Kia ora, this sounds like a great book for the counselling, social work and psychology field. Taima
Review
"Healing the Soul Wound is the most innovative and thought-provoking scholarship that I've read in a long time.... Taken seriously and applied, it represents a paradigm shift that will transform theory and practice." - From the Foreword by Allen E. Ivey, Distinguished University Professor (Emeritus)"
Product Description
Eduardo Duran—a psychologist working in Indian country—draws on his own clinical experience to provide guidance to counselors working with Native Peoples. Translating theory into actual day-to-day practice, Duran presents case materials that illustrate effective intervention strategies for prevalent problems, including substance abuse, intergenerational trauma, and internalized oppression. Offering a culture-specific approach that has profound implications for all counseling and therapy, this groundbreaking volume:
* Provides invaluable concepts and strategies that can be applied directly to practice.
* Outlines very different ways of serving American Indian clients, translating Western metaphor into Indigenous ideas that make sense to Native People.
* Presents a model in which patients have a relationship with the problems they are having, whether these are physical, mental, or spiritual.
* Includes a section in each chapter to help non-American Indian counselors generalize the concepts presented to use in their own practice in culturally sensitive ways.
More info: http://www.amazon.com/Healing-Soul-Wound-Multicultural-Foundations/dp/0807746894%3FSubscriptionId%3D19BAZMZQFZJ6G2QYGCG2%26tag%3Dsquidooa29587-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D0807746894
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Reliving the Indian Problem at First Nations University
Kia ora,
It is a shame that the perpetuation of power and control over Native education keeps continuing even in 2010. This article, gives a description of assimilative actions to subvert Native peoples from pursuing their unique and special self-determination for Native education. I found the article exemplary and well written. Have a read, Taima
Reliving the ‘Indian Problem’ at First Nations University By Jesse Rae Archibald-Barber in CAUT Magazine, May 2010.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper officially apologized in June 2008 to the tens of thousands of former students of the residential schools system. “We now recognize that it was wrong to separate children from rich and vibrant cultures and traditions — that it created a void in many lives and communities, and we apologize for having done this,” he said.
“There is no place in Canada for the attitudes that inspired the Indian Residential Schools system to ever prevail again. You have been working on recovering from this experience for a long time and in a very real sense, we are now joining you on this journey.”
Last month, faculty of the First Nations University of Canada gathered to showcase the academic excellence of the school. If anything, this place, this school, provides a way of recovering from past educational policies that the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs imposed on First Nations communities throughout the history of this country.
As a professor in the English department, I teach First Nations and Métis poetry, fiction and drama. One of the main issues we face is the history of the English language itself — and the most critical concern to begin with is that English was the language of the colonizer. But in the words of Emma LaRocque, English is now a tool of decolonization, a universal language of resistance.
That’s why it is so important that we teach our students to read, write and think critically about literature, as well as all the other texts we encounter every day. In the English department, we also teach creative writing, because free artistic expression is essential to the human spirit.
In addition to First Nations and Métis literatures, we also look at English Canadian works that attempt to represent Aboriginal concerns, because here we can examine many of the attitudes toward First Nations and Métis peoples that have manifested throughout Canadian history.
The most pressing concern for us today is that Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is sitting by while our school struggles to survive. The department’s minister appears to be on a mission. Chuck Strahl told reporters earlier this year about our school: “What is not clear to us, and is not completely evident, is whether all of the planned reforms that are being talked about are going to happen. They’ve got other issues that so far have not been addressed … and a bunch of other academic problems.” (CBC News, 31 March 2010)
He also said “Our government remains committed to helping first nations students access and complete their education — no matter what university they choose to attend.” (Globe and Mail, 18 Feb. 2010)
Apparently Strahl believes he knows best how to educate our students — that he has their best interests in mind. We’ve seen proud men like Strahl before — Ottawa men, who claim to know what is in our and our students’ best interests.
There is an early English Canadian writer who is of particular interest to our current situation — Duncan Campbell Scott. Among other things, Scott was a member of a group known as the “Confederation poets” and is considered to be a major figure in early English Canadian literature. But Scott was also deputy superintendent of the Department of Indian Affairs from 1913 to 1932, a department he had served since joining the federal civil service in 1879.
During his time in office, Scott defined the role of the minister and the department’s policy toward Indian education for subsequent generations. Most notably, he was a strong proponent of Canada’s Residential Schools.
To read some of his more infamous and disturbing statements — in 1920, Scott wrote: “I want to get rid of the Indian problem. (…) Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill.” This essentially sums up Scott’s Indian educational policy.
And in 1910, Scott also wrote, referring to the high death rate of children in residential schools, “this alone does not justify a change in the policy of this Department, which is geared towards the final solution of our Indian Problem.”
Today, history does not look favourably on Scott. Yet those who attempt to redeem him point to his achievements in poetry. Scott did indeed make a major contribution to early English Canadian poetry, but there are some poems that reveal his patronizing attitudes towards First Nations people, namely his works known as “Indian poems.”
In one entitled “The Onondaga Madonna” (1898), Scott romanticizes the loss of Native cultures. He describes a Native woman as a “tragic savage” — heroic but ultimately doomed — doomed because Scott depicts her as resisting the transition from her traditions into Canadian society: “Her rebel lips are dabbled with the stains / Of feuds.” The stain of blood on her lips is a symbol of resistance to the assimilation of her identity into Scott’s colonial gaze. But Scott depicts her as already in the process of being assimilated — he describes the child she holds as “the latest promise of her nation’s doom.”
It is here Scott envisions his colonial policy, as he attempts to redeem mother and child, by depicting them being converted to Christianity — with the figure of the mother and child posing, he gives shape to the archetype of Mother Mary and Baby Jesus. However, the Indian mother still does not passively accept her suffering with humility: her “rebel lips” still seek resistance, and this is further passed on to her child, who “draws his heavy brows and will not rest” — the child will presumably continue to resist assimilation.
Because of this, Scott intimates that the Natives are “doomed” because they will not willingly assimilate to the culture of English Canada.
Even with this brief analysis, one can see how this poem is a classic instance of the English Canadian author, or authority, giving voice to First Nations concerns — to those whom Scott represents as dying. In Scott’s view, Indians have everything to gain from assimilating.
The attempt by the Department of Indian Affairs to eliminate the so-called Indian problem is still on-going. We are living it today. Right now. Ottawa politicians still cast their gaze across the country and claim to know what is best for Indian education.
Strahl has continually claimed that his primary concern is the education of First Nations students, and that he’ll ensure they receive the same education as other Canadians. He sounds noble to some, but, at root, his actions are really a continuation of hundreds of years of colonial policy — an educational policy that has failed again and again and again throughout our history.
The First Nations University of Canada is, among many things, a response to the Department of Indian Affairs’ educational policy. The 34 years of the university have been an interruption in that policy. But you don’t just turn around hundreds of years of colonial practices in 34 years — the school must keep going — especially if the government’s apology is not to ring hollow. Join us on our journey.
The Prime Minister’s apology was important, but the substance of it is not only to be judged in the government’s words, but by action. Strahl is playing a game with our futures. Indian and Northern Affairs has us in a corner, waiting to reassert the department’s traditional educational policy. Is this the legacy Strahl wishes to leave in this post-apology era? Is this the historic role of the head of Indian Affairs reasserting itself in our time?
Duncan Campbell Scott is considered to be a major literary figure, but because of his actions and policies as head of Indian Affairs, history now looks on him as one of the most regrettable Canadians of our colonial past.
In this new era, what legacy will Strahl leave behind? How will history remember this minister?
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse Rae Archibald-Barber is as assistant professor of English at First Nations University of Canada.
It is a shame that the perpetuation of power and control over Native education keeps continuing even in 2010. This article, gives a description of assimilative actions to subvert Native peoples from pursuing their unique and special self-determination for Native education. I found the article exemplary and well written. Have a read, Taima
Reliving the ‘Indian Problem’ at First Nations University By Jesse Rae Archibald-Barber in CAUT Magazine, May 2010.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper officially apologized in June 2008 to the tens of thousands of former students of the residential schools system. “We now recognize that it was wrong to separate children from rich and vibrant cultures and traditions — that it created a void in many lives and communities, and we apologize for having done this,” he said.
“There is no place in Canada for the attitudes that inspired the Indian Residential Schools system to ever prevail again. You have been working on recovering from this experience for a long time and in a very real sense, we are now joining you on this journey.”
Last month, faculty of the First Nations University of Canada gathered to showcase the academic excellence of the school. If anything, this place, this school, provides a way of recovering from past educational policies that the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs imposed on First Nations communities throughout the history of this country.
As a professor in the English department, I teach First Nations and Métis poetry, fiction and drama. One of the main issues we face is the history of the English language itself — and the most critical concern to begin with is that English was the language of the colonizer. But in the words of Emma LaRocque, English is now a tool of decolonization, a universal language of resistance.
That’s why it is so important that we teach our students to read, write and think critically about literature, as well as all the other texts we encounter every day. In the English department, we also teach creative writing, because free artistic expression is essential to the human spirit.
In addition to First Nations and Métis literatures, we also look at English Canadian works that attempt to represent Aboriginal concerns, because here we can examine many of the attitudes toward First Nations and Métis peoples that have manifested throughout Canadian history.
The most pressing concern for us today is that Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is sitting by while our school struggles to survive. The department’s minister appears to be on a mission. Chuck Strahl told reporters earlier this year about our school: “What is not clear to us, and is not completely evident, is whether all of the planned reforms that are being talked about are going to happen. They’ve got other issues that so far have not been addressed … and a bunch of other academic problems.” (CBC News, 31 March 2010)
He also said “Our government remains committed to helping first nations students access and complete their education — no matter what university they choose to attend.” (Globe and Mail, 18 Feb. 2010)
Apparently Strahl believes he knows best how to educate our students — that he has their best interests in mind. We’ve seen proud men like Strahl before — Ottawa men, who claim to know what is in our and our students’ best interests.
There is an early English Canadian writer who is of particular interest to our current situation — Duncan Campbell Scott. Among other things, Scott was a member of a group known as the “Confederation poets” and is considered to be a major figure in early English Canadian literature. But Scott was also deputy superintendent of the Department of Indian Affairs from 1913 to 1932, a department he had served since joining the federal civil service in 1879.
During his time in office, Scott defined the role of the minister and the department’s policy toward Indian education for subsequent generations. Most notably, he was a strong proponent of Canada’s Residential Schools.
To read some of his more infamous and disturbing statements — in 1920, Scott wrote: “I want to get rid of the Indian problem. (…) Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill.” This essentially sums up Scott’s Indian educational policy.
And in 1910, Scott also wrote, referring to the high death rate of children in residential schools, “this alone does not justify a change in the policy of this Department, which is geared towards the final solution of our Indian Problem.”
Today, history does not look favourably on Scott. Yet those who attempt to redeem him point to his achievements in poetry. Scott did indeed make a major contribution to early English Canadian poetry, but there are some poems that reveal his patronizing attitudes towards First Nations people, namely his works known as “Indian poems.”
In one entitled “The Onondaga Madonna” (1898), Scott romanticizes the loss of Native cultures. He describes a Native woman as a “tragic savage” — heroic but ultimately doomed — doomed because Scott depicts her as resisting the transition from her traditions into Canadian society: “Her rebel lips are dabbled with the stains / Of feuds.” The stain of blood on her lips is a symbol of resistance to the assimilation of her identity into Scott’s colonial gaze. But Scott depicts her as already in the process of being assimilated — he describes the child she holds as “the latest promise of her nation’s doom.”
It is here Scott envisions his colonial policy, as he attempts to redeem mother and child, by depicting them being converted to Christianity — with the figure of the mother and child posing, he gives shape to the archetype of Mother Mary and Baby Jesus. However, the Indian mother still does not passively accept her suffering with humility: her “rebel lips” still seek resistance, and this is further passed on to her child, who “draws his heavy brows and will not rest” — the child will presumably continue to resist assimilation.
Because of this, Scott intimates that the Natives are “doomed” because they will not willingly assimilate to the culture of English Canada.
Even with this brief analysis, one can see how this poem is a classic instance of the English Canadian author, or authority, giving voice to First Nations concerns — to those whom Scott represents as dying. In Scott’s view, Indians have everything to gain from assimilating.
The attempt by the Department of Indian Affairs to eliminate the so-called Indian problem is still on-going. We are living it today. Right now. Ottawa politicians still cast their gaze across the country and claim to know what is best for Indian education.
Strahl has continually claimed that his primary concern is the education of First Nations students, and that he’ll ensure they receive the same education as other Canadians. He sounds noble to some, but, at root, his actions are really a continuation of hundreds of years of colonial policy — an educational policy that has failed again and again and again throughout our history.
The First Nations University of Canada is, among many things, a response to the Department of Indian Affairs’ educational policy. The 34 years of the university have been an interruption in that policy. But you don’t just turn around hundreds of years of colonial practices in 34 years — the school must keep going — especially if the government’s apology is not to ring hollow. Join us on our journey.
The Prime Minister’s apology was important, but the substance of it is not only to be judged in the government’s words, but by action. Strahl is playing a game with our futures. Indian and Northern Affairs has us in a corner, waiting to reassert the department’s traditional educational policy. Is this the legacy Strahl wishes to leave in this post-apology era? Is this the historic role of the head of Indian Affairs reasserting itself in our time?
Duncan Campbell Scott is considered to be a major literary figure, but because of his actions and policies as head of Indian Affairs, history now looks on him as one of the most regrettable Canadians of our colonial past.
In this new era, what legacy will Strahl leave behind? How will history remember this minister?
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse Rae Archibald-Barber is as assistant professor of English at First Nations University of Canada.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Valmaine Toki: Representative of the Pacific on the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
Kia ora, this is wonderful news that we have a Maori woman lawyer to represent the pacific on Indigenous views. Kia kaha, Taima
GREAT BARRIER IWI NOMINATES TOKI FOR UN ROLE - Waatea news, 5/5/2010
A woman from one of New Zealand's most remote communities will represent indigenous people will represent the indigenous peoples of the Pacific on the United Nations permanent forum on indigenous issues.
Valmaine Toki is from the Ngati Rehua hapu of Ngati Wai, based on Aotea-Great Barrier Island.
The Auckland University law lecturer says she's had a keen interest in global and indigenous issues, so she saw the opportunity of a three-year term on the 16-member council as a great way to encourage Maori participation in the forum.
She spotted the notice of the election while scanning the UN site for information for a research site, and brought it to the attention of her iwi trust board which nominated her.
Valmaine Toki says her nomination was in before New Zealand finally affirmed the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous peoples, but the timing could have helped her case.
GREAT BARRIER IWI NOMINATES TOKI FOR UN ROLE - Waatea news, 5/5/2010
A woman from one of New Zealand's most remote communities will represent indigenous people will represent the indigenous peoples of the Pacific on the United Nations permanent forum on indigenous issues.
Valmaine Toki is from the Ngati Rehua hapu of Ngati Wai, based on Aotea-Great Barrier Island.
The Auckland University law lecturer says she's had a keen interest in global and indigenous issues, so she saw the opportunity of a three-year term on the 16-member council as a great way to encourage Maori participation in the forum.
She spotted the notice of the election while scanning the UN site for information for a research site, and brought it to the attention of her iwi trust board which nominated her.
Valmaine Toki says her nomination was in before New Zealand finally affirmed the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous peoples, but the timing could have helped her case.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
New relationship for Te Whiuwhiu o te Hau programme
Kia ora, the Te Whiuwhiu o te hau programme based at Wintec, Hamilton, has been considering some major changes to their governance and delivery models. The team, Rawiri, Maria and Carol are guiding the process. Rawiri explains how their partnership relationship with the Counselling endorsement is operating. I hope to be there in July to share my Ph.D findings with the staff and students. Kia kaha, kia maia, kia manawanui, Taima
Te Whiuwhiu o te Hau Maori Counselling Relationship by Rawiri David Waretini-Karena
Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau Maori Counselling has entered into a relationship with the Counselling Endorsement. We are creating a from parallel to Partnership relationship that stipulates that each paradigm stay true to their worldviews, but also create shared space to move into others areas in terms of sharing views on social constructionism and understanding Societies and Relationships. The foundation of this relationship comes from the model that we are constructing as a team. I am also taking this concept to another level in my own developing model.
We as a team are examining at what does the Treaty Partnership look like and how will this new vision work within a bi-cultural relationship. There have been new initiatives created within the School of Development as a result of Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau Maori Counselling joining the School. The school has agreed to implement Karakia & Waiata in all hui. All staff regardless of ethnicity has to begin with a Karakia i roto Te Reo Maori. This has not been a practice of the School previously.
The hope is that it will filter into the mainstream classrooms where it will be a common practice amongst all mainstream classes. The impact of this for Te Whiuwhiu is that we are moving into more traditional Moteatea and manawawera and ngeri bringing us even closer to things kaupapa Maori. We also have Basic Te Reo as part of our curriculum now so these are some significant changes that have taken place with Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau Maori Counselling.
Te Whiuwhiu currently has 14 year one students. This is quite a resurgence from the year before in 2009 where we ended up with three students. What was evident when research was done on why the numbers were so low is that Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau had a lack of support, lack of resources and an expectation that we would fade away.
However, we have worked hard and as a result actually started out with approx 25 students for 2010 but due to DHB and Ministry of Social Development criteria of whom has decided to only fund social work resulted in Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau losing 11 students. We do not have a year two student program running in 2010 but we have 13 year 3 students.
Te Whiuwhiu o te Hau Maori Counselling Relationship by Rawiri David Waretini-Karena
Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau Maori Counselling has entered into a relationship with the Counselling Endorsement. We are creating a from parallel to Partnership relationship that stipulates that each paradigm stay true to their worldviews, but also create shared space to move into others areas in terms of sharing views on social constructionism and understanding Societies and Relationships. The foundation of this relationship comes from the model that we are constructing as a team. I am also taking this concept to another level in my own developing model.
We as a team are examining at what does the Treaty Partnership look like and how will this new vision work within a bi-cultural relationship. There have been new initiatives created within the School of Development as a result of Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau Maori Counselling joining the School. The school has agreed to implement Karakia & Waiata in all hui. All staff regardless of ethnicity has to begin with a Karakia i roto Te Reo Maori. This has not been a practice of the School previously.
The hope is that it will filter into the mainstream classrooms where it will be a common practice amongst all mainstream classes. The impact of this for Te Whiuwhiu is that we are moving into more traditional Moteatea and manawawera and ngeri bringing us even closer to things kaupapa Maori. We also have Basic Te Reo as part of our curriculum now so these are some significant changes that have taken place with Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau Maori Counselling.
Te Whiuwhiu currently has 14 year one students. This is quite a resurgence from the year before in 2009 where we ended up with three students. What was evident when research was done on why the numbers were so low is that Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau had a lack of support, lack of resources and an expectation that we would fade away.
However, we have worked hard and as a result actually started out with approx 25 students for 2010 but due to DHB and Ministry of Social Development criteria of whom has decided to only fund social work resulted in Te Whiuwhiu O Te Hau losing 11 students. We do not have a year two student program running in 2010 but we have 13 year 3 students.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Indigenous Rights Declaration Symbolic says Key
Kia ora, finally... exciting news... Taima
Indigenous Rights Declaration Symbolic by Tracy Watkins, 20 April, 2010, NZ Stuff.
Prime Minister John Key says New Zealand's endorsement of a declaration on indigenous rights won't change "our fundamental laws or constitution".
Mr Key said it was "a good day for New Zealand" after Maori Affairs Minister Pita Sharples announced New Zealand's support for the declaration at the United Nations early today.
"We've always had a very proud record when it comes to indigenous rights."
But he said endorsing the declaration was more symbolic in nature than anything else as New Zealand laws took precedence.
Mr Key denied shrouding the declaration in secret, meanwhile, saying the decision to keep quiet in advance about Dr Sharples' trip to New York was out of respect for him. He did not want to steal Dr Sharples' thunder.
"If we told you Pita is going to New York, obviously people would have put two and two together. I thought it was a nice touch."
Mr Key kept Dr Sharples' trip secret even after being asked about New Zealand's position on the declaration on indigenous rights while in Canada last Friday New Zealand Time. He indicated then that decisions were still to be made.
The previous Labour Government had refused to sign, saying it was incompatible with New Zealand's constitution, legal framework and the Treaty of Waitangi.
Also it raised concerns that indigenous people would have more rights than the non-indigenous.
Foreign Minister Murray McCully told Radio New Zealand this morning that the Government would spell out areas where it would not follow the non-binding declaration.
Some of those would be areas inconsistent with the Treaty of Waitangi and mechanisms for settling treaty claims, he said.
"This is the practice that's been adopted by other countries that have recently adopted the declaration as well; it's to adopt it in principal and then make it clear that there are some (aspects) of their national agenda that cause them to do things differently."
Dr Sharples, also a Maori Party co-leader, said after negotiation his party and the Government had come to a position they could both accept.
Dr Sharples last month gave a speech in which he said issues affecting Maori had put pressure on his party's support arrangement with the Government and said it had agreed to support the declaration, but with too many caveats attached.
This morning Dr Sharples seemed happy with the final outcome and was pleased with the standing ovation his speech received at the UN.
Ad Feedback Dr Sharples said the Government had agreed to review the status of the Treaty in the country's constitution and that was about to happen.
"It is disappointing to hear that Mr McCully has viewed the joining of New Zealand in support of the declaration in such a negative way because United Nations gave us a standing ovation that lasted for some time and New Zealand can now hold its head high in the nations of the world..."
The declaration recognises the rights of indigenous peoples to self-determination, to maintain their own languages and cultures, to protect their natural heritage and manage their own affairs.
New Zealand was until now one of only four UN member states opposed to the declaration, and Dr Sharples said that had been "a great disappointment" to Maori.
In his speech to the UN's Forum on Indigenous Issues, Dr Sharples said the declaration was "entirely consistent" with the Treaty of Waitangi.
"Today's announcement restores our mana and our moral authority to speak in international fora on issues of justice, rights and peace," Dr Sharples said.
"It reflects well on the relationship between the National and Maori parties that this Government has been able to endorse this important declaration."
Prime Minister John Key said in a statement New Zealand had always supported the overall aspirations of the declaration and most of its provisions had already been implemented.
Mr Key said supporting the declaration would not compromise the fundamentals of the Government's approach to resolving treaty claims.
- with NZPA
WHAT IT MEANS
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is non-binding. It was drafted more than 20 years ago but was adopted by the General Assembly only in September 2007. New Zealand was one of four countries to reject it, though several others abstained. It recognises the rights of indigenous people to self-determination, to maintain their own languages and cultures, to protect their natural and cultural heritage and manage their own affairs.
PITA SHARPLES' FULL SPEECH TO THE UNITED NATIONS PERMANENT FORUM ON INDIGENOUS ISSUES
(Tauparapara)
E nga mana whenua, e te iwi Onondaga, na koutou nga karakia i tuku ki te wahi ngaro kia pai ai tatou, tena koutou.
E nga mate, o tena iwi, o tena iwi, haere, haere, haere ki te okiokinga tuturu mo te tangata.
E te whare o nga iwi o te ao, karanga mai, karanga mai. Karanga mai ki tenei waewae tapu (manuhiri) mai i Aotearoa.
E te hunga ora, e nga mangai o nga iwi taketake o te ao, tena koutou katoa.
Kei te mihi atu ki o koutou maunga, ki o koutou awa, ki o koutou whenua, i takea mai ai o koutou tipuna, tae noa mai ki a koutou e huihui nei i tenei ra.
I haere mai au me te ngakau mahaki, ki te whakanui i te Whakaputanga o nga Mana o nga Iwi Taketake. Kua roa te Kawanatanga o Aotearoa e whiriwhiri ana i tenei take, katahi ano ka tau te whakaaro, me tautoko.
No reira kei te mihi atu ki nga rangatira, ki nga iwi, ki nga ropu i oti i a koutou tenei kaupapa o te Whakaputanga, hei whakaae ma nga Kawanatanga o te ao.
To the inherent powers of this land; to the Onondaga people, who have offered spiritual acknowledgement to the unseen world to bless us, greetings to you.
To the spirits of the deceased, of each and every nation, we farewell you to the ultimate resting place of humankind.
To this house of the peoples of the world, please welcome this newcomer from New Zealand.
To the living representatives of indigenous peoples of the world, I salute you all.
I greet your mountains, your rivers, your lands, (the places) where your ancestors originated, including you who are meeting here today.
I come with a humble heart to celebrate the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The New Zealand Government has long discussed this matter, and has recently decided to support it.
So I salute the leaders and chiefs, the many peoples and groups who established the foundation of the Declaration, for assent by the Governments of the world.
Announcement of New Zealand's Support for the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
1. In September 2007, at the United Nations, 143 countries voted in favour of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. New Zealand was one of four countries that voted against the Declaration.
2. Today, New Zealand changes its position: we are pleased to express our support for the Declaration.
3. In keeping with our strong commitment to human rights, and indigenous rights in particular, New Zealand now adds its support to the Declaration both as an affirmation of fundamental rights and in its expression of new and widely supported aspirations.
4. Māori hold a distinct and special status as the indigenous people, or tangata whenua, of New Zealand. Indigenous rights and indigenous culture are of profound importance to New Zealand and fundamental to our identity as a nation. A unique feature of our constitutional arrangements is the Treaty of Waitangi, signed by representatives of the Crown and Māori in 1840. It is a founding document of New Zealand and marks the beginning of our rich cultural heritage. The Treaty establishes a foundation of partnership, mutual respect, co-operation and good faith between Māori and the Crown. It holds great importance in our laws, our constitutional arrangements and the work of successive governments.
5. The Declaration contains principles that are consistent with the duties and principles inherent in the Treaty, such as operating in the spirit of partnership and mutual respect. We affirm this objective, and affirm the Government's commitment to build and maintain constructive relationships with Māori to achieve better results for Māori, which will benefit New Zealand as a whole.
6. The Declaration is an historic achievement: the result of many years of discussions - 22 years in fact - and of hard work and perseverance by many people. I acknowledge the long involvement of Māori in the elaboration of the Declaration and the extent of their investment in its development.
7. The Declaration acknowledges the distinctive and important status of indigenous peoples, their common historical experiences and the universal spirit that underpins its text. The Declaration is an affirmation of accepted international human rights and also expresses new, and non-binding, aspirations.
8. In moving to support the Declaration, New Zealand both affirms those rights and reaffirms the legal and constitutional frameworks that underpin New Zealand's legal system. Those existing frameworks, while they will continue to evolve in accordance with New Zealand's domestic circumstances, define the bounds of New Zealand's engagement with the aspirational elements of the Declaration.
9. In particular, where the Declaration sets out aspirations for rights to and restitution of traditionally held land and resources, New Zealand has, through its well-established processes for resolving Treaty claims, developed its own distinct approach.
10. That approach respects the important relationship Māori, as tangata whenua, have with their lands and resources both currently and historically, and the complementary principles of rangatiratanga and kaitiakitanga that underpin that relationship. It also maintains, and will continue to maintain, the existing legal regimes for the ownership and management of land and natural resources.
11. New Zealand acknowledges and understands the historic injustices suffered by Māori in relation to their land and resources and is committed to addressing these through the established Treaty settlement process. Many Māori groups have already benefited from the transfer of considerable land, forest and fisheries assets through negotiated Treaty settlements; many more are in the process of negotiations with the Government towards settling their claims. These settlements contribute to the re-establishment of an economic base as a platform for future development. Redress offered in Treaty settlements is, however, constrained by the need to be fair to everyone and by what the country as a whole can afford to pay.
12. Further, where the Declaration sets out principles for indigenous involvement in decision-making, New Zealand has developed, and will continue to rely upon, its own distinct processes and institutions that afford opportunities to Māori for such involvement. These range from broad guarantees of participation and consultation to particular instances in which a requirement of consent is appropriate.
13. In those processes and institutions, we acknowledge that our ongoing national dialogue is grounded in the Treaty of Waitangi. We further recognise that Māori have an interest in all policy and legislative matters and acknowledge the determination of Māori that custom, worldviews and cultural heritage should be reflected in the laws and policies of New Zealand. Māori have been, and continue to be, active in developing innovative responses to issues with a strong indigenous perspective and in engaging with successive governments on possible paths forward.
14. We will continue that conversation within the relationship that the Treaty and New Zealand's constitution as a whole affords. Further, we will continue to work in international fora to promote the human rights of indigenous peoples. New Zealand acknowledges the ongoing process of dialogue and debate over the meanings that may be given to the aspirations put forward by the Declaration.
15. New Zealand's support for the Declaration represents an opportunity to acknowledge and restate the special cultural and historical position of Māori as the original inhabitants - the tangata whenua - of New Zealand. It reflects our continuing endeavours to work together to find solutions and underlines the importance of the relationship between Māori and the Crown under the Treaty of Waitangi. Its affirmation of longstanding rights supports and safeguards that ongoing relationship and its proclamation of new aspirations gives us all encouragement and inspiration for the future.
16. No reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa
Indigenous Rights Declaration Symbolic by Tracy Watkins, 20 April, 2010, NZ Stuff.
Prime Minister John Key says New Zealand's endorsement of a declaration on indigenous rights won't change "our fundamental laws or constitution".
Mr Key said it was "a good day for New Zealand" after Maori Affairs Minister Pita Sharples announced New Zealand's support for the declaration at the United Nations early today.
"We've always had a very proud record when it comes to indigenous rights."
But he said endorsing the declaration was more symbolic in nature than anything else as New Zealand laws took precedence.
Mr Key denied shrouding the declaration in secret, meanwhile, saying the decision to keep quiet in advance about Dr Sharples' trip to New York was out of respect for him. He did not want to steal Dr Sharples' thunder.
"If we told you Pita is going to New York, obviously people would have put two and two together. I thought it was a nice touch."
Mr Key kept Dr Sharples' trip secret even after being asked about New Zealand's position on the declaration on indigenous rights while in Canada last Friday New Zealand Time. He indicated then that decisions were still to be made.
The previous Labour Government had refused to sign, saying it was incompatible with New Zealand's constitution, legal framework and the Treaty of Waitangi.
Also it raised concerns that indigenous people would have more rights than the non-indigenous.
Foreign Minister Murray McCully told Radio New Zealand this morning that the Government would spell out areas where it would not follow the non-binding declaration.
Some of those would be areas inconsistent with the Treaty of Waitangi and mechanisms for settling treaty claims, he said.
"This is the practice that's been adopted by other countries that have recently adopted the declaration as well; it's to adopt it in principal and then make it clear that there are some (aspects) of their national agenda that cause them to do things differently."
Dr Sharples, also a Maori Party co-leader, said after negotiation his party and the Government had come to a position they could both accept.
Dr Sharples last month gave a speech in which he said issues affecting Maori had put pressure on his party's support arrangement with the Government and said it had agreed to support the declaration, but with too many caveats attached.
This morning Dr Sharples seemed happy with the final outcome and was pleased with the standing ovation his speech received at the UN.
Ad Feedback Dr Sharples said the Government had agreed to review the status of the Treaty in the country's constitution and that was about to happen.
"It is disappointing to hear that Mr McCully has viewed the joining of New Zealand in support of the declaration in such a negative way because United Nations gave us a standing ovation that lasted for some time and New Zealand can now hold its head high in the nations of the world..."
The declaration recognises the rights of indigenous peoples to self-determination, to maintain their own languages and cultures, to protect their natural heritage and manage their own affairs.
New Zealand was until now one of only four UN member states opposed to the declaration, and Dr Sharples said that had been "a great disappointment" to Maori.
In his speech to the UN's Forum on Indigenous Issues, Dr Sharples said the declaration was "entirely consistent" with the Treaty of Waitangi.
"Today's announcement restores our mana and our moral authority to speak in international fora on issues of justice, rights and peace," Dr Sharples said.
"It reflects well on the relationship between the National and Maori parties that this Government has been able to endorse this important declaration."
Prime Minister John Key said in a statement New Zealand had always supported the overall aspirations of the declaration and most of its provisions had already been implemented.
Mr Key said supporting the declaration would not compromise the fundamentals of the Government's approach to resolving treaty claims.
- with NZPA
WHAT IT MEANS
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is non-binding. It was drafted more than 20 years ago but was adopted by the General Assembly only in September 2007. New Zealand was one of four countries to reject it, though several others abstained. It recognises the rights of indigenous people to self-determination, to maintain their own languages and cultures, to protect their natural and cultural heritage and manage their own affairs.
PITA SHARPLES' FULL SPEECH TO THE UNITED NATIONS PERMANENT FORUM ON INDIGENOUS ISSUES
(Tauparapara)
E nga mana whenua, e te iwi Onondaga, na koutou nga karakia i tuku ki te wahi ngaro kia pai ai tatou, tena koutou.
E nga mate, o tena iwi, o tena iwi, haere, haere, haere ki te okiokinga tuturu mo te tangata.
E te whare o nga iwi o te ao, karanga mai, karanga mai. Karanga mai ki tenei waewae tapu (manuhiri) mai i Aotearoa.
E te hunga ora, e nga mangai o nga iwi taketake o te ao, tena koutou katoa.
Kei te mihi atu ki o koutou maunga, ki o koutou awa, ki o koutou whenua, i takea mai ai o koutou tipuna, tae noa mai ki a koutou e huihui nei i tenei ra.
I haere mai au me te ngakau mahaki, ki te whakanui i te Whakaputanga o nga Mana o nga Iwi Taketake. Kua roa te Kawanatanga o Aotearoa e whiriwhiri ana i tenei take, katahi ano ka tau te whakaaro, me tautoko.
No reira kei te mihi atu ki nga rangatira, ki nga iwi, ki nga ropu i oti i a koutou tenei kaupapa o te Whakaputanga, hei whakaae ma nga Kawanatanga o te ao.
To the inherent powers of this land; to the Onondaga people, who have offered spiritual acknowledgement to the unseen world to bless us, greetings to you.
To the spirits of the deceased, of each and every nation, we farewell you to the ultimate resting place of humankind.
To this house of the peoples of the world, please welcome this newcomer from New Zealand.
To the living representatives of indigenous peoples of the world, I salute you all.
I greet your mountains, your rivers, your lands, (the places) where your ancestors originated, including you who are meeting here today.
I come with a humble heart to celebrate the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The New Zealand Government has long discussed this matter, and has recently decided to support it.
So I salute the leaders and chiefs, the many peoples and groups who established the foundation of the Declaration, for assent by the Governments of the world.
Announcement of New Zealand's Support for the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
1. In September 2007, at the United Nations, 143 countries voted in favour of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. New Zealand was one of four countries that voted against the Declaration.
2. Today, New Zealand changes its position: we are pleased to express our support for the Declaration.
3. In keeping with our strong commitment to human rights, and indigenous rights in particular, New Zealand now adds its support to the Declaration both as an affirmation of fundamental rights and in its expression of new and widely supported aspirations.
4. Māori hold a distinct and special status as the indigenous people, or tangata whenua, of New Zealand. Indigenous rights and indigenous culture are of profound importance to New Zealand and fundamental to our identity as a nation. A unique feature of our constitutional arrangements is the Treaty of Waitangi, signed by representatives of the Crown and Māori in 1840. It is a founding document of New Zealand and marks the beginning of our rich cultural heritage. The Treaty establishes a foundation of partnership, mutual respect, co-operation and good faith between Māori and the Crown. It holds great importance in our laws, our constitutional arrangements and the work of successive governments.
5. The Declaration contains principles that are consistent with the duties and principles inherent in the Treaty, such as operating in the spirit of partnership and mutual respect. We affirm this objective, and affirm the Government's commitment to build and maintain constructive relationships with Māori to achieve better results for Māori, which will benefit New Zealand as a whole.
6. The Declaration is an historic achievement: the result of many years of discussions - 22 years in fact - and of hard work and perseverance by many people. I acknowledge the long involvement of Māori in the elaboration of the Declaration and the extent of their investment in its development.
7. The Declaration acknowledges the distinctive and important status of indigenous peoples, their common historical experiences and the universal spirit that underpins its text. The Declaration is an affirmation of accepted international human rights and also expresses new, and non-binding, aspirations.
8. In moving to support the Declaration, New Zealand both affirms those rights and reaffirms the legal and constitutional frameworks that underpin New Zealand's legal system. Those existing frameworks, while they will continue to evolve in accordance with New Zealand's domestic circumstances, define the bounds of New Zealand's engagement with the aspirational elements of the Declaration.
9. In particular, where the Declaration sets out aspirations for rights to and restitution of traditionally held land and resources, New Zealand has, through its well-established processes for resolving Treaty claims, developed its own distinct approach.
10. That approach respects the important relationship Māori, as tangata whenua, have with their lands and resources both currently and historically, and the complementary principles of rangatiratanga and kaitiakitanga that underpin that relationship. It also maintains, and will continue to maintain, the existing legal regimes for the ownership and management of land and natural resources.
11. New Zealand acknowledges and understands the historic injustices suffered by Māori in relation to their land and resources and is committed to addressing these through the established Treaty settlement process. Many Māori groups have already benefited from the transfer of considerable land, forest and fisheries assets through negotiated Treaty settlements; many more are in the process of negotiations with the Government towards settling their claims. These settlements contribute to the re-establishment of an economic base as a platform for future development. Redress offered in Treaty settlements is, however, constrained by the need to be fair to everyone and by what the country as a whole can afford to pay.
12. Further, where the Declaration sets out principles for indigenous involvement in decision-making, New Zealand has developed, and will continue to rely upon, its own distinct processes and institutions that afford opportunities to Māori for such involvement. These range from broad guarantees of participation and consultation to particular instances in which a requirement of consent is appropriate.
13. In those processes and institutions, we acknowledge that our ongoing national dialogue is grounded in the Treaty of Waitangi. We further recognise that Māori have an interest in all policy and legislative matters and acknowledge the determination of Māori that custom, worldviews and cultural heritage should be reflected in the laws and policies of New Zealand. Māori have been, and continue to be, active in developing innovative responses to issues with a strong indigenous perspective and in engaging with successive governments on possible paths forward.
14. We will continue that conversation within the relationship that the Treaty and New Zealand's constitution as a whole affords. Further, we will continue to work in international fora to promote the human rights of indigenous peoples. New Zealand acknowledges the ongoing process of dialogue and debate over the meanings that may be given to the aspirations put forward by the Declaration.
15. New Zealand's support for the Declaration represents an opportunity to acknowledge and restate the special cultural and historical position of Māori as the original inhabitants - the tangata whenua - of New Zealand. It reflects our continuing endeavours to work together to find solutions and underlines the importance of the relationship between Māori and the Crown under the Treaty of Waitangi. Its affirmation of longstanding rights supports and safeguards that ongoing relationship and its proclamation of new aspirations gives us all encouragement and inspiration for the future.
16. No reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Feds Put First Nations University in Peril by Randy Lundy
Feds Put First Nations University in Peril by Randy Lundy, Chair of the First Nations University of Canada's academic council. Cited in CAUT Bulletin, Vol 57 No. 4 April 2010.
The Government of Canada has put the future of Canada’s only First Nations university at grave peril. Indian and Northern Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl’s refusal to restore full federal finding to First Nations University of Canada will mean massive layoffs and a significant reduction in course programs, likely forcing the university to declare financial exigency and eventually close.
“We cannot understand the federal government’s decision, coming after the longstanding governance and administrative concerns at the university have been fixed,” said Randy Lundy, academic council chair and head of the institution’s English department.
More than 2,000 people have signed an open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, calling for the restoration of full federal funding. The letter reminds the prime minister of his historic 2008 apology for the residential schools that attempted to strip aboriginal Canadians of their culture and traditions and assimilate them into the dominant culture.
The letter notes that the loss of government funding will force the university to close when
the school year ends Aug. 31, making it impossible for First Nations university students to study in an institution based on First Nations traditions and cultures. The letter calls this “an act of disrespect to First Nations peoples in Canada and a continuation of the very practices for which you apologized in June 2008.”
The federal government’s surprise announcement last month to pull the annual funding from First Nations University, then its decision to provide bridge funding to allow students to complete their course work until Aug. 31, came after dramatic changes had taken place at the school.
The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations had reformed the governance structure
by dissolving the university’s board of governors and replacing it with a smaller and depoliticized board — a change recommended by several commissions and CAUT.
The school’s president and vice-president of administration were dismissed.
The federation, First Nations University, the Saskatchewan government and the University of Regina agreed to a partnership arrangement where the financial and administrative affairs of First Nations University would be under the aegis of the University of Regina for the next four years.
“The loss of First Nation University is a tragedy that need not happen,” said CAUT executive director James Turk. “Perhaps the federal government has the mistaken belief that the university can limp along, but once faculty are laid off, programs cut and students go elsewhere or drop out, it will be too late.”
He said there was strong support for the reinstatement of funding from opposition leaders Michael Ignatieff, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe, whose parties “are continuing to press the Harper government in the House of Commons and in the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs.”
The Government of Canada has put the future of Canada’s only First Nations university at grave peril. Indian and Northern Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl’s refusal to restore full federal finding to First Nations University of Canada will mean massive layoffs and a significant reduction in course programs, likely forcing the university to declare financial exigency and eventually close.
“We cannot understand the federal government’s decision, coming after the longstanding governance and administrative concerns at the university have been fixed,” said Randy Lundy, academic council chair and head of the institution’s English department.
More than 2,000 people have signed an open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, calling for the restoration of full federal funding. The letter reminds the prime minister of his historic 2008 apology for the residential schools that attempted to strip aboriginal Canadians of their culture and traditions and assimilate them into the dominant culture.
The letter notes that the loss of government funding will force the university to close when
the school year ends Aug. 31, making it impossible for First Nations university students to study in an institution based on First Nations traditions and cultures. The letter calls this “an act of disrespect to First Nations peoples in Canada and a continuation of the very practices for which you apologized in June 2008.”
The federal government’s surprise announcement last month to pull the annual funding from First Nations University, then its decision to provide bridge funding to allow students to complete their course work until Aug. 31, came after dramatic changes had taken place at the school.
The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations had reformed the governance structure
by dissolving the university’s board of governors and replacing it with a smaller and depoliticized board — a change recommended by several commissions and CAUT.
The school’s president and vice-president of administration were dismissed.
The federation, First Nations University, the Saskatchewan government and the University of Regina agreed to a partnership arrangement where the financial and administrative affairs of First Nations University would be under the aegis of the University of Regina for the next four years.
“The loss of First Nation University is a tragedy that need not happen,” said CAUT executive director James Turk. “Perhaps the federal government has the mistaken belief that the university can limp along, but once faculty are laid off, programs cut and students go elsewhere or drop out, it will be too late.”
He said there was strong support for the reinstatement of funding from opposition leaders Michael Ignatieff, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe, whose parties “are continuing to press the Harper government in the House of Commons and in the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs.”
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
new book: Thriving beyond sustainability: Pathways to a resilient society
Kia ora, came across this new book, Thriving Beyond Sustainability: Pathways to a Resilient Society by Andres Edwards. Interesting and innovative ideas, Taima
Thriving Beyond Sustainability draws a collective map of individuals, organizations and communities from around the world that are committed to building an alternative future - one that strives to restore ecological health, reinvent outmoded institutions and rejuvenate our environmental, social and economic systems. The projects and initiatives profiled are meeting the challenges of the day with optimism, hope and results, leading the way in relocalization, green commerce, ecological design, environmental conservation and social transformation. The comprehensive resource section provides the tools for everyone to become a catalyst for change.
This book can be found at Fernwood Books Ltd, www.fernwoodbooks.ca
Thriving Beyond Sustainability draws a collective map of individuals, organizations and communities from around the world that are committed to building an alternative future - one that strives to restore ecological health, reinvent outmoded institutions and rejuvenate our environmental, social and economic systems. The projects and initiatives profiled are meeting the challenges of the day with optimism, hope and results, leading the way in relocalization, green commerce, ecological design, environmental conservation and social transformation. The comprehensive resource section provides the tools for everyone to become a catalyst for change.
This book can be found at Fernwood Books Ltd, www.fernwoodbooks.ca
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)