First nations will blockade roads as part of 'Idle No More' protest

[Slava]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Unemployment rate there is about 60%, so no not "every" house is getting a cheque. Others that do though, are likely getting more than $1500/month, especially if they have children.



Now you're starting to see the light. As is the case on many reserves, it is a a select few who benefit the greatest from government dollars; the money doesn't get down to those who truly need it.

Here are some other things that might surprise you.

Purchases on reserve (and most vehicles) are GST exempt.

Income considered earned on reserve is tax free.

They are then considered to have zero taxable income; so they qualify for full GST Rebate and Child Tax Benefit.

The right hand side of this document (pdf) shows what De Beers has contributed to Attawapiskat.

http://www.wildrose.ca/feature/keno-...r-money-smith/

I haven't been able to find any reference in the band's financial for these funds. Where is that recorded?

Well I'm aware of the trickle down economics on the reserves and the ridiculous conditions. I suppose what I'm suggesting is that the Sun has inflated these numbers to generate some outrage. I know....sounds crazy, but it could be the case.

Its pretty clear that the way they've arrived at the numbers is questionable. Saying her husband was billing $850/day and that comes to $221k/year....OK but that is 260 days of work. Did he bill for that or didn't he? Its a broad generalization.

Then you have his figures about government spending, which basically seem irrelevant here. So what if overall government spending has increased? Does that mean that there are no other issues to address? Does that increase in spending mean that everyone should ignore the obviously deplorable conditions on the reserves?

I'm not even going to get into the review of the taxation situation, which seems to be one of his main complaints. Yes, there are no taxes on the reserves. Seems like a time when there are calls for treaty discussions might be a good time to review these issues and go over them?

Then we have Levant pointing out other things like $9M in shares that they own. The horror! That $9M (which looks like its invested in large, blue chip companies) is basically chump change. Sure, if I had $9M in my bank account its a lot of money, but not for 300 families.

I just think that Levant has thrown this together with half truths and is deflecting from his other current problems.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well I'm aware of the trickle down economics on the reserves and the ridiculous conditions. I suppose what I'm suggesting is that the Sun has inflated these numbers to generate some outrage. I know....sounds crazy, but it could be the case.

Its pretty clear that the way they've arrived at the numbers is questionable. Saying her husband was billing $850/day and that comes to $221k/year....OK but that is 260 days of work. Did he bill for that or didn't he? Its a broad generalization.

Then you have his figures about government spending, which basically seem irrelevant here. So what if overall government spending has increased? Does that mean that there are no other issues to address? Does that increase in spending mean that everyone should ignore the obviously deplorable conditions on the reserves?

I'm not even going to get into the review of the taxation situation, which seems to be one of his main complaints. Yes, there are no taxes on the reserves. Seems like a time when there are calls for treaty discussions might be a good time to review these issues and go over them?

Then we have Levant pointing out other things like $9M in shares that they own. The horror! That $9M (which looks like its invested in large, blue chip companies) is basically chump change. Sure, if I had $9M in my bank account its a lot of money, but not for 300 families.

I just think that Levant has thrown this together with half truths and is deflecting from his other current problems.

All the numbers are here: http://www.attawapiskat.org/financial-statements/

Which I'm certain you are far more qualified to read than I am.

I was able to find the numbers he references (sans the welfare figures).

What I can't find is the darn De Beers money.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by First Lady

All the numbers are here: http://www.attawapiskat.org/financial-statements/

Which I'm certain you are far more qualified to read than I am.

I was able to find the numbers he references (sans the welfare figures).

What I can't find is the darn De Beers money.

I breezed through it and its not as rosy as the picture that Ezra paints. In terms of real cash flow this doesn't look like a reserve with a large bank account. They have a net surplus, basically because of equity in tangible capital assets (things like buildings).

the one interesting point is that they receive just under half of their funding from Indian and Northern Affairs and about 12% from the Province of Ontario. The way things seem in the media I expected this to be north of 90%. It's true that they would not be self-sufficient without that income, but still the small percentages surprised me.

As for the DeBeers money, maybe there is something that makes them report it elsewhere? I just scanned these statements out of curiosity more than anything and didn't see any mention of it. There are a number of entities contained here though, so it could also be in the financials for one of them?

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

I breezed through it and its not as rosy as the picture that Ezra paints. In terms of real cash flow this doesn't look like a reserve with a large bank account. They have a net surplus, basically because of equity in tangible capital assets (things like buildings).

Still a surplus of 8M with little of that in their buildings. Couldn't they depose of some of their shares and put that money into fixing residents homes, the school, etc.?

the one interesting point is that they receive just under half of their funding from Indian and Northern Affairs and about 12% from the Province of Ontario. The way things seem in the media I expected this to be north of 90%. It's true that they would not be self-sufficient without that income, but still the small percentages surprised me.

I found it interesting that they get funds from casino pooling. Nearest casino has to be 1000's of KMs away.

As for the DeBeers money, maybe there is something that makes them report it elsewhere? I just scanned these statements out of curiosity more than anything and didn't see any mention of it. There are a number of entities contained here though, so it could also be in the financials for one of them?

I did finally find it, referenced here: http://www.attawapiskat.org/wp-conte...skat-Trust.pdf

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by First Lady

For Vulcan and MelBridgeman

http://abearsrant.com/2013/01/the-mi...rve-lands.html

Bit long, but well worth the read. Is part one of three; I've only read this first one so far, but it helped my understanding greatly.

Yeah so the legislation was reportably done at the request of some bands in BC, the fact remains that the people protesting the legislation don't want it as they fear it's an inroad to losing their lands. To me the part where they will have an easier time leasing their land, doesn't seem that much of a problem but they still don't want it. Part of the problem is that they don't trust their leaders to make good decisions as a lot of them seem to be crooked (had to edit that as my step son just got elected to his band council). True the band leaders will still need a majority vote to lease land, but with the band leaders having too much influence in directing the vote, it's something they don't want.

As for the waterways legislation, it's one more piece of legislation that controls commercial expansion of our waterways lost. Sure provincial and local governments (including First Nations) will now be given more powers to decide but I'd trust the federal government far more not to be bought off. Here's a case where the city (Vernon) is opposing a marina but the provincial government can override them. The way I understand it, now their is one less level of government for these commercial enterprises to go through.

http://www.vernonmorningstar.com/news/181055641.html

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Yeah so the legislation was reportably done at the request of some bands in BC, the fact remains that the people protesting the legislation don't want it as they fear it's an inroad to losing their lands. To me the part where they will have an easier time leasing their land, doesn't seem that much of a problem but they still don't want it. Part of the problem is that they don't trust their leaders to make good decisions as a lot of them seem to be crooked (had to edit that as my step son just got elected to his band council). True the band leaders will still need a majority vote to lease land, but with the band leaders having too much influence in directing the vote, it's something they don't want.

Yeah so?? The government responds to a good idea the Chiefs bring forward and include it and you say "yeah so"?? If the people don't want it perhaps they should be more involved in elected representatives who will carry their message. They've demonstrated they can mobilize people (as in Idle No More); so do the same thing at the band level. Get rid of those that seem crooked (your word, not mine).

As for the waterways legislation, it's one more piece of legislation that controls commercial expansion of our waterways lost. Sure provincial and local governments (including First Nations) will now be given more powers to decide but I'd trust the federal government far more not to be bought off. Here's a case where the city (Vernon) is opposing a marina but the provincial government can override them. The way I understand it, now their is one less level of government for these commercial enterprises to go through.

http://www.vernonmorningstar.com/news/181055641.html

On this I guess we will need to disagree. I believe local decisions should be made by the those closest to the situation. I think most bands (and cities) would agree, they would prefer more control in their own backyard.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Yeah so?? The government responds to a good idea the Chiefs bring forward and include it and you say "yeah so"?? If the people don't want it perhaps they should be more involved in elected representatives who will carry their message. They've demonstrated they can mobilize people (as in Idle No More); so do the same thing at the band level. Get rid of those that seem crooked (your word, not mine).

It was a good idea to some chiefs in BC but apparently the rest of the First Nations don't think it's a good idea.

On this I guess we will need to disagree. I believe local decisions should be made by the those closest to the situation. I think most bands (and cities) would agree, they would prefer more control in their own backyard.

The case I referred you to is not being decided by the local government (closest to the situation) but is being decided by the provincial government. Perhaps if the Federal Government was still involved the local government would have an ally or at least a less biased interest.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Still a surplus of 8M with little of that in their buildings. Couldn't they depose of some of their shares and put that money into fixing residents homes, the school, etc.?



I found it interesting that they get funds from casino pooling. Nearest casino has to be 1000's of KMs away.



I did finally find it, referenced here: http://www.attawapiskat.org/wp-conte...skat-Trust.pdf

If you want to see the other side, you can also pull it out of Debeers Canada's annual shareholder report.

[HELPNEEDED]

More power to the First Nations of Canada.

http://www.nfb.ca/film/dancing_around_the_table_1

I'd like to make a quick preface to my quick comment: I owe a lot to PM Trudeau for my Canadian birth, if it was'nt for him my families immigration would probably be have delayed.

But the way he represents the crown and the federal government in the video I posted is disgusting. He goes as far as dissolving the entire Indian act to which he complains the "Indians" do not comply. Where would that leave the FNs? It would render them without any rights and incapacitated from self determination on what is their own land.

And an FYI to all the un-educates that keep arguing that people get conquered all the time. Canada DOES NOT consider our FNs to be a conquered or surrendered people.

[Mr.Coffee]

Alberta is on the brink of changing it's consultation procedures and requirements regarding oil and gas operations for first nations. This seems to be ignored, or, maybe just because it isn't finalized yet. But anyway... ho hum.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by First Lady

For Vulcan and MelBridgeman

http://abearsrant.com/2013/01/the-mi...rve-lands.html

Bit long, but well worth the read. Is part one of three; I've only read this first one so far, but it helped my understanding greatly.

thank you very much

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by HELPNEEDED

Canada DOES NOT consider our FNs to be a conquered or surrendered people.

Which, I imagine, is a part of the problem. If they had been back when it happened, I doubt we'd have this sort of mess on our hands these days.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Alberta is on the brink of changing it's consultation procedures and requirements regarding oil and gas operations for first nations. This seems to be ignored, or, maybe just because it isn't finalized yet. But anyway... ho hum.

Do you have a link for this? I haven't heard this yet but would love to find out more. We deal with consultation all the time.
Thanks

[para transit fellow]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Perhaps, but I've looked at those numbers and they all correspond to ones in the financial statement.

So the only statement on there that might be debatable is the one about the hunger strike not being a hunger strike.

I don't doubt that the numbers were correct. However, Ezra's ability to present any information as credible has become poor.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Still a surplus of 8M with little of that in their buildings. Couldn't they depose of some of their shares and put that money into fixing residents homes, the school, etc.?



I found it interesting that they get funds from casino pooling. Nearest casino has to be 1000's of KMs away.



I did finally find it, referenced here: http://www.attawapiskat.org/wp-conte...skat-Trust.pdf

Like I say, I skimmed it, but wasn't the surplus a mere $3M or so? Plus I thought that the vast majority of this was based on the tangible assets. Something like $500k in actual cash surplus?

I didn't see anything in the statements about shares or how many shares of each of these that they owned either. That information could be entirely accurate, but I just didn't see it there.

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

I don't doubt that the numbers were correct. However, Ezra's ability to present any information as credible has become poor.

The numbers could be correct, and one has to think that him getting them from the financial statements that they are. I agree that the whole issue is presentation though. He suggests that this $9M in investments is enormous and the band should liquidate this immediately to take care of their problems. Well its a pittance to run a town on in all sincerity. Second, lets pretend that they didn't have the $9M and were in roughly the same position; we all know that the argument then would be "why didn't they save any money?"

Then you have these issues with his numbers like I mentioned above where the figures are averaged and twisted to generate outrage. He says that these numbers come from the band themselves, but I didn't see a lot of these figures when I skimmed through that document, so maybe he has more to prove his point?

[HELPNEEDED]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

Which, I imagine, is a part of the problem. If they had been back when it happened, I doubt we'd have this sort of mess on our hands these days.

Ummm, no. Jesus H. Christ. read up on the issue. Peace treaties were signed for a reason in place of papers of surrender. Some nations like that of the Haida were not even discovered till well after.

[c.t.ner]

Haven't seen this posted, but it looks like PM Harper has scheduled a meeting with First Nations Leaders for next Friday.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle6938970/

It'll be interesting to see if anything productive comes out of this.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

Do you have a link for this? I haven't heard this yet but would love to find out more. We deal with consultation all the time.
Thanks

X2 on this.

Seems to me the last major restructure was around about the same time as "our fair share" came out.

It was pretty "all-inclusive" since you need to consult with the nearest band even if 100 KMs away and not even on reserve land.

This was one of 3 big changes that impacted the industry and ended the most recent "boom". (IMHO)

[Slava]

Originally Posted by c.t.ner

Haven't seen this posted, but it looks like PM Harper has scheduled a meeting with First Nations Leaders for next Friday.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle6938970/

It'll be interesting to see if anything productive comes out of this.

Well it does set a terrible precedent, there can be no denying that. I say that as someone who has already stated that they should meet in this thread! I'm having second thoughts on whether being forced into a meeting in these kinds of situations is a good idea though.

Now she won't eat until next week? So when does she plan on eating again, after the meeting? What if that meeting doesn't produce enough of a solution for her liking though? What if she is sated by this meeting (I doubt it) and others aren't?

At this point, there is just no winning for Harper, unfortunately. If he didn't meet with her and she dies then he has to deal with the obvious issues surrounding that. He meets with her, and faces the spectre of "it worked last time, so lets try again". He meets with her and resolves nothing (a probable outcome, realistically), and then what...she starves for a longer period of time I suppose?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well it does set a terrible precedent, there can be no denying that. I say that as someone who has already stated that they should meet in this thread! I'm having second thoughts on whether being forced into a meeting in these kinds of situations is a good idea though.

Now she won't eat until next week? So when does she plan on eating again, after the meeting? What if that meeting doesn't produce enough of a solution for her liking though? What if she is sated by this meeting (I doubt it) and others aren't?

At this point, there is just no winning for Harper, unfortunately. If he didn't meet with her and she dies then he has to deal with the obvious issues surrounding that. He meets with her, and faces the spectre of "it worked last time, so lets try again". He meets with her and resolves nothing (a probable outcome, realistically), and then what...she starves for a longer period of time I suppose?

It is a reflection of the whole Native issue, no?