I want to say good morning and meegwetch for the opportunity to be here and present to the standing committee.
I want to acknowledge the Creator for the day he has given us today. I want to acknowledge the peoples whose territory I am honoured to be in today, and most certainly I want to acknowledge all of you for your work, that what has become known as the Kelowna accord can be seen as the most significant aboriginal policy initiative since the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.
From April 2004 to November 2005, an historic process was undertaken where the big five national aboriginal organizations were provided unprecedented access and opportunity to address the multi-faceted barriers facing first nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples in this country. The entire process culminated in a first ministers meeting on aboriginal issues, where 14 jurisdictions agreed to an action plan.
Despite all this, friendship centres demonstrated outside the meeting, but we did so with a heavy heart because friendship centres support the measures contained in their agreements. We felt they did not go far enough. The agreements failed to adequately deal with the 50% of first nations, Métis, and Inuit people who live in urban areas. The agreements would not provide the programming and resources necessary to meaningfully impact the issues our clients face every day.
Friendship centres background: this is an important distinction. Friendship centres, like the five national aboriginal organizations consulted and present during the first ministers meeting, are service delivery bodies. We do not claim to represent a certain segment of aboriginal people; we serve all of them: first nations, both status and non-status; Métis from all areas of Canada; and Inuit peoples. Friendship centres are in 116 communities across Canada--large, medium, and small communities. They are places of gathering and refuge for aboriginal women to take their rightful place in leadership and governance in our agencies and communities, for our young people to access programming and to become engaged and empowered; they are places to celebrate and practice our cultures.
Friendship centres are places to heal, places to find food when you're hungry, access to training when you need it, and start on the path toward a better life for you, your family, and your nation.
Last year, Friendship centres provided over 1.1 million client services across Canada. Friendship centres possess an impressive capacity to reach the often forgotten urban aboriginal population.
Friendship centre experience: we brought all this experience to the first Canada aboriginal peoples round table on April 19, 2004. There we witnessed from the outside the beginning of over 20 months of deliberations and planning. Despite being the largest aboriginal service to the infrastructure in Canada, we were afforded no opportunity to provide policy advice or insight into matters considered.
During the round tables, we were forced into a distinction-based conversation on how the Métis Nation should address lifelong learning, develop their housing stock, or define and demonstrate accountability. No space was provided in the dialogue for a broader urban aboriginal conversation on how to address education needs, what housing services are required, what level of jurisdiction is responsible for these areas, what is the role of representative bodies, what is the role of service providers. Indeed, a historic opportunity was lost.
Our first demonstration occurred during the May 31, 2005, policy retreat with the leaders of the five national aboriginal organizations and the aboriginal affairs committee. We wanted to highlight the important conversation that was being missed.
The Prime Minister met briefly with us to hear our concerns. He agreed that some role should exist for this conversation to occur and challenged his officials to find one. They failed.
Not only were we not afforded an opportunity to participate in the dialogue, we were not even able to submit reports for consideration. In the days and weeks before the first ministers meetings, the government assured us that Kelowna was just a start, that it was not perfect, that they would look at the specific urban issues in implementation and follow-up.
Still we decided to hold an information rally outside out of the first ministers meeting to remind everyone involved that the work is not done. It was incomplete.
We must come together and address urban issues in the implementation and beyond.
Despite all of this, the friendship centre movement still encourages the federal government to support the measures contained in the Kelowna accord. In part, this is because we recognize the benefits that would accrue to all aboriginal peoples by proceeding with a comprehensive plan, a process rather than a piecemeal approach.
We have also signed an MOU with the Assembly of First Nations that will ensure our involvement in future initiatives and discussions that follow on Kelowna.
It is important that we do not stop there. We must get to work on addressing the issues that our clients face.
If we are to effect meaningful change to the life conditions that first nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples face, we must develop some thinking on the urban dilemma. We must get past our jurisdictional divides. We must think bigger than our own organizations.
Bill C-292 is short. It seeks to get this government to commit to the terms of the Kelowna accord.
For us, this includes the text of the plans developed. It includes the approach of working with aboriginal groups on the issues facing our communities. It includes adding to this work to address the urban challenges facing first nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples.
It is no secret that Kelowna was not perfect. No process ever is.
Our recommendations: to believe and support it; to believe and support Kelowna; to believe that our work didn't end there; and to believe that we need “Kelowna plus”.
Thank you very much.