Web Analytics

Protests against the proposed First Nations Education Act to be held Wednesday

First Nations people and ally supporters will rally around Indian Affairs offices across the province tomorrow to say no to the conservative governments proposed takeover of education on all First Nations territories across the country.

stopeduact

First Nations people and ally supporters will rally around Indian Affairs offices across the province tomorrow to say no to the conservative governments proposed takeover of education on all First Nations territories across the country.

Last week press releases were issued from First Nations across the country in a sweeping rejection to the proposed bill. The London District Chiefs Council, representing nine of the Southwestern Ontario reserves, issued a press release urging people to reject the act and take part in the rally outside the Toronto Indian Affairs office.

The press release which can be read here includes this message from London District Chiefs Council Chair and Delaware Nation Chief Greg Peters. “Our children who attend school on-reserve receive substantially less funding provided to non-First Nations students attending provincial school,” says Chief Peters, adding that inadequate funding directly correlates to lower student success. “From residential schools to chronically under funded on-reserve schools, our graduation rates are typically about half the national average, so it’s easy to see that federal control over First Nations education simply doesn’t work.”

There are only four Indian Affairs offices in Ontario; located in Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Toronto and Brantford. Rally times and locations are as follows:

Brantford –  AANDC offices, 58 Dalhousie Street, 11am-12pm

[hr]

Toronto – 25 St. Clair Ave. E, 10:30 am

[hr]

Sudbury – 200 Brady Street, Tom Davies Square 10am

[hr]

Thunder Bay – Fort William First Nation Community Centre, March to INAC, 10am

Share this Article!

27 comments
Nahnda Garlow

Nahnda Garlow

Nahnda Garlow is Onondaga under the wing of the Beaver Clan of Six Nations. Nahnda has been a journalist with the Two Row Times since it's founding in 2013. She is a self-proclaimed "rez girl" who brings to the Two Row Times years of experience as a Haudenosaunee cultural interpreter, traditional dancer and beadwork aficionado. Nahnda is a member of the Canadian Association of Journalists and the Native American Journalists Association.

Related Posts

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

27 Comments

  • Jonathan Garlow
    December 4, 2013, 1:37 pm

    IMO: The Haudenosaunee trust fund was amalgamated into a general slush fund in 1869, I think that is the trust that is in question here. It has been estimated at 500 trillion dollars. The treaty that guides the relationship between the Six Nations and the Crown predates the fradulent numbered treaties by hundreds of years. It is the 1677 Two Row treaty which says “we will be like brothers” and doesn’t mention things like education but focuses on the basis for unity and autonomy. I really like how informed you are Garry, please keep posting and I suggest you write a letter to the editor at TRT!

    REPLY
    • Garry Horsnell@Jonathan Garlow
      December 4, 2013, 2:46 pm

      The Six Nations Haudensaunee trust fund for the Six Nations of the Grand River reserve is another matter.

      When Six Nations of the Grand River chiefs agreed to surrender Six Nations use of the Crown’s land along the Grand River back to the Crown for sale, the Crown said, in many of those surrenders, the Crown would make sure the money from the land sales would be put into a trust fund for the benefit of Six Nations to help run the reserve.

      The money from the land sales was not for individual Indians but was to be used to run the reserve lands.

      When non natives bought that land their monthly mortgage payments would be put into the trust fund or, if the non native paid a lump sum for the land, that money would be put into the trust fund. When the land was completely paid for, the Crown would issue a letter patent, a deed, to the new owner.

      Apparently, the money from those land sales was not always put into the trust fund. Sometimes only the fee for land title (deed) was put into the trust fund. In some cases, the land was never sold but used for town halls or town cemeteries so money did not go into the trust fund.

      The Six Nations also alleges the Crown mismanaged the trust fund. The Six Nations also alleges the Crown borrowed money from the trust fund to pay to build Osgoode Hall law school and parts of McGill University, etc. and did not pay the money back.

      If those allegations are true and can be proved, I have a feeling the Crown owes the Six Nations of the Grand River a lot of money.

      REPLY
      • N8VSON@Garry Horsnell
        December 5, 2013, 7:46 pm

        The allegations are true. Will they ever see the inside of a courtroom? Not on your life if Canada’s record of stall, stall, stall is any indication. Here’s a sample;

        In 1845, $14,717.00 was illegally taken from the Six Nations’ Trust Fund and never paid back. After the government’s [own] standard 6% compounded interest rate, that little transaction would be worth $223 million today.

        In 1846, another $16,487.00 was embezzled by Canada from [the] Six Nations’ Trust Fund, which, with interest, today would equal $223,957,349.93.

        Also in 1846, $17,650.00 in Trust funds went to what is now the city of Toronto. That is now worth $249,405,836.90.

        Between 1836 and 1858, $59,600.00 in unauthorized withdrawals from the fund were taken and not returned. That would now equal $707, 115,842.36.

        Between 1853 and 1857, $310,124.00 was taken from Six Nations’ [Trust] Fund to build Upper Canada. That is now worth $2.4 billion.

        And, in 1854, Six Nations unwittingly paid $133,600.00 for the building of turnpikes, now worth $1,007,148,041.82.

        This is not a complete list of theft, fraud, embezzlement and unauthorized taking of Six Nations’ own money; money earned by virtue of their own business initiatives and NOT money paid to Six Nations out of Canada OR Crown funds.

        All figures are as of March, 2013.

        REPLY
        • Garry Horsnell@N8VSON
          December 6, 2013, 7:05 am

          As I have said before the Crown probably owes the Six Nations a lot money if those allegations can be proved.

          But here is something interesting to ponder.

          The Six Nations claimed the Crown owed about $160,000 in money lost to the Six Nations when the Grand River Navigation Company basically went bankrupt and finally closed around 1860.

          However, in sections 60 and 61 the Crown’s Statement of Defense in the 1995 court case, it says the following.

          60 “The federal Crown offered “to make annual grants for roads and other public purposes on the reserve gradually compensating for the ($160,000) loss”.

          61 “The Six Nations accepted this offer. Accordingly, from 1925 to 1932 funds were appropriated from Parliament for public purposes such as roads, a hospital and an electric plant for a total of $164,938.61 an paid towards improvements on the Six Nations reserve, Such funds were paid and received in full satisfaction of any claim of the Plaintiff by reason of the investment of funds in the Grand River Navigation Company”.

          The Canadian federal government (the big Crown) and the Ontario government (the little Crown) have been funneling tens of millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money per year for decades to the Six Nations of the Grand River reserve to pay for roads, water and sewage plants, etc and services and programs for people on the reserve.

          So I wonder how much of that money should be used to satisfy and offset some the Six Nations claims.

          REPLY
        • N8VSON@Garry Horsnell
          December 6, 2013, 11:22 am

          @ Garry – Your single example pales in comparison to the bigger picture. Others of Six Nations may verify what you say. Myself, I’m not so knowledgeable on that particular issue. Still, the salient point is: The Big Crown DID in fact, help itself to our funds without our knowledge OR consent. Only when it was caught in the act and proof of their illegal act put forth did it offer to make some form of restitution. You’ll have to come up with a better example than this if you want to impress me Garry. On your part, to say the Crown “apparently mismanaged” the Trust, was extremely generous to say the least.
          That said, it is clear the Crown was in no hurry to make restitution or, for that matter, even admit it had fraudulently helped itself to our Trust. 1860 (approx.) to 1932 is 72 years. The interest in that 72 year span would have by far exceeded the approximate figure of the eventual “restitution” in 1932 of (your figure) $164,938.61 and would have been a bargain. 72 years of compounded interest? Hmmm. To my mind, that does not represent a fair settlement at all. I would have to say that Six Nations was more than generous in accepting that offer. Then too, according to the Rule of Law, the Crown escaped without criminal charges being laid against it for its fraudulent conduct, something the government of today is quite adept at.

          REPLY
        • N8VSON@N8VSON
          December 6, 2013, 11:58 am

          I cannot believe I failed to give that figure with compounded interest using the government’s own rate of 6%. $160,000 X 6% X 72 years = $10,620,434,42. Yep Garry, we were MORE than fair in accepting the offer of improved infrastructure that came to a grand total of (your figure) $164, 938.61. $4,938.61 over and above the stolen amount is indeed…..VERY generous. Ponder that!

          REPLY
        • Garry Horsnell@N8VSON
          December 7, 2013, 3:07 am

          You mention all the claims and money including interest the Crown allegedly owes the Six Nations and, if those claims are valid and provable, you are right. The Crown will owe the Six Nations a lot of money.

          But you also have to remember the claims were put forward by the Six Nations Elected Band Council. It is the plalntiff in the 1995 court case. The court case is its case. Only the Six Nations Elected Band Council and the Crown have standing in that court case. Others do not have standing in that court case.

          And the Six Nations Elected Band Council and the Crown agreed to negotiate settlements to valid claims. That means give and take and neither side will get everything its wants or thinks it should get.

          During negotiations, Crown negotiators offered the SN $125 million to settle 4 of 28 SN claims. The SN negotiators would not accept. Crown negotiators then offered $26 million to settle 1 of 28 SN claims. Again, SN negotiators would not accept.

          The Crown stood firm and nobody would budge so the SN Elected Band Council took its claims back to court in 2009 demanding an accounting of all money in and out of the SN trust fund.

          So there it sits. I have no idea where that court case is located, who the Judge (Justice) is, whether things are still in the discovery phase or what the status and progress are in that case. Nobody seems to be reporting about it.

          REPLY
    • N8VSON@Jonathan Garlow
      December 5, 2013, 8:26 pm

      Jonathan, with respect, you have yet to learn that Garry is a self professed “expert” in both the Indian Act and Treaty interpretation. He’s akin to a dog with a bone and possesses a very narrow focus on both issues. He reads the treaties in the typical way settlers do, in a linear fashion. Something like a horse wearing side blinders. He avoids like the plague, Supreme Court decisions which state clearly, that “treaties MUST be interpreted in the manner in which they [Indians] understood them to mean.” It’s sad that lower Canadian courts have yet to accept this ruling as a matter of Indian law. It has NOT been appealed and stands as case law. His research is no better than that of a 10 year old who knows how to Google.

      REPLY
  • Garry Horsnell
    December 3, 2013, 10:45 pm

    Here is something I don’t get. The government (the Crown) only promised in some of the 11 numbered treaties with Indians across the west, from northwestern Ontario to northeastern British Columbia (BC), to maintain a school and or a teacher on each Indian reserve.

    In other agreements or treaties, the Crown did not promise schools, teachers or education for Indians on reserves.

    There is nothing in the October 25, 1784 Haldimand document about providing schools, teachers and education for the people on the Six Nations of the Grand River reserve and most Indian bands on Vancouver Island in mainland BC south of Treaty 8 territory don’t even have treaties yet with the Crown to get anything from the Crown.

    So how come the Canadian federal government (the big Crown) pays for and is expected to pay for the schools, teachers and education for Indians on all Indian reserves across Canada even in cases where there are no treaties that call for that?

    And when Indians who live and work on Indian reserves do not have to pay taxes to the Crown, when the federal government pays for the school buildings on Indian reserves and when Indians can get materials, supplies and equipment for their schools tax free so their costs are less, why would they need funding per student equivalent to schools outside of Indian reserves?

    Furthermore, many Indians run their own businesses on Indian reserves so why don’t the business owners and their workers pay some fees or taxes to their own band council governments so some of that money can be used to help run the schools on Indian reserves if the Indians want more money for education?

    REPLY
    • Pentortoise@Garry Horsnell
      December 3, 2013, 11:00 pm

      GRE pays 150 million a year to the feds last time I checked, many registered businesses pay taxes. How much of that is returned to our community?

      REPLY
      • Garry Horsnell@Pentortoise
        December 3, 2013, 11:19 pm

        GRE pays excise taxes. Excise taxes are consumption taxes. Companies add the cost of excise taxes to their products. The people who buy the products then cover the cost of those excise taxes and the companies get their tax money back from the consumers.

        GRE sells most of its cigarettes to people outside of the reserve so those people are actually paying the taxes.

        REPLY
        • Pentortoise@Garry Horsnell
          December 4, 2013, 1:20 am

          Why indeed, its not like canadians actually need all this stuff that we are forced to keep up with.

          REPLY
        • Garry Horsnell@Pentortoise
          December 4, 2013, 6:07 am

          Here’s a thought. Why doesn’t the Six Nations of the Grand River settle some valid claims with the Canadian federal government (the big Crown), get money in settlement for those claims and put some at that money toward education for people on the reserve?

          REPLY
        • Jonathan Garlow@Garry Horsnell
          December 4, 2013, 1:52 pm

          I don’t think the Hodihyaneso consider Canada to be a country, it is thought of as a corporation or a colony but our treaties are with the British Crown, or the Crown in Chancery. Maybe Canada became a country in 1982 but the Queen’s Privy Council still operates under guidance of the Most Dread Sovereign. Additionally, we have leased lands and refused to sell any since the beginning, Canada is squatting (Ruperts Land Act, 1869) so why would we sell land now? We can renegotiate leases, or take part in tax revenue sharing agreements but Six Nations does not negotiate with terrorists (aka colonists).

          REPLY
        • Garry Horsnell@Jonathan Garlow
          December 4, 2013, 3:14 pm

          Well, for some reason countries around the world and the United Nations seem to think Canada is a country and I don’t think the Queen (the Crown) of Britain has said otherwise.

          REPLY
        • Jonathan Garlow@Garry Horsnell
          December 4, 2013, 5:42 pm

          I don’t know but I would like to say I appreciate your polite contributions and although I have a different viewpoint I feel a surprising amount of respect for you because you obviously have done your homework.

          REPLY
        • N8VSON@Garry Horsnell
          December 5, 2013, 7:27 pm

          What reason would you think that to be Garry? The reasoning that if you tell a lie long enough, it will eventually be believed? If Canada is a sovereign country, how is that that its currency carries the likeness of the monarchy of another sovereign nation? How is it that the Queen’s own words recently referred to herself as the “Queen of Canada.” “As your Queen….? (referring to Canadians). Yes, the Crown of Britain HAS said otherwise. Care to write her a letter and inform her she’s wrong?

          REPLY
    • Rhiannon Edge@Garry Horsnell
      December 4, 2013, 8:53 am

      because the indian act legally insures that natives can only get their earned money that is being held in trust in the Indian trust Fund as doled out by the government at the governments discretion. No federal tax money funds reserves.

      REPLY
      • Garry Horsnell@Rhiannon Edge
        December 4, 2013, 10:05 am

        Excuse me. Indian reserves do get tax money from the federal government through Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, Health and Welfare Canada and other federal departments.

        And provincial governments send money to Indian reserves, that is tax money.

        REPLY
        • Jonathan Garlow@Garry Horsnell
          December 4, 2013, 1:43 pm

          The biggest problem is that 90% of our people died from colonism, alcholism and diesease which was brought by unwary settlers. Pre-contact indigenous societies paid 50% to 100% tax not under obligation but freely through honorable duty & sense of responsibility. Our settler brothers should be able to assess the situation and help us through these times, ungrudgingly until we have the population again to sustain a sovereign society and operational government.

          REPLY
    • N8VSON@Garry Horsnell
      December 5, 2013, 8:06 pm

      The answer to your last question is: Because at some point, Canada, without consulting Indians and Inuit peoples, arbitrarily declared Canada’s Indigenous peoples as Wards of the State. THIS is how the responsibility of maintaining our educational infrastructure came to pass. Their arrogance has resulted in the “shot themselves in the foot” scenario for which you constantly claim Canadian taxpayers are on the hook for. We’re just the symptom. The Big Crown is the cause. Address the Crown and leave us out of it.
      Now, I have posted this reply to you in other forums (CBC) in answer to your question and assertions there was NO provision in the various treaties to pay for our education and health programs. Why have you consistently refused to address my reply yet continue asking the same rhetorical questions?
      Oh! Jonathan Garlow says he is impressed with your research. Why not impress him further and research “wards of the state.”

      REPLY
      • Garry Horsnell@N8VSON
        December 9, 2013, 8:27 am

        In the 1763 Royal Proclamation, it says Indians “who live under our Protection, should not be molested or disturbed in the Possession of such Parts of Our Dominions and Territories as, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us, are reserved to them or any of them, as their Hunting Grounds”.

        So why aren’t Indians fighting against the Crown’s arbitrary policy of making Indians wards of the state on Indian reserves and why aren’t Indians fighting vigorously against the Indian Act so Indians can look after themselves unmolested and undisturbed on their Indian reserves?

        REPLY
        • N8VSON@Garry Horsnell
          December 9, 2013, 12:27 pm

          The Proclamation was just a lot of hot air where your comment is concerned. They never protected us and admitted they couldn’t. Same applies to the Haldimand deed/grant/treaty – whatever. Squatters helped themselves to our territories “unmolested” which evokes the age old axiom that, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Just more examples of their miserable failure in complying with their own laws and treaties. True, the King’s intentions were well meant but the colonial administrators were not interested in complying with the King’s edicts. “White Man’s Law” illustrates that quite succinctly. To willfully ignore the King’s command is in every way, defined as treason.
          “Wards of The State?” Gawd! Another fight? More protests,? More injunctions? More Indians in jail and radicalized – as is their intent? Tell you what, if you can see the injustices as a non-Native, why not mobilize your friends and stand with us and demand justice once and for all? We’ll just make the “wards” issue as another claim and have it wind up on the back-burners for what…..another 200 years? It would be interesting though, having our white brothers standing with us for a change and demanding we be dealt with fairly. You know, like the majority of us stood with England against the French and the U.S.? Then, when we were of no further use to them, abandoned? Then systematically robbed of our territories, physically beaten and kicked out of our homes along the Grand by the good citizens of Brantord…..oh yeah. We need another fight we do.
          Now if YOU, as a single non-Native were to launch an action against Canada concerning the ward-ship matter, indeed, you may have a better chance at it then we do….collectively.

          REPLY
        • Garry Horsnell@N8VSON
          December 10, 2013, 5:05 am

          You said “Squatters helped themselves to our territories “unmolested”

          Well, in 1785, Mohawk leader Joseph Brant to provided land to John Smith and John Thomas for helping to build the Mohawk Chapel. In fact, Brant gave John Thomas a 999 year lease for 200 acres of land near what is now Cainsville Ontario for eighty pounds New York currency paid to Brant.

          Joesph Brant invited non native British loyalists from Butler’s Rangers to farm on what is now called the Johnson settlement near what is now Cainsville Ontario thinking they could teach Six Nations people more modern farming techniques.

          With power of Attorney from 35 Six Nations chiefs, Joseph Brant arranged to sell about 350,000 acres of land around what is now Waterloo Ontario to Mennonites and other non natives in 1798.

          Six Nations chiefs gave about 15,000 acres of land along the Grand River to William Claus because they liked him and thought he had helped Six Nations people.

          Some Indians would sell land along the Grand River to non natives. The Crown would then post notices for non natives to vacate that land and then, later, Indians would sell that land again.

          In 1793, Governor Simcoe offered a letter patent, a deed, for land along the Grand River to the Six Nations. In that patent (deed) Simcoe said Six Nations people, the Indians, should only dispose of land to the Crown. That was to protect them so they wouldn’t keep selling land to non natives and land speculators but Joseph Brant and the Six Nations chiefs would not accept that Simcoe Patent (deed) because they did not like its conditions.

          It would seem to me Six Nations people wanted to be able to sublet and sell the Crown’s land along the Grand River to non natives.and invite them onto land along the Grand River.

          REPLY
        • N8VSON@Garry Horsnell
          December 10, 2013, 10:17 pm

          Garry – are you just feigning stupidity or are you really just plain illiterate and cannot read? I Said NOTHING about land that was gifted or sold to whites by Brant and/or the Six Nations people. I SAID…..read carefully……land that was SQUATTED on by whites. And do NOT tell me you know nothing about the squatter problem Six Nations had, complained about to the Crown and had NOTHING done about it by the Crown! That’s pretty damn clear isn’t it? And if it isn’t, you need help. Get outta here and go blow smoke up someone else’s ass. You’re talking to Indians who DO know the TRUE history of what went on here and you know it!!!!!! Write on all you want, Continue “impressing” people like Jonathan Garlow with your vast Knowledge.” ME? I’m done with you. I think you should be pretty damn grateful that some people print your twisted style of reasoning, in our own paper no less. If it were me, I’d tell you to go peddle your drivel somewhere else!

          REPLY
        • Garry Horsnell@N8VSON
          December 11, 2013, 7:43 am

          There was really nothing in the October 25, 1784 Haldimand document to stop non natives from entering land along the Grand River or to stop Six Nations chiefs or other Indians from leasing or selling some of that land.

          Some non natives probably did squat on land along the Grand River but, as I said, when Six Nations Indian chiefs or others complained, the Crown posted notices for non native squatters to leave that land.

          And, when Governor Simcoe tried to offer a letter patent, a deed, to the Six Nations for land along Grand River in 1793 with conditions the Six Nations Indians should only dispose of land to the Crown, Mohawk leader Joseph Brant and the Six Nations chiefs would not accept it.

          And Brant and various groups of chiefs, including Mohawk chiefs, kept leasing and selling land to non natives.

          So what do you think the Crown should have done?

          REPLY
  • Jonathan Garlow
    December 3, 2013, 2:13 pm

    cool!

    REPLY
 width=

Headquarters:


Oneida Business Park Suite 124
50 Generations Drive, Box 1
Ohsweken, ON N0A 1M0
Six Nations of the Grand River Country


Email: info@tworowtimes.com


Main office: (519) 900-5535


Editorial: (519) 900-6241


Advertising: (519) 900-6373

Mini Job Board

JeexTrax Twitch Stream

Most Recent Articles

Share this Article!

Two Row Times

Two Row Times

LIVE NOW! CLICK TO VIEW.
CURRENTLY OFFLINE