is an appropriate mental health or housing strategy. It's also way too expensive. As Greenspan and Doob explain in this month's Walrus: "Keeping a single inmate in federal penitentiary costs about $117,000 per year; a provincial inmate about$58,000. Money spent on incarceration is money not spent on services (the police, education, public health, and so on) that the evidence suggests would be more effective at reducing crime."

Unfortunately, the Conservative response has been the opposite of what common sense, and the preponderance of the evidence, tells us is needed. They are closing prisons at the same time they are pursuing sentencing changes that will dramatically increase prison populations. Locking people up in overcrowded conditions for longer will not make us safer. I remember, as a member of the Justice Committee a decade ago, learning that Canada had the lowest recidivism rate in the world. The then Chair of the committee asked a "tough on crime" witness, "If in your approach the inmate comes out to a life of crime and in mine he never re-offends, which system creates a safer society?"

I am disheartened when I read the prediction in this government commissioned report that, "it is highly unlikely that the issues of such a marginalized population will receive the attention and resources necessary to even begin to address the multitude of issues." The Aboriginal population is the youngest and fastest growing population in Canada. Evidence is clear that a "secure, personal and cultural identity" is the key to mental health.

Pride and dignity of who you are is imperative to making good choices. But the Conservative government has effectively turned its back on this tremendous resource and potential source of future prosperity for all Canadians. Aboriginal children on reserve are still receiving only two thirds of the funding per year as children in the provincial system. Only one third of aboriginal children finish high school. Education is the key to economic opportunity but also to staying out of jail.

This isn't an Aboriginal problem, it's a Canadian problem.

All Canadians must realize that it is in all of our interests -- in terms of public safety, cost and untapped human potential -- to heed the call of this report and take "aggressive action" to deal with this national disgrace.]]> Once Again, Harper Gives Northern Issues the Cold Shoulder tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1828443 2012-08-24T17:07:04-04:00 2012-10-24T05:12:11-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
Over the past many years, I have had the privilege of getting to know Canada's North. I first visited the North in 1998 as part of former Liberal MP for Nunavut Nancy Karetak-Lindell's Arctic Caucus with the late MP Shaughnessy Cohen. We were overcome by the majesty of the land and the dignity and pride of the people. I have been back virtually every year since, often two or three times annually, to listen and learn about the unique issues facing our northern communities, as well as the solutions necessary to address them.

I have been to Beechey Island and am supportive of the renewed commitment to seek answers about the deadly Franklin expedition, but the Prime Minister's various announcements ignore the fact that the one nurse in Grise Fiord spends 75 per cent of her budget on transporting patients out of her community.

It ignores the fact that these communities are experiencing climate change firsthand and have no way to deal with its serious and direct impact on their lives. Community food lockers are at-risk as the permafrost thaws; there is no infrastructure to deal with the opening of the North West Passage to shipping and tourism; and exorbitant food prices and overcrowding mean that children go to school hungry, and face a TB rate 137 times the Canadian rate. The Prime Minister must not continue to ignore these issues.

Northern Canadians need their federal government to listen to their concerns and be a true partner in addressing the challenges and opportunities they face. As I said earlier this week, Northerners deserve more than an annual photo op from their prime minister and hollow announcements that never seem to materialize. We will never tackle serious national issues like food insecurity, the crippling cost of living in the North, and education and training gaps for the Inuit, Inu, Dené and all Northerners until the government accepts there are problems in the first place.

As noted recently by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Canada has a serious food insecurity problem and in northern communities some estimates put it as high as 79 per cent, or eight out of 10 people, without sufficient food. Seventy per cent of Inuit preschoolers live in homes where there is not enough food and the government program, Nutrition North, which was supposed to deal with the situation, has failed. Despite this, the government refuses to even admit there is a problem.

The Arctic is preparing for significant large-scale resource development projects, but the federal government is failing to ensure that First Peoples and all Northerners can participate and benefit in a meaningful way. Just this year the Conservatives ended the successful Aboriginal Skills and Employment Partnership, a program in which Canada's resource sector companies were active partners. The government continues to say one thing and do the opposite.

There is confusion surrounding the Prime Minister's announcements of military and infrastructure projects, which never seem to materialize. From Arctic patrol ships to the construction of a deep water port, many of Harper's commitments to northerners have been defunded, delayed or never materialized in the first place. Even the high Arctic research station for which he announced funding on this trip is behind schedule.

While this Prime Minister may speak fervently about northern sovereignty, he fails to acknowledge that it includes more than military deployments. It must also deal with the social and economic welfare of the people who live there. Our northern sovereignty depends on northern peoples. It's time he listened to them and worked with them on their priorities.]]> Attawapiskat didn't Mismanage Funds, Harper -- You Did tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1732146 2012-08-02T07:28:45-04:00 2012-10-02T05:12:06-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/ Federal court ruled
this morning the that the Conservative government's response to the crisis in Attawapiskat was unreasonable and failed to look at any remedy other than the appointment of a Third Party Manager.

Rather that own up to their mistake the Conservative government says it is "disappointed" with the decision. What will it take for this government to take responsibility for its own incompetence?
 
The court made it clear that Attawapiskat did not mismanage funds, as the Conservatives -- from the Prime Minister on down -- accused them of doing in an attempt to deflect blame from themselves. It also made clear that the decision to appoint a third party manager during the Attawapiskat crisis was unreasonable. But this is part of a much broader issue.
 
At the outset, the government knew putting a third party manager in place was the wrong direction to go in. The government's own 2010 review of its intervention policy, which they introduced back in 2006, found that the use of Third Party Management was neither cost effective, nor did it manage to achieve its stated objectives, such as improving conditions in First Nations communities.

In fact, because third party managers are paid out of First Nations community funding, the process was found to simply drain the very limited capacity in these communities without dealing with the underlying issues that led to intervention being considered in the first place.
 
The review noted that third party managers do not generally contribute to capacity building and that there are a number of unintended impacts of the policy. Most notably, the policy has a negative impact on the availability of band support funding for governance and administration and the cost of co-managers and third party managers is particularly high for smaller and more remote communities.
 
The previous federal minister, Chuck Strahl, promised to overhaul the intervention policy back in the summer of 2010, but we have unfortunately seen no action on this commitment.
 
Further, the government's own August 2010 audit of on reserve housing showed that funding is based on bad data and that the government cannot adequately demonstrate the extent to which funding for housing achieves expected outcomes. The government's own assessments of its policy for intervention and its programs for housing showed they were abysmal failures.
 
Yet, the Prime Minister made a political decision to distract Canadians from his government's neglect by blaming the victim. Harper purposely called attention to large aggregate funding numbers for the community, quoting money spent over many years and amalgamating money for programs like health, education and various other social programs most Canadians take for granted. His attempt to divert Canadians with this "sticker shock" created the impression that the community was well funded and the band must have squandered or misused money. 

Shamefully, this was the cornerstone of the government's response to the court decision today. Repeating the misleading figure of $90-million, the government is continuing its campaign of confusion in an attempt to convince Canadians that First Nations are getting large sums of money and that the government is fulfilling its obligations.

This is an impression that has now been established to be unfounded by the federal court. Despite the government's comments about management, they failed to produce any evidence of mismanagement or incorrect spending by the band. Further, the court noted that the $90-million referenced by the Prime Minister, and government spokespeople even today, could not have related exclusively to the funds made available for housing repair or reconstruction.
 
It is clear that this government sees Aboriginal people as adversaries. It chose to smear the reputation of the band instead of owning up to its responsibility to respond to the housing emergency in Attawapiskat.
 
Given today's court decision, the Conservative government should accept responsibility for its own mismanagement of the crisis, abstain from an appeal and reimburse the Attawapiskat band for all funds they were forced to pay for this third party manager. We also need a complete overhaul of the government's intervention policy so that it is focused on partnership and collaboration and deals with issues like capacity development and prevention strategies.

The Conservative government must work with First Nations to find solutions rather than simply trying to deflect blame for their own failures.]]> Please, Mr. Harper, May I Have More? tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1557630 2012-06-01T07:45:36-04:00 2012-08-01T05:12:19-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food recently toured Canada and reported, "very desperate conditions and people who are in extremely dire straits." He raised specific concerns regarding aboriginal peoples including: the high cost of food in the North, the effectiveness of the Nutrition North program, the socio-economic and cultural barriers affecting the food security of those living on reserve, and the jurisdictional buck-passing for First Nations living off reserves. 

The callous Conservative response was to deny the problem and to attack the credibility of the Rapporteur. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney lectured, "the UN should focus on development in countries where people are starving."

Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq went so far as to call the Rapporteur "ill-informed" and "patronizing" for raising these legitimate issues. Speaking of Canadians in the North, she argued that, "We continue to live off the land, eat the seal meat, eat the polar bear meat and whatnot." She then tried to deflect attention from the Conservative government's inaction on food security by raising the seal hunt. Both the Liberal Party and I support the seal hunt, but the fact remains northerners are still suffering from food insecurity issues. Further, the Nutrition North food subsidy plan has been a failure, has not reduced the cost of food, and did not reflect the advice from northerners in its design.

Canada has a serious food insecurity problem and in northern communities some estimates put it as high as 79 per cent, or eight out of 10 people without sufficient food.

The refusal of the Conservative government to admit food insecurity even as an issue was contradicted by aboriginal leaders across the country.

Mary Simon, president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami was crystal clear, "There is food insecurity in the North." She went on to comment specifically on Aglukkaq's denial of the problem, "You know, I haven't talked to her so I am not sure why the position was that because we did work with the regions in the North and we did a report for the Rapporteur and we met with him. So he has first-hand information on the situation as it stands right now in the Arctic."

Manitoba Grand Chief Nepinak said, "I've never seen the minister come to Manitoba to visit the remote communities that I was able to take the rapporteur to. I would trust the observation of the rapporteur ahead of the health minister at this time." Further, the Assembly of First Nations provided a submission to the rapporteur advocating for right to food priorities for First Nations in Canada, including the need to develop and implement a national food policy reflective of First Nation traditions and values.

On May 16, the government of Nunavut also stepped up to address the food insecurity issue announcing its plan to create a food security coalition to ensure people are fed properly. Local initiatives are trying to fill the federal void, but where is the federal Conservative government?

The minister of health needs to admit the serious problems of food security in Canada. She and her Conservative colleagues must put aside the PMO talking points and demonstrate real leadership by working collaboratively with aboriginal communities, provincial and territorial governments, food producers, community groups and experts to develop and implement a comprehensive food policy for Canadians.]]> Canada Sends Its Filmakers Packing tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1457408 2012-04-30T07:25:53-04:00 2012-06-30T05:12:02-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/

One of the huge privileges and joys of being an MP is getting to travel across the country and listen to Canadians talk about their needs, as well as hear their thoughtful proposals for real solutions. It means that we spend a lot of time on planes. Some would think all that time would be a negative thing.

This past Sunday, I flew back to Toronto from Victoria and, as usual, I started the journey clicking the NFB option on the in-flight entertainment. I realized how much I have learned by routinely clicking on that button and how much the NFB has meant to me and so many Canadians as our window to Canada and the world.

We've been thrilled the 12 times the NFB has won an Oscar, and the impressive 72 times NFB films have been nominated in its 73-year history. All the while, our feature film industry struggles. The NFB, CBC, and Telefilm Canada have brilliantly fulfilled their mandate -- telling our stories and interpreting different parts of Canada. With 90 per cent of Canadians living within a 100 miles of the American border, we need government supported institutions that ensure Canadians have access to a secure personal and cultural identity; the essential ingredients of a genuine understanding of our citizenship.

So on a recent flight I began by watching War of 1812 -- Part Two: "Or Leave Our Bones Upon Them...": Chief Tecumseh's reputation grows when he saves the lives of prisoners following the failed attack on Fort Meigs.

As it ended, I wanted to know what I could do to fight for a monument to Tecumseh at least as important as that to General Brock. I wanted all Canadians to see this film, especially this year. Here's a list of the other movies I watched on the plane:

  • Oedipus: Director Paul Driessen offers up a tragicomic version of the classic Greek myth featuring beloved NFB animated characters.



  • Namrata: The courageous story of a Punjabi woman who left an abusive relationship to start both a new life and an exciting career.




  • Project Grizzly: Join Troy James Hurtubise as he tests his grizzly-proof suit of armour in stunts that are both hair-raising and hilarious.


  • The Van Doos in Afghanistan: In March 2011, members of the Royal 22e Régiment speak candidly about their lives during their deployment to Afghanistan.


  • The Mad Canadian: A thrilling close-up of stunt man Ken Carter, who risks life and limb to rocket a car from a ramp over a line of parked cars.


  • Ballet Adagio: A slow-motion study by Norman McLaren of the pas-de-deux adagio, one of the most exciting dances of classical ballet.


All of a sudden, the captain was telling us it was time to land. I had crossed Canada and at the same time been treated to an amazing buffet of our stories.

I confess that I am married to a passionate Canadian filmmaker. Peter O'Brian was born in Canada, but because his father had been a RAF Spitfire pilot in the Battle of Britain, he was raised in the UK until he was 12. He spent those years as a proud Canadian, loving hockey and boasting about his summers on the Georgian Bay.

From the day we met, his passion for Canadian cinema, and his conviction that it is a necessity for Canada, have been contagious to me and to everyone he touches. He believes Canada has wonderful stories to tell.

But he also believes the proximity to the American market and Hollywood has made the pursuit of our own cinema more difficult than anywhere else in the world. The United States' market is 10 times as large as ours, and our filmmakers, directors, writers, and actors have often had to go south to make a living. Many would rather have been able to stay here in Canada and tell OUR stories. The Quebec cinema is the exception to the rule. Les Quebecois and Quebecoise support their cinema and actually go and watch their films!

Film and television production is truly important to the Canadian economy. According to the 2011 Canadian Film and Television Production Association Report, it is $5.49 billion in production volume, $2.26 billion in export volume, creating 128,000 jobs. From camera operators to grips, to makeup artists and art department and production staff, we have some of the best crews in the world.

With the parity of the Canadian dollar, it is now a reality that American filmmakers no longer find it cheaper to come North to Canada to shoot their films. It should have been obvious that it is the time for the government to incent more truly Canadian productions here in Canada.

Instead they cut. They cut the NFB. They cut the CBC and its ability to commission Canadian productions. They cut Telefilm Canada and its ability to help finance Canadian films. Our industry is fragile. Securing a broadcast deal with CBC could mean the difference between getting a film made or not.

In 1979, when I first met Peter, I was proud to tell him I had seen Outrageous, the film starring Craig Russell. I was thrilled to learn that he had been associate producer. Peter was then in post-production of Fast Company, one of David Cronenberg's early films. We met January 1 and were married May 19. I fell in love with him, but I also fell in love with what he was trying to do: tell Canadian stories.

Shortly thereafter, Peter started talking about a genius filmmaker, Phillip Borsos, who had made some beautiful documentaries, including Cooperage and Spartree, and also Nails with the help of the NFB. We watched them together. Nails was nominated for an Oscar. We were with Phillip in spirit that night at the Dorothy Chandler pavilion -- so proud of Phillip and Canada. He didn't win, but he carried the torch for all of us.

Peter and I discussed whether he should take the risk in trying to make Phillip's first feature film -- The Grey Fox. He did, and it won the Genie for Best Picture in 1983. He then produced Sandy Wilson's first feature My American Cousin, and it won the Genie in 1986. Phillip had the vision of a Canadian Christmas movie and his One Magic Christmas has become a Christmas classic internationally.

It was Sarah Polley's first film acting role. From Milk and Honey, the poignant story of a Jamaican nanny in Toronto, to Gordon Pinsent's heart wrenching John and the Missus, I have been at the rough cut screenings, hugely worried whether Canadians would be able to see that our stories are important and worth seeing.

Phillip's last film before he died, Far from Home, the Adventures of Yellow Dog, ended up the most rented video the following July. When Peter directed Hollywood North, he told a story that hilariously yet poignantly explained the challenges of the early days of trying to create a Canadian cinema.

So, I am not happy with the cuts to the NFB, CBC and Telefim. It's culturally dumb. It's economically dumb. The cuts will only mean less jobs for the talented people working in this industry. We want them to be able to work here in Canada.

It's time that the government's support for telling our stories was not viewed as some fluffy option. It is as much an "Economic Action Plan" as any of the projects we've seen sporting those annoying signs. This Conservative Government needs to look at the evidence. If they want to celebrate the War of 1812 and the role of aboriginal peoples, they should take the time to look at the McKenna brothers' NFB War of 1812 documentaries. Then they should think about the many more stories we should be telling in order that Canadians can better understand our history and our values and how and why we've ended up the best country in the world.

Meegwetch.]]> Hiding Behind Your Ethnicity isn't the Answer to Aboriginal Health Cuts, Minister tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1448626 2012-04-24T09:40:22-04:00 2012-06-24T05:12:01-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
Mr. Speaker, unbelievably, the Minister of Health has made Aboriginal health the number one target for cuts in her department. She has cut programs for diabetes, youth suicide and Aboriginal health human resources. She says she is protecting front line services. Does the minister really believe that disease prevention and health promotion is not a front line service?

A minister has choices. Could the minister explain to the House why her cuts target the population with the worst health outcomes in Canada, the Aboriginal people of Canada?


In response the minister accused me of crossing the racial line in my questioning:

Mr. Speaker, as an aboriginal person I take that type of line of questioning to be unacceptable. Our government has ensured that we have protected the front line services of all heath care services across the sector.

Our government takes first nations health seriously. There were a number of funding initiatives in budget 2012 to improve water systems on reserve. We are funding $30 million annually for Aboriginal health research. Last year we invested $2.2 billion in first nations and Inuit health programs. Why does the member not support that?


My question simply repeated the concerns of First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities that the budget's cuts to Aboriginal health promotion and disease promotion will increase the gap in health outcomes, reduce capacity at the community level and increase the pressure on front-line community health services.

My question certainly hit a nerve with the minisiter. The truth hurts. In defending the indefensible, she reacted emotionally with "best defence is a good offence." There is no possible "defence" for her budget choices and no one accepts her choice of a deflecting "offence." Except that it was offensive.

Here are the facts:
  • The health budget of the Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) was cut by 100 per cent.

  • The health budget of the Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada was cut by 100 per cent.

  • The health budget of the Métis National Council (MNC) was cut by 100 per cent.

  • The health budget of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK) was cut by 40 per cent.

  • The health budget of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) was cut by 40 per cent.


The largest number of job cuts at Health Canada are in the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch. And funding for the essential work of the National Aboriginal Health Organization was permanently pulled, without being reallocated to another vehicle for collaborative, community-based Aboriginal health research.

These facts speak for themselves. That is why my colleague Hedy Fry and I wrote to the minister last Friday to call on her to immediately reverse her department's cuts to Aboriginal health.

Perhaps the minister objected to my comment that "her cuts target the population with the worst health outcomes in Canada, the Aboriginal people of Canada?"

Once again, I was simply repeating what Aboriginal organizations, front-line health workers, First Nations, Inuit and Meétis leaders, and most importantly, the statistics, show.

According to the most recent data from the Public Health Agency of Canada, the tuberculosis rate among Inuit is 284 times the rate for the Canadian-born non-Aboriginal population.

According to ITK, the Inuit suicide rate is 11 times higher than the national average.

According to NWAC, "Aboriginal women are newly diagnosed with HIV at over three times the rate of their non-Aboriginal counterparts, have atrocious disparities in suicide rates, and live on average almost six years less than Aboriginal women."

And as I witnessed first hand recently in my visit to Nishnawbe Aski Nation communities, some northern and remote First Nations communities are confronting far higher rates of prescription drug addiction and suicide than other parts of Canada.

Evidence doesn't lie.

Minister Aglukkaq should stop attacking the opposition and listen to what Aboriginal leaders said about her decision to dramatically cut Health Canada's funding for Aboriginal health.

NWAC responded by saying that, "Aboriginal women are the least healthy and suffer the greatest chronic health conditions than any other segment of Canadian society. The burden of ill health affects them as individuals, their families, communities and the health system as a whole. However, Aboriginal women lag far behind the rest of the Canadian population in both of these areas."

ITK President Mary Simon told the CBC that, "I really fail to see the logic. The government is saying aboriginal people are a priority for this country, but you take away the tools for the national organizations to do their work?" Further, she called the cuts "unconscionable," and predicted that they would "have major and direct negative impacts on the Inuit" making "a terrible situation worse."

Pauktuutit President Elisapee Sheutiapik "expressed extreme concern and dismay" over the cuts and concluded, "as Canadian citizens we have the right to the same health status and life expectancy as others, and the federal government has a responsibility to work with us to address the very serious health issues we are facing in our communities."

It is my job as critic/"porte-parole" to hold the government to account. My job is to be the "spokesperson'"in the House for those affected by government polices and budget choices. My job is to be a strong voice on the problems as they and I see them and to present the alternative solutions.

My line of question was entirely legitimate. It is the minister's refusal to listen to Aboriginal communities and admit the certain and negative impact of her budget cuts that is completely unacceptable.

The minister has also presided over an unprecedented attack on women's health. The most recent victim is the Women's Health Contribution Program, which supports Le Réseau Québécois d'Action pour la Santé des Femmes, the Canadian Women's Health Network, the Atlantic Centre of Excellence for Women's Health, the British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's Health, the Prairie Women's Health Centre of Excellence and the National Network on Environments and Women's Health.

Monday's line of defence won't work there either. As I said in my question, "Ministers have choices." The minister is accountable for those choices.]]> Anatomy of a Canadian Disgrace tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1378443 2012-03-26T10:44:28-04:00 2012-05-26T05:12:01-04:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
The question is no longer whether there were nefarious activities to secure a Conservative victory in the Canadian Election in 2011. The question is "who done 'em?"

Long before the 2011 election, the Conservative party has had a policy of refusing to admit when they've done wrong and instead ridicule and scorn those who question their "end justifies the means" modus operandi, both in and outside Parliament.

The Conservative party is the first party since Confederation to be found to have committed election spending fraud for their "In and Out" scheme, which masterminded an overspending the election spending limit by one million dollars in the 2006 election and then have taxpayer-funded rebates fill the coffers of the participating ridings. They paid the relatively small fine and then unbelievably declared a VICTORY. No remorse, no "We're sorry," no "It won't happen again," no consequences. It seems no lessons learned other than: "That didn't hurt much -- what can we do next to get a majority?"

My colleague Mark Eyking has likened this to speeding on the highways in Central America with a wad of $20 bills in your pocket to offer to the police whenever you're stopped. This is an approach that has no respect for the law; the fine or bribe is just the cost of doing business.

It is clear that in Canada, even with respected institutions such as Elections Canada, we do not have in place the framework or consequences necessary to deal with operatives who will just happily pay the fines and carry on with behaviour that undermines the institutions and processes essential to maintain the integrity of our democracy in Canada. If a political party, indeed the governing party, can just pay a fine and those named can carry on as though nothing happened, if the MP's of the ridings involved in the illegal scheme suffer absolutely no consequences, how can we be surprised that these perpetrators will continue to flaunt the law and carry on with their "Catch me if you can and if you do catch me I'll just pay the fine" approach?

The 2011 election in Canada has been described by Bob Rae as Canada's "Nixonian moment." Question Period is dominated by eerily familiar "I am not a crook" rhetoric when they are not pathetically "blaming the victim" -- suggesting that the Liberal party would have been calling voters/supporters at midnight during their Passover Seder, calling again and again until they were truly irritated, and then calling on Election Day with the wrong address for the polling station.

I believe the Conservative party has to admit that they were behind the calls to Irwin Cotler's riding lying about his so-called imminent retirement. Will they admit that they were behind the calls into Glen Pearson's riding falsely informing voters that he spent six months a year in Southern Sudan? Glen's voting record would have made it quite clear that that was not the case, but the calls were placed so close to election day that Glen had no opportunity to defend himself and explain that he spent 10 days in Sudan every year in January when Parliament isn't sitting.

Whether it is the Conservative party itself or some others illegally working to "help" the conservative cause, the revelations of the misdeeds of the 41st election in Canada is an international disgrace. As former Chief Electoral Officer Jean-Pierre Kingsley has said, "We have never seen anything like this alleged case in terms of this potential organization and in terms of numbers."

In recent years, we have come to learn about the new science of voter suppression; an anti-democratic tactic that falls short of outright election fraud. In Stealing Democracy, Spencer Overton documents the truly appalling tactics and strategies being used to turn off voters and keep them home on election day. These strategies are particularly effective for young people, women, aboriginals, tenants, and immigrants, all of whom tend to vote for more progressive parties. The theory is premised on the reality that those who vote for right-wing parties -- what professor Christopher Waddell has called "permamad" -- are very good at turning out to the polling stations regardless of the election issues, candidates, weather. They vote. The theory continues that the lower the voter turnout, the greater the influence the right-wing parties will have on the outcome of an election.

A steady, unrelenting campaign that "all government is bad," "all politicians are bad," "pox on all their houses," "what does it even matter if you vote?'" and when caught "the other guys did it too," all compounded by negative advertising, drives the cynicism up and the voter turnout down. Over the years we've seen gerrymandering that turns ridings in smaller urban centres into pie piece shapes with tiny urban tips and predominately rural voters. We've watched polling stations removed from apartment buildings to locations less convenient to tenants.

Sadly, we have received more and more reports of irregularities in the last federal election. Even here in St. Paul's, Jewish voters were called during the first Passover Seder by callers misrepresenting themselves from the "Dr. Carolyn Bennett" campaign. We knew immediately that it wasn't our campaign -- we don't use "Dr." when referring to my campaign and we had made a decision NOT to call on the evening of April 18, 2011. On April 20, we reported these complaints to Elections Canada. Throughout the campaign, voters were reporting they had been called "numerous" times by our campaign, when the truth was, we had not engaged a call centre at all in that campaign and our volunteers had barely been able to call each household once! On Election Day, voters were called to be told that their polling station location had been changed -- an outright lie. One constituent, when she questioned the caller, was also told that she could vote twice.

More recently, truly serious revelations of calls misrepresenting themselves as from Elections Canada, directing voters to false voting locations, "stealing ballot boxes," organizing people not on the voters' list to "swear in" and vote anyway have put the results of the last election in question.

We believe that Elections Canada and the RCMP must have the resources to get to the bottom of any irregularities in last year's election. Elections Canada has identified 700 complaints from voters across the country with specific circumstances where they believe similar wrongdoing took place. The overwhelming majority of Canadians are calling for a public inquiry and the need for Elections Canada to have the powers to get to the bottom of this criminal activity. We believe that Elections Canada and the RCMP must have the resources to get to the bottom of any irregularities in last year's election.

In February, we had a terrific Town Hall meeting in St Paul's on electoral reform and the need for a more proportional system. The speakers were the Honourable Stephane Dion, Dave Meslin, Wayne Smith of Fair Vote Canada, and Donna Dasko of Equal Voice. The video is up on my website. We were all concerned that in the present system a majority government can be elected with only 39% of the 59% of eligible Canadians that voted. There were many comments that the so-called "strong mandate" for this government was actually derived from a small minority of Canadians. It was a truly important discussion on how we can work together over the next few years to build the civic literacy that will enable a serious conversation on reform of the electoral system. As we were discussing the need for a more representative democracy, we had no idea of the seriousness of the allegation of election fraud that would surface a month later. Electoral Reform is truly important. Electoral Fraud is criminal.

Last week, Bob Rae and the Liberal party called for a Royal Commission that would be able to recommend the necessary changes to ensure our elections procedures and enforcement mechanisms are robust enough to ensure every Canadian can freely exercise their right to vote.

The health of our democracy is at risk. Citizens have been seriously turned off. We need them back fighting for "peace, order and good government." Change will only happen when Canadians demand it. Let's get to the bottom of the problems with the 41st election and call upon the government to strike a Royal Commission to ensure that it can never happen again.

***

It's not too late to report any incidents of electoral fraud. If you received any calls during the 2011 election that you feel interfered with your right to vote, please report it to the Commissioner of Elections Canada at: http://www.elections.ca/commissioner/complaint.aspx?lang=e.]]> Remembering École Polytechnique tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1132393 2011-12-06T17:29:59-05:00 2012-02-05T05:12:01-05:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/ wonderful poem that Stevie Cameron wrote the next day.

Twenty-one years of candles and roses and speakers and guitar solos and the names of each of the 14 women read slowly with less than perfect French accents.

Yet this morning felt profoundly different. I remember the wave numbing disbelief on hearing of the events that afternoon in 1989. I remember the fervour with which we planned the first memorial service in 1990 at Women's College Hospital. The following year the Parliament of Canada designated Dec. 6 the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women, honouring the victims of École Polytechnique. That year the White Ribbon Campaign was founded, with men organizing to fight violence against women. We celebrated years of progress -- legislation that made stalking illegal, gun control and "smart on crime" policies that resulted in truly safer communities. Evidence-based polices worked to lower crime rates by reducing recidivism, dealing differently with crimes committed by those suffering from mental illness or addictions. According to feminist lawyer Pamela Cross, the homicide rate has steadily declined except in one area -- still almost every week one or two women are murdered by an intimate partner or previous partner.

Last night as we were standing in our places voting against the omnibus crime bill, sporting our Leadnow.ca "Safer not Meaner" buttons, it felt like we were letting Canada down. The results of the last election have meant that even though 60 per cent of Canadians voted for progressive policies, the majority Conservative government is actively dismantling the progress we had made. We thought especially of those families and friends of the young women we lost at École Polytechnique and Dawson College. The victims of terrorism too. Member of Parliament Irwin Cotler had tabled amendments on their behalf, which the government members voted against in committee, and then in a spectacle of parliamentary ignorance, tried to table them as Conservative amendments in the House. It was a display of rabid partisanship instead of allowing parliamentarians to do their work creating better laws and better public policy. Ideology over evidence.

The 21st commemoration ceremony today will not signify the "coming of age" of the violence against women movement. It sadly signals the day on which, in spite of real progress, we feel we all must begin the fight again.]]> What's the Difference Between Parliament and Government? Democracy. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1127035 2011-12-06T12:50:49-05:00 2012-02-05T05:12:01-05:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/ responded that this government was actually "tough on democracy."

From controlling which witnesses appear before parliamentary committees, to repeatedly cutting off debate, the Conservatives are using their majority status to silence the voices of the 60 per cent of Canadians that didn't vote for them and their elected representatives. It's a bad strategy. The government has the arithmetic on its side. They can afford to be generous and let the debate take place. Their bills will pass anyway. They should not be seen to be compounding bad legislation by shutting down the parliamentary process.

The late James Travers observed in a column in the Toronto Star that it has taken 500 years to wrestle power from the king and only 50 years to get the power back in one man's office. Historians and political scientists like the late Tom Kent and Donald Savoie and Thomas Axworthy have documented the steady decline in the role of parliamentarians and the rise in power of the prime minister and the Prime Minister's Office.

As a Liberal, I know that the centralization of power began in the late '60s with Trudeau's PMO. His observation that MPs were nobodies within 50 yards from Parliament Hill was unfortunately made during a Conservative filibuster requesting rule changes in the House of Commons. David Collenette once observed that ministers who have never been backbenchers have trouble understanding that those pesky MPs are not trying to wreck the government's legislation -- they are really trying to improve it after listening to the thoughtful witnesses who come before their committees.

In 1992, near the end of the Mulroney era, an all-party committee chaired by Conservative MP James McGrath laid out important course corrections that were meant to restore the ability of Parliament to hold government to account. Jeffrey Simpson entitled his book on Jean Chrétien The Friendly Dictator, albeit he depicted his rule as benevolent, and he acknowledged Chretien's expectation that ministers would run their own departments. Paul Martin, the son of a parliamentarian, spoke eloquently about the need for democratic reform. The question, "Who do you know in the PMO?" was becoming far too common, and telegraphed the message that the unelected posse around the prime minister was superseding the role of parliamentarians. Unfortunately, his PMO did not reverse the trend.

In 2002, Deb Gray, Yves Morin and I authored a study with the Library of Parliament which researched MP's views on parliamentary reform. The recommendations in our report, The Parliament We Want, are even more poignant now. This government has refused to govern and refused to abide by the will of Parliament. The Stephen Harper administration and perpetual campaign communication machine have replaced our parliamentary democracy.

The PMO directs the messages from ministers, ambassadors and even the sacred Statements by Members that precede Question Period every day. The House has passed motions and bills that the government has ignored. Votes taken on Kyoto, the Kelowna Accord, child care, war resisters, and gun control have passed in the House and then been treated by the government as nuisance suggestions they can ignore. Their handbook of dirty tricks -- yes, there actually is a handbook -- has been successfully used by Conservative members to degrade what was once the best of Parliament: the Standing Committees that in the past have often tabled unanimous reports giving guidance to government in areas of national importance. Conservative MPs seem to be prepared to just suit up in the team jerseys and spew the talking points. I am filled with nostalgia for my days as a backbencher in a Liberal majority -- fighting for tobacco control, victims of hepatitis C and changes to the Disability Tax Credit to help people with mental health problems. We were trying to help our government make better public policy.

Enough already. We need to spend the next four years building up the civic literacy of Canadians so that they too will understand that Stephen Harper is actively dismantling our democratic processes. Many Canadians haven't really understood how they are governed. Close to 90 per cent of us live within 100 miles of the American border and we are inundated with CNN and Fox News. It has been hard to convince Canadians that in a parliamentary democracy we don't directly elect our prime minister. Often, the party the prime minister leads has received less than 40 per cent of the vote -- the majority of voters voted for the other parties. The prime minister is only able to govern because he can muster a majority in the House of Commons. He is not a president who has a direct mandate from voters.

Understanding the difference between government and Parliament is the bedrock of our democracy. Government (or the Executive) is made up of the prime minister, the cabinet ministers and the public service. The Commons was put in place to "control the purse." It was so frustrating during the past election trying to explain "contempt of Parliament." The government was thwarting the ability of Parliament to hold it to account by misleading the House and refusing to provide documents or the costing of bills. It is virtually impossible to make the case of contempt of Parliament when Canadians think government and Parliament are one and the same.

We have four years to ensure that Canadians better understand how a parliamentary democracy is supposed to work. Their voices are being silenced as Stephen Harper rules with his divine paternalism. Power to the people and to the MPs elected to represent them.]]> Were You Manipulated By Voter Supression? tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1012513 2011-10-20T09:09:32-04:00 2011-12-20T05:12:01-05:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/
Although Ontarians utilized their ability to vote differently provincially and federally, sadly way less of them actually voted. This is a truly worrying trend. It also no surprise that, as the 'cynicism thermometer' rises, voter turnout drops.

It is important that we understand what is really going on. This isn't by accident. I generally have no truck with conspiracy theorists. But I believe that there is a concerted campaign by right-wing parties to do everything in their power to reduce the voter turnout. Negative advertising fuels the flames of cynicism and voters stay home. Lee Iacocca, former CEO of Chrysler, once said that if automobile executives denounced one another's cars and safety records the way politicians speak about one another, no one would ever buy a car. He has beautifully explained decreased voter turnout.

I believe voter suppression tactics are working. They are effectively eroding the fundamentals of our democracy; when citizens are turned off and tune out, the right-wing 'perma-mad' folks vote in great numbers regardless. I think that when cynicism rises, the youth, tenants, indigenous peoples, new citizens stay home. Some of the most vulnerable, those who benefit the most from government services, are persuaded that it doesn't matter if you vote or not and that all government is bad. When government is caught doing something wrong, the response that "the previous government did it too" works.

Elizabeth May has described a sinister strategy of 'voter abandonment'. Lawrence Martin described it in a column in the Globe and Mail as an effort "to drive the ever-diminishing participation in Canadian elections down further... it then becomes a matter of which party can get its base to vote in the largest numbers."

Martin continues, "In the 2008 election campaign, (May) maintained, Mr. Harper purposely drove down voter participation in several ways. He called a snap election, he had the minimum numbers of days for a campaign, he had election day right after the long Thanksgiving weekend, he had changes made in the Elections Act that meant people couldn't vote without additional ID, and his attack ads increased cynicism toward politics. The result was that every party's total vote number went down, except the Green Party's. In the May view, the cynical plan for the future is to drive down the numbers even more."


I am not pessimistic -- I believe voter suppression will ultimately fail. Young people particularly have an innate sense of when they are being manipulated.

St. Paul's is one of the youngest riding in the country. It is not the richest and a majority of its residents are tenants. Yet in the 2006 federal election we were proud to have a 72.2 per cent voter turnout (64.7 per cent nationally), and were saddened to see it drop to 64 per cent in 2008 (58.8 per cent nationally). In the 2009 provincial by-election in St. Paul's the voter turnout was a worrying 33.26 per cent. Voter turnout in by-elections tends to be low, but even the turnout in the 2007 provincial general election was only 52.10 per cent.

We work hard in St. Paul's on our 'Democracy between Elections' model with weekly on-line chats, regular townhalls and roundtables, 'neighbourhood check-ups,' classroom visits as well as our bi-annual St. Paul's Summit in which all elected representatives come together to hear from constituents. We believe that meaningful engagement is a strong antidote to apathy and cynicism.

We can and must do better. As we say at the door, "if you don't vote, you don't get to complain." But there is something sinister happening to put people off politics. The belief that politicians are all just as bad as one another or that it doesn't matter if I vote or not means that people who may not share our views will determine the direction of our beloved city, province, country. Democracy is dependent upon good people running for public office and citizens paying attention and then participating in the choice of their representatives. We cannot continue on this downward slide. Voter turn-out is a serious metric on the health of our democracy.

Thankfully enough Ontarians were paying attention on Oct. 6 to elect a Liberal Government. But I believe that with a greater voter turnout, Dalton McGuinty would have had a majority.

We need to spend the years before the next municipal, provincial and federal elections developing the civic literacy and earning back respect for our democratic institutions in order to ensure that cynicism is down, and voter turn-out is up. Only then can our governments reflect the needs of all of its citizens -- especially its most vulnerable.
]]> Harper's New Bill Is Dumb on Crime tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.984231 2011-09-29T10:52:29-04:00 2011-11-29T05:12:01-05:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/ Bill C-10, "The Safer Streets, Safer Communities Act," which, according to all the experts and the evidence, will not produce safer streets or safer communities. It may, in fact, do exactly the opposite.

Statscan reported this summer that "the police-reported crime rate, which measures the overall volume of crime, continued to decline in 2010 (down five per cent), reaching its lowest level since 1973."

The reckless ideological approach of this Conservative government risks reversing this Canadian success story.

Years ago, I sat on the Standing Committee on Justice when Anne McLellan was revising the Youth Criminal Justice Act. I remember Hon. Andy Scott asking which approach -- one where the offender comes out to a life of crime, or a therapeutic 'give them a chance to turn their life around' approach -- will lead to safer communities? At that time, Canada already had the lowest recidivism rate in the world. Experts from around the world were coming to see what Canada was doing right.

University of Ottawa law professor Errol Mendes has called the Conservatives' proposals one of the "most punishment-focused agendas in Canadian history." Previous governments put in place evidence-based crime-prevention policies that were working. Drug Treatment Courts and Mental Health Courts can effectively deal with these special populations in the community. Excellent programming within the federal corrections system had been paying off; defence counsel were asking judges for "two years plus a day" in order for their client to have access to the programming in the federal institutions. Addiction programming and anger management programming were working to diminish the likelihood of re-offending. For many, the ability to finish their education, even earn a degree, was the real road to becoming a law-abiding citizen.

On a visit to one of the federal institutions, a warden proudly told Hon. Andy Scott and I that when an inmate leaves with a B.A., he/she needs new friends, and will undoubtedly return to society a productive citizen. The 'corrections' system was then properly focused on 'correcting' the behaviour of the offender wherever possible. The goal was, once they had 'done their time,' they would never come back.

I remember the testimony of a former young offender named Matt Geigen-Miller who became the poster child for our committee as his story was a demonstration of what getting a second chance can mean. Matt testified on behalf of an NGO called the National Youth in Care Network which advocates for youth in group homes and institutions. We need to ask the justice minister how he thinks that incarcerating a young person caught with six marijuana plants for six months in 'crime school' will do anything but ruin his chances of a productive life.

As my parliamentary colleague Geoff Regan said in a recent presentation at Dalhousie Law School, "Prisoners go in for minor crimes and come out of a broken, overloaded system ready to do dangerous, serious crimes. It's analogous to putting in a butter knife and churning out a machine gun."

This Bill is just 'dumb on crime.' The kids in trouble are real people with real problems. Some statistics have shown up to 70 per cent have a learning disability or problems such as Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. Some kids have had a tough life. We know that child abuse is a serious pre-condition to addiction and violence. The inability to trust those charged with your care leads to an inability to trust authority figures period. A sense of belonging matters. I remember a young man in my riding who confided to me that the first time he'd ever felt that 'he belonged' was when he joined a gang. He told me that the first thing he'd ever been told he was good at was shoplifting.

Here in Ontario, we lived the consequences of the Mike Harris cuts to school arts, music and sports. Without outlets for these talents, young people struggling with academics get into trouble. In 2005, turning around the guns and gangs required the cooperation of all levels of government and most government departments. At the time, Mayor David Miller asked Justice McMurtry to chair a community safety committee, which brought together Federal Ministers John Godfrey and myself, Provincial Ministers Monte Kwinter and Michael Bryant, the Toronto District School Board, Toronto's Chief of Police Bill Blair, city councillors and youth cabinet members. All members of the committee were able to tap into the resources of their departments and their colleagues. We developed a plan for homework clubs and sports infrastructure, training programmes and anything we could think of that would be able to create a sense of pride and belonging. Former prime minister Martin met with us all. I remember the powerful effect of the interventions of the youth cabinet members. We ended up with safer communities -- this approach was 'smart on crime.'

Prisons seem to be the Conservative mental health and housing strategy -- unfortunately their only infrastructure and job creation strategy. Perhaps if they transferred the resources they've budgeted for expanded prisons to proper investments in housing, mental health and education, we would continue to make real progress in creating truly safe communities where citizens would be able to live in dignity and willing and able to make a positive contribution to their communities.

The shocking statistics with respect to the incarceration of Aboriginal peoples speak to the need for real reform, not the failed American approach represented in Bill C-10. Aboriginal people are three per cent of the Canadian population, yet make up 18 per cent of the prison population. For Aboriginal women, it's even worse -- approximately 30 per cent of incarcerated women in Canada are First Nations, Metis or Inuit.

We know a great deal about the social determinants of health and mental health. Bill Mussell from the Native Mental Health Association speaks eloquently on the importance of "secure personal and cultural identity" in achieving the self-esteem and resilience necessary to make healthy choices. We have much work to do to reverse the consequences of colonization and residential schools. Chandler's research on youth suicide in Aboriginal communities demonstrates huge success when land claims, education, health, police and fire services, and cultural facilities and ceremonies are in place. Without these basics, there is no social justice. Without social justice, crime flourishes.

Newt Gingrich has advised the Conservative government not to follow the bad example of the U.S. If incarceration of a huge percentage of the population and, in particular, the most marginalized populations, was good public policy, the Americans would have the safest streets and communities in the world. That is clearly not the case. In the U.S., there are 743 people incarcerated per 100,000 citizens, compared to Canada's 117 people incarcerated per 100,000 citizens. The policies of mandatory minimums are bankrupting the States and clearly don't work.

Canadians should be able to trust their government to put forward good laws based in clear evidence that they will effect the stated goals. C-10, "The Safer Streets and Communities Act", is a bad law that will cost billions of dollars without any evidence that our streets or communities will be safer. H.L. Mencken said that for every complex human problem there is neat simple solution; it's just that it's wrong. Complex problems require complex solutions. Creating safer streets and communities is a complex challenge, requiring serious approaches to crime prevention, especially to turn around the lives of those who do get in trouble with the law, and a much more courageous approach to identifying and keeping the truly dangerous psychopaths and sociopaths off our streets. C-10 is a 'solution' that is simply wrong.

One of my constituent just emailed me: "Walking home from the Wychwood Barns this morning, I saw a man wearing a T-shirt with the following text: 'Fighting crime by building more prisons is like fighting cancer by building more cemeteries.' Keep fighting the good fight."

Couldn't say it better! ]]> Sept. 18: The 10th Anniversary of Parliament's Reaction to 9/11 tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.963893 2011-09-18T13:50:52-04:00 2011-11-18T05:12:02-05:00 Hon. Carolyn Bennett http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hon-carolyn-bennett/


Shimon Perez once told our Canadian parliamentary delegation that the radical Islamists are actually "fighting against a modern world." The former Israeli Ambassador to Canada, Haim Divon explained that Israel's enemies saw Israel as 'little Satan' but that the U.S. was the 'big Satan' as it was the icon for the "modern Western world."

Ten years ago, the attack on the World Trade Center was the ultimate and deadly expression of the 'war against a modern world.'

On Sept. 15, 2001, Marcus Gee wrote in The Globe and Mail:

"Terrorism is a deliberate form of political or ideological warfare waged by fanatics with a disposition for unlimited violence. In the case of extreme religious terrorists, whether Islamic or Christian or Sikh, they are engaged in a holy war, a struggle for the fate of the world that justifies any amount of bloodshed."


Last Sunday, I attended the EMS 9/11 Ceremony at Toronto City Hall with my neighbour Rob Tyrie, who had been on the 40th floor of the North Tower of the World Trade Center when it was hit 10 years ago. He reminded me that when he returned to Toronto, he crossed the street and knocked on my door. He wanted to make sure that I would convey to all decision makers how real it was. He had experienced the horror first-hand. He was clear that what he wanted from his government was a solution for the next 100 years. He agreed with former Prime Minister Jean Chretien's opinion that "we must be guided by a commitment to do what works in the long run, not by what makes us feel better in the short run."

Rob was extraordinarily convincing in his argument that the perpetrators had spent years planning this assault on our civilized world. If it takes years to ensure that it can never happen again, he said that he would feel well served by our government and the coalition it is building. He wanted to make sure that we would do what works, not what makes us feel better for a minute. He wanted to tell the prime minister in person, as someone who had experienced that day in New York City that was 9/11.

Although Rob didn't get to speak to the prime minister directly, I hope I was able to convey Rob's urgent plea for long-term solutions in my speech in the House of Commons on Sept. 18, 2001, and forever after in every ensuing conversation on and off Parliament Hill.

Sunday morning, while we were waiting for the march past of the police, firefighters, EMS and war veterans in Nathan Phillips Square, Rob talked about the question everyone needed to ask: "Are we safer 10 years later ?" Rob had read and was impressed and moved by Michael Ignatieff's poignant piece in The Globe and Mail Friday Sept. 9. Rob, too, was worried that, billions of dollars for security later, laws that restrict our freedoms are about to re-introduced, while Parliament is unable to oversee the government of the day.

Are we closer to the long-term solution 10 years later, even with Osama bin Laden dead? Rob had sent me the piece he had written the day that Osama Bin Laden had been killed:

"I did not feel jubilation and pure happiness, like the faces I was seeing in Washington at the cheering mob quickly forming in front of the White House. Just calm relief. As the news unfolded, this didn't change. I wondered over the implications. The meaning to me, to the US, to New York, to all the families that lost sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, the people I was with and closest to on 9/11." At the end of his piece he commented on President Obama's speech "With that calm resolve, might come peace."



Optimism. Hope. Calm resolve. We have to believe that we can build a better world. A world free of hatred. A world at peace, with peace not being just the absence of war, but peace in the fullest sense -- the presence of a social justice.

Every year, I reread the words I spoke in the House of Commons on Sept. 18, 2001. I had spent a week listening to people in the riding. My father and father-in-law had profound observations on how the 'freedoms' they had fought for in World War II would now have to be 'fought' for differently.

I spent a lot of time that week talking to my friend, the inspiring scientist and pacifist, Ursula Franklin. Ursula had suggested that the 'injury' that was 9/11 should be looked upon as the result of an 'infection.' She wanted me as a physician to explain that we needed to help build up the' antibodies' against this 'infection' -- the antibodies of social justice and caring. Her goal was an effective' immune system' in every part of this tiny planet. She reminded me that hatred is virulent. That it is learned. Contagious. That it is like an acquired infection. She warned that it should not be compared to a cancer. That there is no gene for hatred. As of then, we had not found any 'immunization' against cancer. She wanted us to recommit to improving the caring, education and justice that could immunize the world against the collective weakness that allows terrorism to flourish. She believed that we must begin with our children, the children in Northern Ireland, in the Middle East, in Bosnia, here in Canada.

Ten years later, we need to redouble our efforts to seek, as Rob Tyrie said then, a solution that will last 100 years. We must work to support good government around the world which is fair, transparent and takes people seriously. We must use our brains and our technology to deal with this modern lack of justice. I'm afraid we must start again with a much broader and longer-term vision. Our sons and daughters and grandchildren and great-grandchildren are counting on us.

Ten years later my closing thoughts are the same as they were standing in the House of Commons on Sept. 18,2001: "My son put it best: 'We are all just earthlings and we have to learn how to share this rock.' It is now the time for all like-minded nations to work together to make a safe planet for all of us. We must urgently move forward to effect worldwide the presence of justice, a true peace."
]]>