Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
Alberta Law Review, 2018
If the duty to consult does not accompany the transfer of sovereign powers from Canadian provinces to local governments, then it will not be able to play its essential role of protecting Aboriginal rights and promoting reconciliation. Provincial governments have a duty to consult and accommodate Aboriginal peoples, grounded in the Honour of the Crown and section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. In the past two decades, provincial legislatures have given municipalities the powers, purposes, flexibility and legal status of an order of government. A series of Supreme Court of Canada decisions have supported this shift by recognizing the important role of local governments and interpreting local powers generously. Moreover, devolving governmental powers without corresponding constitutional obligations would be inconsistent with the honour of the Crown. Nevertheless, Canadian courts have been reluctant to recognize that local governments are bound by a duty to consult. Actions taken by local governments can have tragically negative or profoundly positive effects on the relationship between Canada’s Indigenous peoples and the society as a whole. The effects are more likely to be positive if local governments have a duty to engage with Indigenous communities on matters that affect them.
Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law, 1995
Undergraduate honors thesis, completed in 2009 In 2007, the United Nations adopted a landmark resolution for indigenous issues, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. After twenty years of preparation, there were, however, still problems. Four countries with significant indigenous populations declined to sign: the United States of America, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. All four refused to do so over the contentious issue of land claims and some uncertainty about the definition of 'indigenous'. Examining these national systems for land claims and national museums through an anthropological perspective will help identify central issues in indigenous relations. All four nations recognize a form of indigenous land rights, but their infrastructure for recognizing and redressing these rights is often problematic. The Declaration is an important step toward finding solutions to disputes with indigenous peoples, especially now when in a globalized world multiple threats confront these groups. These four nations have a significant influence on how indigenous issues are being dealt with internationally, and without their support this declaration will be unable to make a real difference. Understanding the differences in evidentiary standards among the four nations will help suggest ways in which anthropological research can better work to support indigenous rights and actualize the aspirations of the Declaration.
Ocean and Shoreline Management, 1989
Canada is beginning to slowly embrace an ethic of Indigenous-Settler biculturalism. One model of change is afforded by the development of biculturalism in Aotearoa New Zealand, where recent Indigenous Māori mobilization has created a unique model in the western settler world. This article explores what Canada might learn from the Kiwi experience, focusing on the key identity marker Pākehā, an internalized and contingent settler identity, using Indigenous vocabulary, and reliant on a relationship with Indigenous peoples. This article gauges Pākehā's utility in promoting biculturalism, noting both its progressive qualities and problems in its deployment, including continued inequality, political alienation, and structural discrimination. While Canada has no Pākehā analogue, terms such as settler are being operationalized to develop a larger agenda for reconciliation along the lines recommended by the TRC. However, such terms function best when channeled towards achieving positive concrete goals, rather than acting as rhetorical screens for continued inaction.
In the name of religion and “civilization of the salvages,” Anglo-American/European descendants migrated across the globe leaving troubling legacies that span beyond simple voluntary mass movement of Aboriginal peoples. Their thirst for colonization and imperialism resulted in exclusion, social injustices, subjugation, decimation and forced displacement of several nations of indigenous communities. In essence, it was through historical and systematic legal mechanisms invented by alien races that will deny unborn generations of natives any social rights and protection. Highlighting some of these historical events of Anglo-American “invasion” of native communities in Canada to (a larger extent) and Australia, New Zealand, United States, and South Africa (to a lesser extent), this paper critically examines repeated trends of human rights abuses resulting in forced displacement of Aboriginals. Overall, the paper seeks to dissect the socio-politico biases and rhetoric used by the State and international community in responding to the concepts of “relocation” in Western countries versus “internal displacement” in Third World communities.
Marine Policy, 2015
Institutional racism, a pattern of differential access to material resources and power determined by race, advantages one sector of the population while disadvantaging another. Such racism is not only about conspicuous acts of violence but can be carried in the hold of mono-cultural perspectives. Overt state violation of principles contributes to the backdrop against which much less overt yet insidious violations occur. New Zealand health policy is one such mono-cultural domain. It is dominated by western bio-medical discourses that preclude and under-value Māori, the indigenous peoples of this land, in the conceptualisation, structure, content, and processes of health policies, despite Te Tiriti o Waitangi guarantees to protect Māori interests. Since the 1980s, the Department of Health has committed to honouring the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of Māori-settler relationships and governance arrangements. Subsequent Waitangi Tribunal reports, produced by an independent Commission of Inquiry have documented the often-illegal actions of successive governments advancing the interests of Pākehā at the expense of Māori. Institutional controls have not prevented inequities between Māori and non-Māori across a plethora of social and economic indicators. Activist scholars work to expose and transform perceived inequities. My research interest lies in how Crown Ministers and officials within the public health sector practice institutional racism and privilege and how it can be transformed. Through dialogue with Māori working within the health sector, fuelled by critical analysis and strategic advice from a research whānau (family) of Māori health leaders and a Pākehā Tiriti worker, and embracing the traditions of feminist and critical race theory I provide evidence of racism that can invoke strong emotional reactions. More disturbing is its normalisation to nigh imperceptibility within ones personal and professional life. The exposure of racism as a socially created phenomenon is a strength of the research presented here. My action orientation is my ethical response. Honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a pathway to transforming racism. Such change is likely to be resisted by the Pākehā majority. This anticipated resistance is not a credible reason to weaken responsibility for such necessary change. Transforming institutional racism needs to be driven by senior managers, professional bodies, unions, and by communities. Policies, practices and leadership that enable institutional racism need to be systematically eliminated from the health sector. Crown officials must be supported to strengthen their professional accountabilities and to embrace ethical bicultural practice. Greater transparency could enable more effective monitoring of Crown behaviour and support transformed practice.
Transmotion. Vol. 5, No. 1, 2019
Since the time of European exploration of Australia, the topography of the continent has been mapped from a colonial cartographic perspective. Colonial government guidelines have ‘controlled’ the knowledge base of understanding of the landscape for non-Indigenous Australians. This perspective has lead to a coloniallytainted sense of place for non-Indigenous (and some Indigenous) Australians. Such Euro-centric focused governance and management of the development of Australia understanding of the landscape was strongly exemplified during a recent six-month review of State forest names in Victoria. By the beginning of 2004 over 90 percent of State forests in Victoria did not have officially registered names in the Australian Gazetteer. Thus, the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) employed the researchers to undertake a pilot study program, investigating different methods for officially naming the State forests in the Midlands Region of Victoria. The authors were assisted in this process by a steering committee which had representatives from DSE, Aboriginal Affairs Victoria (AAV) and the Victorian Aboriginal Corporation for Languages (VACL). This pilot study program focussed on producing a best practice model for naming State forest areas, which would then be utilised for all State forests across Victoria. It was understood by the researchers that place names were markers of national, regional, local and personal identity, and as such, part of the State forest review concentrated on recognising all the various historical and contemporary identities apparent in the Midlands region. This attempt at recognising historical and contemporary associations with the State forest areas proved to be a challenge. Difficulties arose in multiple areas of the review process. It is important to take a moment to reflect upon the processes of place naming, before discussion of the current project can begin. We must ask, ‘why do we name?’ and ‘how do we name?’ before we can understand what the problems encountered with naming and changing names are.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law, 2006
Waikato Law Review: Taumauri, 2011
'But How Does This Help Me?': (Re)Thinking (Re)Conciliation in Teacher Education, 2017
Canadian Journal of Political Science, Volume 49, Issue 4 (2016) pp. 643-664., 2016
Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti and Māori Ethics Guidelines for: AI, Algorithms, Data and IOT., 2020
Canada's Constitutional Democracy: the 150th Anniversary Celebration, 2017
Political Science, 2016
Linking Indigenous Communities with Regional Development , 2020
Growth and Change, 2005
39 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 2008
Göttingen Journal of International Law, Vol. 5(1)
Coates, Ken S. 2004. A Global History of Indigenous Peoples Struggle and Survival. First Published. New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan.