NationStates Jolt Archive

Stephen Harper says sorry (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/06/11/pm-statement.html)

Mr. Speaker, I stand before you today to offer an apology to former students of Indian residential schools. The treatment of children in Indian residential schools is a sad chapter in our history.

In the 1870's, the federal government, partly in order to meet its obligation to educate aboriginal children, began to play a role in the development and administration of these schools.

Two primary objectives of the residential schools system were to remove and isolate children from the influence of their homes, families, traditions and cultures, and to assimilate them into the dominant culture.

These objectives were based on the assumption aboriginal cultures and spiritual beliefs were inferior and unequal.

Indeed, some sought, as it was infamously said, "to kill the Indian in the child."

Today, we recognize that this policy of assimilation was wrong, has caused great harm, and has no place in our country.


Frankly I, and many Canadians even not of First Nations heritage are shocked at this turn about. When Harper first took power, it was made clear that no apology for the Residential School (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/05/16/f-faqs-residential-schools.html) system would be forthcoming, despite a compensation package for survivors that was unveiled in 2005 as well as the formation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (http://www.trc-cvr.ca/indexen.html) to finally comprehensively deal with the issues.

I have to say, as much as I hate the Conservatives, this was an extremely needed, and important political step. I attended one of the many small First Nations and Metis gatherings to watch the apology telecast live...and I can't even begin to describe to you the feeling in that room as we came finally face to face with the acceptance of the wrong done, and the acknowledgement of the pain caused generations of my people.

By no means is every Canadian happy about this apology, or the compensation, or the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and I open the floor to what I hope will be an actual debate on the issues.

Fair enough.

And so the idea of multiculturalism comes before assimilation in Canada once again.

What else is new.

I disagree with it. If I was a part of the Canadian government I would not have apologized and I would have continued to use assimilation as the main policy, as I do not agree with the idea of a multicultural "salad bowl" style nation but instead favor a society that demands assimilation (melting pot). Unfortunatly, our weak governemnt has been failing on this...

It's amazing...having grown up knowing about Residential Schools, hearing the horror stories of relatives who attended them...I am always brought up short when I realise how little most Canadians still know about the system. We've been telling our stories for so long, and it's like....all of a sudden, the floodgates opened and people started listening.

We've known for so long that there were many thousands of children who died at the Residential Schools and who were buried in unmarked, even mass graves. Some families were never notified of the deaths...their children just never returned home.

Finally, some of these grave sites are being identified and there are those calling for the exhumation of the bodies so that we can at least try to identify the dead.

It's so bizarre. I remember a woman from Fort McPherson talking about how her three sisters died in school...how one day they were in the infirmary, and the next were gone...how the nuns told her they were dead, but wouldn't tell her where the bodies were. Imagine that...knowing your siblings were gone, but not being allowed to have anything to do with their internment, not really being able to carry out proper mourning. She told that story so many times...we even knew by then where the grave-site was...but the local government wasn't at all interested in 'ancient history'.

Just maybe her family will be able to take those girls home now.

isn't using the term Indian rather inaccurate?

Unfortunately, not legally. First Nations people are still officially recognised as 'Indian' in the legislation. Even if that were changed, it would still be right to use the historical name for the Indian Residential school system.

In recognizing errors of the past, let us all seek to prevent their repetition.

did mr harper have a change of heart on his own or was he forced into this.

i have great respect for anyone who can make a public statement then realize that they were wrong and do the right thing.

And so the idea of multiculturalism comes before assimilation in Canada once again. It's what our nation is founded on. There would have been no Confederation without it...even ignoring the presence of aboriginal peoples, you had the French who under no circumstances would have been willing to 'assimilate' in order to become part of Canada.

What else is new. Nothing. As noted, it's a founding principle of our nation.


I disagree with it. If I was a part of the Canadian government I would not have apologized and I would have continued to use assimilation as the main policy, as I do not agree with the idea of a multicultural "salad bowl" style nation but instead favor a society that demands assimilation (melting pot). Unfortunatly, our weak governemnt has been failing on this...

So your solution would be to sweep injustice under the rug, and pretend it didn't happen? Sounds more divisive than cohesive to me. The history of the Residential Schools has been largely absent from mainstream discourse up until this point...it was only recently introduced into the curriculum in schools even. That was assimilative, and it failed, miserably. At some point, our nation needed to realise that assimilation didn't work, was manifestly unjust, and a new approach was needed. It took a long time, but this is a good step forward. If we want to get over this horrible legacy, we need to face it full on, and walk together.

In my mind, this will do so much more for Canadian solidarity and cultural cohesion than willful 'forgetting' ever possibly could.

did mr harper have a change of heart on his own or was he forced into this.

i have great respect for anyone who can make a public statement then realize that they were wrong and do the right thing.

It's hard to say really. The Conservatives have a minority government, so perhaps it's political maneuvering...but I don't think it's all that.

Since the Harper government has come in, there have been some conflicting responses to national aboriginal leaders. The Conservatives at one point massively cut funding to aboriginal programs, and threatened further cuts last year if any funded aboriginal organisation participated in protest actions on our National Day of Action. Yet, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has received a lot of support, and Harper has been mostly open to maintaining ties with the main aboriginal political groups in the country. So it's a bit of give and take.

I'm not really sure why he and the Conservatives have chosen this route. The Liberals apologised as well, btw, but who knows if they'd have done it on their own steam. It could be that Harper is doing this as a sort of preemptive strike...saying sorry before the damning report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is finally tabled. We had a Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples in 1995 which was damning enough...there's no hope this one is going to come out in the government's favour.

So, trying to get the aboriginal vote? Maybe...maybe the times have changed enough that Canadians are willing to face up to their past. Not to mention that there are still massive landclaim processes and treaty negotiations taking place in BC and elsewhere. We have seen apologies for the Chinese Head tax under the Harper government...we have seen apologies for the Kamagata Maru (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Chandigarh/Finally_apology_for_Kamagata_Maru/articleshow/3049923.cms)incident...so apologies are not alien to the Harper government.

Buch of Canadian-news-hating poopheads :P

Canadi-who?

And so the idea of multiculturalism comes before assimilation in Canada once again.

What else is new.

I disagree with it. If I was a part of the Canadian government I would not have apologized and I would have continued to use assimilation as the main policy, as I do not agree with the idea of a multicultural "salad bowl" style nation but instead favor a society that demands assimilation (melting pot). Unfortunatly, our weak governemnt has been failing on this...

You would have the inkling of a point if you were talking about immigrants assimilating, but this is about aboriginals. You know, the people who were there first. It would make more sense to expect them to demand the other Canadians assimilate into their society.

That's great to hear, but how does this affect ME? :p :D

And so the idea of multiculturalism comes before assimilation in Canada once again.


What, you want Canadians to leave the cities and start making igloos?

This is Harper's excuse to now ignore all current native issues by claiming he apologized for the past, and that should be enough. :rolleyes: Cause, you know, it's much easier to say you're sorry for something you didn't do than to fix the problems in front of you.

Stephen Harper says sorry (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/06/11/pm-statement.html)



Frankly I, and many Canadians even not of First Nations heritage are shocked at this turn about. When Harper first took power, it was made clear that no apology for the Residential School (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/05/16/f-faqs-residential-schools.html) system would be forthcoming, despite a compensation package for survivors that was unveiled in 2005 as well as the formation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (http://www.trc-cvr.ca/indexen.html) to finally comprehensively deal with the issues.

I have to say, as much as I hate the Conservatives, this was an extremely needed, and important political step. I attended one of the many small First Nations and Metis gatherings to watch the apology telecast live...and I can't even begin to describe to you the feeling in that room as we came finally face to face with the acceptance of the wrong done, and the acknowledgement of the pain caused generations of my people.

By no means is every Canadian happy about this apology, or the compensation, or the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and I open the floor to what I hope will be an actual debate on the issues.

So, when is Planned Parenthood going to apologize for Margaret Sanger?

Ive got to say, apologizing was called for, bringing to full light the trauma that the canadian government of the past dealt to the native peoples. But, what sort of annoys me is that they just handed out $4 billion. Thats a whole lot of money.
Wouldnt the apology and the money have been much better used if Harper had apologized and then said something like....and in light of that we are investing this much money into fixing the modern problems with water supplies on reserves, healthcare for northern communities, safer housing and better roads on reserves and increased staffing for the ongoing land disputes....working forward while acknowledging our past. Because everyone knows you cant change the past, even by throwing money at it.

I'm voting for 'political maneuvering'.

It was an inexpensive way to make a big splash. As Caput562 poited out, we should wait and see if he puts his (our) money where his mouth is.

That should not, however, detract from the importance of this apology and how desperately we need to open this whole can of worms to the light of day so that we can move forward as a country of equal nations.

Harper's apology means shit given that he won't acknowledge the Kelowna Accord. Sure it's nice that the government apologised but we all know damn well that it's just pure Conservative twaddle and that he wouldn't have actually done this without a lot of coercion from Layton and the NDP.

It's just a feel good move until something realistic actually gets done.

I hope this provides the impetus for Canada to sign and ratify the UN treaty on the rights of aborigianl peoples.

I won't hold my breath.

Never hearing the Canadian speach and being naturally sceptical of all politicians it instantly reminds me of what my own countries PM said to its stolen generation of aboriginal people. The scenarios are simular

On the back of an election promise to say sorry he did. He did it publicly and openly as a national appology should. His speach was very well crafted. Many people cried that day. Overall it was beautiful.

But what happened after that appology. Well his approval rating remained VERY high despite bad governance when it came to petrol (installing something that 4 department say will raise prices), alcahol (more teens drinks spirits now in an attempt to stop binge drinking), education (Top tax cut wasted on personal laptops that are now considered a security risk when traveling to and from school. The computers at school are somehow unusable), water (Billion dollar bribe to fellow state party), foreign policy (ignoring japan on an international visit).

This took me less then a minute to write after he has been in office for 6 months. My point is prehaps the Canadian PM heard about this. What a way to suddenly be reelected. Say sorry and do nothing. If costs next to nothing and you get praised for it. When is your next election by the way?

This took me less then a minute to write after he has been in office for 6 months. My point is prehaps the Canadian PM heard about this. What a way to suddenly be reelected. Say sorry and do nothing. If costs next to nothing and you get praised for it. When is your next election by the way?

When either the next official election day arrives or the Liberals grow a fucking backbone and topple this damn minority government. I'm banking on the first happening because as long as the Liberals have Dion at the helm, shit ain't getting done. Though he won't last long.

Apparently we (US America) haven't done this yet because we would owe millions and millions of dollars to the Native Americans.

But I mean, come on! They have so much land. (http://www.eere.energy.gov/tribalenergy/images/tribal_regions.gif) that I fail to see where lots of money that they rightly deserve would come in handy. Stupid Feds and BUI.

I've been following the coverage of this with great interest for the last few days, and there's some things I'm still wondering about.

It seems that this apology, even though it's just an apology, is hugely important to lots of first nations people. I kept hearing over and over again in people's reactions "I wish my mother/grandfather/uncle who went to residential school could have heard this". Symbols and words matter alot. Having this as an official part of Canadian history, in an address from the house of commons is really significant to our sense of ourselves as Canadians (not just for first nations people).

The thing that I'm more curious about is the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, or action on aboriginal issues in general. I don't know that much about it, but some people say that the biggest beneficiaries of it are the reams of lawyers, mediators, etc. Neesika, do you think discussions of aboriginal issues focus too much on coming to terms with the past instead of actually getting out of the poverty and illness that plagues aboriginal communities right now? I think it ties into the reserve system in general which keeps people in remote areas where there's no chance of earning a living, but are able to have some semblence of a traditional community.

Margaret Wente (who I usually can't stand) sort of articulates the point I'm curious about in yesterday's Globe. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080612.wcowent12/BNStory/commentsalon/
I'm wondering what your perspective on this is Neesika? Like, is this an argument only a white person could make?

When Kevin Rudd apologised for a similar policy here in Australia, there was a similar reaction: everyone acted all happy for a few days, and then people realised that nothing changed.

I suppose I'm not as emotional a person, and I've been told a few times that I "just can't understand" the way indigenous people think about these things, but still...why is this such a big deal? Aren't there seriously more important things to worry about than an apology? To use a (probably inappropriate) example: I don't expect anyone to apologise for bombing Hamburg to pieces and putting my grandparents through all sorts of grief in the process, and I must say I can live quite well without worrying about it.

An apology infers that someone has a guilty conscience.

You would have the inkling of a point if you were talking about immigrants assimilating, but this is about aboriginals. You know, the people who were there first. It would make more sense to expect them to demand the other Canadians assimilate into their society.

Exactly what I thinking.

An apology infers that someone has a guilty conscience.
Well yeah, but what do you get out of knowing that someone else is feeling bad? And what does this feeling bad really mean when in basically no realistic way can the person be held responsible for what happened?

Obviously the government is responsible for the actions of its past incarnations, but the government is an institution, it can't have a guilty conscience or feel bad.

An apology infers that someone has a guilty conscience.

And Canada does.

And Canada does.
I've never met him (or her?), but I'm sure you're right.

Exactly. Thats the reason why people realize that it changes absolutely *nothing*. The only people that care are the ones who feel offended after all this time.

That would be like me being offended that when my ancestors got here they had to work like slaves in coal mines for a pittance, and getting nothing when they got injured, and so on. Yes it was bad that it happened, but it's in the past. Get over it.

That would be like me being offended that when my ancestors got here they had to work like slaves in coal mines for a pittance, and getting nothing when they got injured, and so on. Yes it was bad that it happened, but it's in the past. Get over it.

And that was horrible but residential schools were only 30 years ago, I don't want to sound arrogant and speak for them but generations were sent to be abused, they didn't learn how to be parents, be responsible. How do you recover from the psychological affects of that? How do they cope with the 50 000 that died in that care? And now that aboriginal have gone through being removed from their culture, ostracised, truamatised and abused we put them on reserves, many of which have substandard or even third world conditions and what, we expect them to get better? Some can, but we have done this to them and we need to help those who can't.

Canadians have the blood of 50 000 children on our hands so I think it's time we got off our high-horse and rid ourselves of this "blame-the-victum" thinking.

And that was horrible but residential schools were only 30 years ago, I don't want to sound arrogant and speak for them but generations were sent to be abused, they didn't learn how to be parents, be responsible. How do you recover from the psychological affects of that? How do they cope with the 50 000 that died in that care? And now that aboriginal have gone through being removed from their culture, ostracised, truamatised and abused we put them on reserves, many of which have substandard or even third world conditions and what, we expect them to get better? Some can, but we have done this to them and we need to help those who can't.

Canadians have the blood of 50 000 children on our hands so I think it's time we got off our high-horse and rid ourselves of this "blame-the-victum" thinking.
I've never seen any actual evidence for the 50000 children dead claim. have you?

Exactly. Thats the reason why people realize that it changes absolutely *nothing*. The only people that care are the ones who feel offended after all this time.

That would be like me being offended that when my ancestors got here they had to work like slaves in coal mines for a pittance, and getting nothing when they got injured, and so on. Yes it was bad that it happened, but it's in the past. Get over it.

Yea, those Jews, fuck, why are they still hung up over the Holocaust, christ, why don't get just get over it.

Yea, those Jews, fuck, why are they still hung up over the Holocaust, christ, why don't get just get over it.

Nothing wrong with teaching the future generations of the past. The part where I find wrong is when some groups want to pin the blame of past generations on the generation or generations that had nothing to do with it. This goes for anywhere.

I've never seen any actual evidence for the 50000 children dead claim. have you?

http://www.hiddenfromhistory.org/RecentUpdatesampArticles/Apr102008LocationofMassGravesRevealed/tabid/71/Default.aspx

http://www.hiddenfromhistory.org/RecentUpdatesampArticles/Apr102008LocationofMassGravesRevealed/tabid/71/Default.aspxUhh, yeah I've poked around that website before. Still can't find actual evidence. Did they just throw out a number? And this non-governmental tribunal thing seems a bit hoaky - how exactly can people be tried and indicted by a tribunal that has no authority? They say that they cannot trust the government to conduct a real investigation since they were part of the perpetration. I guess that makes a certain sort of sense, but it's the Canadian legal system that has the power to actually put people in jail/ compensate people etc.

Rexmehe, if it's not still upsetting enough to start another war over it, then it's time to let it go. Not forget - just let go of the hatred because the people who perpetrated it are senile or dead, or at least close to being.

Something that happened 30 years ago, thats a little fresher, but still. If its not something that you're willing to go to war over right this minute, then it's not worth harboring feelings for. Take the intellectual lessons learned and use them to try and prevent it from happening in the future.

The thing that I'm more curious about is the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, or action on aboriginal issues in general. I don't know that much about it, but some people say that the biggest beneficiaries of it are the reams of lawyers, mediators, etc. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission is not about compensation, first off...so the 'benefit' is in terms of creating an officially acknowledged national history. I think you're talking about the Residential Schools compensation.

Originally, individual and then class action lawsuits were the only way to get any sort of compensation for abuse. Those original suits were against the actual churches. The new compensation package comes from the government, and you don't have to go through the expensive legal process of a lawsuit, meaning less goes to the lawyers and so on.

Don't get me wrong...that doesn't mean no lawyers are getting rich off this. Not to mention the speculators...offering lines of credit to residential school survivors in expectation of their payouts and so forth.


Neesika, do you think discussions of aboriginal issues focus too much on coming to terms with the past instead of actually getting out of the poverty and illness that plagues aboriginal communities right now?
No, I don't.

We needed to come to this stage where we're finally, officially, and nationally acknowledging the racist and harmful approach taken in terms of the 'Indian problem'. It is incredibly harmful to try to move on when you've got a government saying, 'but we did nothing wrong, and we only wanted the best for you'. Aboriginal healing is holistic....it cannot be just the physical or social ailments we deal with...we need to be truthful, we need to acknowledge our mistakes, and we need to deal with that past pain in order to move on.

To do otherwise would be to perpetuate the blaming of victims, and the inevitable resentment that would cause. If we can say, look, this was wrong, and these are the effects such policies have had, we can see how that harm travelled down the line. If you can see that, you can really start working on solutions to the poverty, the poor health, and so on. Unless you really want to believe that we suffer these disproportionate levels of poverty and illness simply because we are aboriginal, rather than because of a myriad of factors including official Canadian policy, racism, and the unfocused and surface attempts to 'help' once such deep damage was done.


I think it ties into the reserve system in general which keeps people in remote areas where there's no chance of earning a living, but are able to have some semblence of a traditional community.
Most aboriginal people live in the cities. 70% in fact, are urban.

There needs to be economic development on the Reserves, but not development that further assimilates and destroys.

Margaret Wente (who I usually can't stand) sort of articulates the point I'm curious about in yesterday's Globe. [URL="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080612.wcowent12/BNStory/commentsalon/"]
Okay, look at this quote of Wente's:

"But the backlash led to a different dead end - the idealization of a pre-colonial past, where people lived in harmony with nature, and gender equality prevailed. If only they can recapture the wisdom of the ancestors, wounded communities will be healed."

This view exists much more in the minds of well-meaning non-aboriginal wankers who buy into the 'noble savage' line. We as aboriginal people are much more well versed with our actual history, including the conflicts we had with other aboriginal peoples. Gender equality was a fact among most aboriginal peoples...damn rights we want to return to that. Some tribes held slaves...we're not going to suddenly go 'oh hey, that was traditional, therefore good, let's go! Here slavey slavey...'.

There is much we want to relearn, or to make more widespread, such as traditional methods of healing which have always been holistic. The new western trend to deal with illness this way only confirms for us that this is something we want to return to in our communities. There are legal orders in our communities that still exist, based on our shared values...why would we not want to reexamine these orders, and distill from them the principles of fundamental aboriginal justice? 'Tradition' does not mean stuck in time. The underlying principles of our beliefs, our traditions, our kinship ties fit just as well in the 21st century as they did thousands of years ago.

There is no idyllic life to return to because no idyllic life ever existed. We are well aware of the struggles our ancestors went through to live, to thrive, to survive...you will find very few aboriginal people talking about donning breach-clothes and hunting with spears. Instead, as I've pointed out before...we use our blackberries to text one another in Cree, in Ojibwe, in Anishnaabe...arranging round dances or feasts or sweats etc.

We want a chance to break out of dysfunction, and we truly believe that we can do this much more successfully as aboriginal people, than as an assimilated Canadian minority.

When Kevin Rudd apologised for a similar policy here in Australia, there was a similar reaction: everyone acted all happy for a few days, and then people realised that nothing changed.

I suppose I'm not as emotional a person, and I've been told a few times that I "just can't understand" the way indigenous people think about these things, but still...why is this such a big deal? Aren't there seriously more important things to worry about than an apology? To use a (probably inappropriate) example: I don't expect anyone to apologise for bombing Hamburg to pieces and putting my grandparents through all sorts of grief in the process, and I must say I can live quite well without worrying about it.

It's important, because it's an official recognition of a wrong. I don't think I can really explain to you how important that is...but let me try.

Okay, let's look for a second at justice, aboriginal style. Basically you have an underlying principle of a need for community cohesion and harmony. When things go wrong, when there is conflict, the community as a whole can be put into danger, physically (in terms of survival, say a hunter is killed, or families feuding), emotionally (because people start to take sides, and are hurtful to one another), spiritually and mentally. There is a need to restore balance...that is the ultimate goal.

So let's say you have a wrongdoer. They've upset the balance...perhaps they've harmed someone. Sometimes exacting revenge would restore the balance, but more often than not, this sends things spiralling into worse conflict. Before anything can be done, the wrongdoer needs to admit his or her guilt.

It is nearly incomprehensible to us why you would deny your guilt if you indeed did a thing. You might believe yourself justified, you might believe an action necessary...but you don't simply pretend you didn't take that action.

Were you simply to be punished, yet never acknowledging your actions, it would bring no peace to those you have harmed. They would feel that refusal keenly.

For there to be a true restoration, admitting guilt must come first, and then the process can actually begin.

An important thing has changed. Instead of the official version being, 'we did some wrong by accident, but we meant well'...the official version now is, 'it was wrong, period, and our intentions were not really that pure'.

NOW we can begin the real work...work that up to this point has been tainted by the bad feelings a refusal to admit guilt has caused...tainting everything.

An apology infers that someone has a guilty conscience.

An apology is also a way to acknowledge the past so there can be healing. On a people to people level, rather than an individual to individual level, that apology is going to be more symbolic than personal. Harper wasn't saying, "I had a part in this and I'm sorry". He was saying, "this happened."

I don't think, all things considered, that such a statement, or such an intention was in any way disproportionate.

Exactly. Thats the reason why people realize that it changes absolutely *nothing*. The only people that care are the ones who feel offended after all this time.

That would be like me being offended that when my ancestors got here they had to work like slaves in coal mines for a pittance, and getting nothing when they got injured, and so on. Yes it was bad that it happened, but it's in the past. Get over it.

I'm sorry but your analogy simply doesn't work.

The people who are the target of this apology are the ones who actually suffered the abuses, and who are still living. So it would be more like had you been forced, as a slave, to work in the coal mines, getting an apology.

Also important is the acknowledgement of what that abuse did to the children of residential school survivors. The former students, taken from their families, and subjected to horrible abuses, didn't learn how to parent, didn't have positive adult role models...they learned disfunction and abuse and it's no wonder they passed it on. Yet you'll note, no compensation is being given or asked for in this situation. Only for the ones who directly suffered. Seems the epitome of 'fair' to me.

Uhh, yeah I've poked around that website before. Still can't find actual evidence. Things are starting to roll finally, and the churches recently agreed to open up their books so there can begin to be an accurate account...and more importantly naming, of the children who died in Residential schools...as well as where they are buried. We're not going to know for sure how many there were for some time yet.

Did they just throw out a number? And this non-governmental tribunal thing seems a bit hoaky - how exactly can people be tried and indicted by a tribunal that has no authority?
Huh? Tried? Indicted? You fundamentally misunderstand the function and purpose of a Truth and Reconcilliation Commission. Again, here is a FAQs (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/05/16/f-faqs-truth-reconciliation.html) page you might want to read.

The Canadian government formed the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as part of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement to understand how people were affected by the residential school experience. The commission will allow those who experienced harm at residential schools to share their stories within a safe and culturally appropriate environment.

The purpose of the commission is not to determine guilt or innocence, but to create a historical account of the residential schools, help people to heal, and encourage reconciliation between aboriginals and non-aboriginal Canadians. The commission will also host events across the country to raise awareness about the residential school system and its impact.
We need to explore the past, and come to some sort of agreement on what happened and the impact it had. This isn't even remotely analogous to a trial.


They say that they cannot trust the government to conduct a real investigation since they were part of the perpetration. I guess that makes a certain sort of sense, but it's the Canadian legal system that has the power to actually put people in jail/ compensate people etc.
Put who in jail? Dead priests? Government members in their 90s?

Better to negotiate and agree on compensation than to fight it out in the courts, denying denying denying the whole way.

This is a chance to get it out in the open, and deal with it, rather than continuing to hope the spectre of lawsuits doesn't continue to rise.

He just coppied the actions of the Australian PM. The Aussie PM was very good during his populaist action. Since that week of tears there has been an increase in compensation court casses. There has also been no change within the Australian Aboriginal communities. The current PM is just weakening the action that the previous party took a year ago.

However he has got very high poll ratings. Thats what is truely important in politics. The canadian government would have heard about this and realized a cheap and easy was to get the populist vote.

If the Canadian PM was serious there would be an intervetion. But that is expensieve and pollitically incorrect. if he wished to do a half assed attempt increased finances would go into the communities where they could be wasted. It the Canadian PM wants a vote he will just use the word sorry in a long national speach which ends in the publics tears and applause

Things are starting to roll finally, and the churches recently agreed to open up their books so there can begin to be an accurate account...and more importantly naming, of the children who died in Residential schools...as well as where they are buried. We're not going to know for sure how many there were for some time yet.

Huh? Tried? Indicted? You fundamentally misunderstand the function and purpose of a Truth and Reconcilliation Commission. Again, here is a FAQs (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/05/16/f-faqs-truth-reconciliation.html) page you might want to read.


We need to explore the past, and come to some sort of agreement on what happened and the impact it had. This isn't even remotely analogous to a trial.


Put who in jail? Dead priests? Government members in their 90s?

Better to negotiate and agree on compensation than to fight it out in the courts, denying denying denying the whole way.

This is a chance to get it out in the open, and deal with it, rather than continuing to hope the spectre of lawsuits doesn't continue to rise.Did you look a tthe linked website? I'm pretty sure the process that they talk about on the hiddenfromhistory site isn't the same as the government of Canada's truth and reconciliation commisison process. That was my understanding. I was referring to the former in my previous comment.

The apology, and official recognition seem positive to me. Your comments and what I've read from otehr aboriginal people's reactions show that it IS meaningful and important to more "realistic" considerations like healing and economic development. I was listening to cross country checkup with Rex Murphy the other day and the one thing that seemed to come up again and again was that this apology is a good begining. It sort of provides a cushion of goodwill, and a real recognition of our history that more substantial stuff can be built on. But calling the residential schools a holocuast, and claiming that 50 000 people were killed without anything to back it up (as the hiddenfromhistory effort does) is something entirely different.

Did you look a tthe linked website? I'm pretty sure the process that they talk about on the hiddenfromhistory site isn't the same as the government of Canada's truth and reconciliation commisison process. That was my understanding. I was referring to the former in my previous comment. Aha! My bad...I immediately linked 'tribunal' to an official process, and believed you'd gotten things mixed up, when it was actually my mix up.

If the tribunal in question follows good procedure and gathers confirmable evidence, I see no reason why their findings wouldn't be of great help to the Truth and Reconcilliation Commission. I hope they keep things above board and don't descend into messing with the facts. It's also entirely possible that that TRC itself will carry out its own investigation.

The apology, and official recognition seem positive to me. Your comments and what I've read from otehr aboriginal people's reactions show that it IS meaningful and important to more "realistic" considerations like healing and economic development. I was listening to cross country checkup with Rex Murphy the other day and the one thing that seemed to come up again and again was that this apology is a good begining. It sort of provides a cushion of goodwill, and a real recognition of our history that more substantial stuff can be built on. But calling the residential schools a holocuast, and claiming that 50 000 people were killed without anything to back it up (as the hiddenfromhistory effort does) is something entirely different.
Well, perhaps we need another word than 'holocaust', something that is more fitting to the intention to wipe us out culturally. A word from one of our own languages perhaps to specifically refer to this event, rather than a word that is so closely associated with the genocide of a different people in a different time. Much like the Ukrainians have their 'Holdomor'.

Will it be retroactively justifiable I wonder if it is indeed proven that 50,000 children died in the Residential Schools?

In any case, looking at this as a beginning is the best view, in my opinion.