Aborignal Band Council Watch-dog Groups: its time

I was reading a posting at another site recently. It was a long running string of posts that repeated an old but familiar story claiming band council corruption and disregard for its citizens. I say claimed because I don't know if it’s true or not.

This type of story is as old as band council administrations are. It's full of drama, intrigue, corruption, chiefs and councils feathering their own nests, filling their own pockets, exercising nepotism and favoritism as common hiring practices, family rivalries every election- you know, the whole cartoon. Half the time the stuff ends up being untrue, but the other half of the time it ends up embarrassingly true.

Band councils are supposed to represent the political and social interests of their memberships, ostensibly anyway. They're elected for two or four year terms under which there is no provision for recall incidentally. Checks and balances are supposed to be there to ensure that councils don't abuse their positions of office, that or governing bodies leave it up to tribal council bodies to police their own. Ideally this is the case but as with any ideal it is just that- an ideal.

Not every council is corrupt. Many churn away and do the basic day-today business of the tribe. Nothing fancy, no fanfare, no fights, just business. You never hear about them because they simply don't do anything to give anyone any pause for concern.

There are those though that are every bit of what I described to be earlier and more, and this is sad. You'd think the citizenry could do something about it but more often than not they do nothing more than gossip, rumor monger, get petty, and my personal humorous favorite "parking lot talk." They foam at the mouth and yell at meetings or make jokes about it. Either way, its time to quit acting childish, grow up, and start offering solutions.

With regulations that are toothless, no right of recall, and people acting defeatist as though they could do nothing about it but take it I began to wonder about what could be done.

In the string of postings I was reading somebody mentioned aboriginal citizens’ advocacy/watchdog groups. I think these would be of great service, especially now in this day and age where we are seeing provincial and federal governments are divesting themselves of obligations to First Nations.

I don't know that aboriginal citizens watchdog groups have been tried to any great degree. Opposition parties serve this function both federally and provincially for instance. Opposition "shadow cabinets" monitor the actions of the governing party and keep them in check. Finance critics are among the busiest and most well staffed with researchers for instance. There are various citizens’ watchdog groups who serve in this capacity as well.

These groups have teeth, and all operate within a system where there is no choice but to deal with them and that's that. It's not like the federal and provincial government can say to its citizenry "we're accountable, we hold each other accountable" or "we're all together and we have no need for that" or "you trusted us when you elected us." If the feds or the province, or city council for that matter said this in an attempt to insulate themselves from accountability they'd be given the bums rush out of office tomorrow.

While opposition parties and watchdog groups didn't stop the sponsorship scandal for instance they did bring it to light and the result was a government brought down and an election called. Also, the BC Liberals lost a big chunk of their majority in the last election precisely because BC citizens didn't like they way they had used their 78 seat majority with disregard for its citizenry. There was a need for balance, opposition, and accountability and the last election provided for that. I don't think I'm the only one who has noticed that the Liberals have sounded less smug after the election.

I think the time for implementing aboriginal citizens’ watchdog groups with teeth has come. I can't see how any reserve regime the province over could disagree or try to squash it. After all, you can't on one hand accuse a country of limiting or taking away your peoples freedom and on the other hand limit or take away your own peoples at the same time. If there truly is nothing wrong with the way reserve regimes treat their people or go about tribal business then there is nothing to lose with a watchdog group.

The Nisaga'a treaty instituted an administration decision review board where decisions made by village governments can be appealed and reviewed before a panel whose decision in turn has force and effect. The Board must be satisfied that the decision was improperly made for one of the following reasons: The Nisga’a Public Institution must have:
• acted without any legal authority or acted beyond its legal authority;
• refused to exercise its legal authority;
• failed to observe procedural fairness;
• based its decision on an erroneous finding of fact that was made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the information before it.

The Board does not have authority to set aside a decision on the grounds that it disagrees with the decision made or that it would have come to a different decision in the circumstances.

I don't know that the board has been overly busy but I do know that it’s been used. They make it clear to both sides that this is business, that they are neutral and allied to no one, and that this isn't a place or arena for rival groups or families to pettily beat each other up at.

If we are truly going to self-govern ourselves then aboriginal opposition parties which would encompass other points of view should be created. Citizens from free countries the world over have and exercise this right. I've heard it said before that "we're all one" or when a dissenting point of view was presented "there's a crack in the unification" and when the matter is pressed "we have to have political discipline." We were never one, never. If that were true then there would have been no tribal wars. We may be one peoples but we have different views.

True accountability, opposition, and freedom are integral components of democratic societies across the world. They should also be part and parcel of reserves.

It all starts somewhere.