(Photo courtesy Ben Powless)
APTN National News
TORONTO–After introductions that used over five of her allotted 15 minutes, Mi’kmaq candidate Pam Palmater said she believes the next national chief faces hard times ahead.
And she said the Assembly of First Nations needs to change to reflect that.
“We are in a crisis and we need to call it what it is. We cannot move forward unless we, as the AFN, are the first to stand up front and say we won’t take this from this point forward. So what do we do? We know the status quo is killing our people,” she said.
Palmater, a Ryerson University professor, is one of eight candidates vying for the position of national chief of the AFN. She was speaking during the candidate’s forum during the AFN gathering in Toronto where chiefs will vote for national chief on Wednesday.
Palmater said the organization must take a tougher stance against the Harper government.
“It’s no secret Canada has tried to assimilate us and it remains their ultimate objective. But we now have a government that has put that on fast forward, laid down the gauntlet and said, ‘I dare you to do something about it.’ I’m here today to do something about it,” she said.
Palmater said chiefs are reluctant to make radical changes to the organization because of fear.
“Canada yields a very powerful weapon over us. If we speak out, they cut our funding. If we speak out, maybe they don’t approve your economic development plan. And we are very much dependent on all of these social programs and services. Not in a shameful way, but in a way like any province and territory or municipality is dependent on those social programs,” she said.
She said there is still a need to work with the Canadian government.
“But this choice is not about working with the federal government in an abusive relationship where we always come out at the end. We have the right and the responsibility to demand a respectful relationship,” she said.
Palmater said that if she’s elected the AFN will be given back to the chiefs, saying the organization is not a government but a potentially powerful advocate.
“Why on earth wouldn’t we make that choice? We can do this. We’ve done it before, we’re standing here as a testament. We can do it again,” she said.
