Effects of systemic racism on equity in access to public services among Canadian indigenous communities

Akademische Arbeit , 2022 , 12 Seiten , Note: A

Soziologie - Kultur, Technik, Völker

Canada enjoys a positive global standing as a human rights defender. As a demographically and culturally diverse society, it has an enviable record in terms of core civil and political rights. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees these rights (OECD, 2022). Whereas considerable efforts have been made in Canada in advancement of human rights, concerns remain on the country’s relationship with the indigenous communities. These communities lag behind in access to public services such as healthcare, and higher education. They have one of the worst unemployment rates among the minority groups. Brooks (2017) indicated that systemic racism could be possible contributor to injustice and inequalities that the indigenous communities suffer. Though Canada continues to implement various efforts to address systemic racism and other wide-ranging violations against the indigenous people, Heatherton (n.d.) suggested there is still a long way to go in achieving equality in access to public services by all Canadians. In line with this argument, this essay explores how systemic racism continues to adversely impact on the indigenous people’s access to public services in Canada.

Effects of systemic racism on equity in access to public services among Canadian indigenous communities

Introduction

Canada enjoys a positive global standing as a human rights defender. As a demographically and culturally diverse society, it has an enviable record in terms of core civil and political rights. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees these rights (OECD, 2022). Whereas considerable efforts have been made in Canada in advancement of human rights, concerns remain on the country’s relationship with the indigenous communities. These communities lag behind in access to public services such as healthcare, and higher education. They have one of the worst unemployment rates among the minority groups. Brooks (2017) indicated that systemic racism could be possible contributor to injustice and inequalities that the indigenous communities suffer. Though Canada continues to implement various efforts to address systemic racism and other wide-ranging violations against the indigenous people, Heatherton (n.d.) suggested there is still a long way to go in achieving equality in access to public services by all Canadians. In line with this argument, this essay explores how systemic racism continues to adversely impact on the indigenous people’s access to public services in Canada.

Discussion

Systemic racism refers to a form of racism deeply ingrained in society’s laws and regulations. Brooks (2017) defined systemic racism as the organization’s failure to guarantee professional services to members due to their culture, colour and ethnicity. It manifests in access to employment, representation, education, criminal justice and housing among others. Some of the key characteristics of systemic racism are attitudes and processes that result in thoughtless, stereotyped and ignorant actions which reduces the success chances of a particular group of people. Historically, indigenous rights excite different emotions within Canadian political system. The uneasy relations between the indigenous communities and the government could be traced to the colonial periods. During these periods, these people entered different agreements with the settler societies which defined relationships to the present day. Some of these treaties included the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and the Treaty at Niagara in 1764 (The Lancet, 2021).

Whereas treaties were important in ensuring harmonious relationship between the Indigenous communities and settlers, the scope of applicability of such treaties remained a major issue. For example, most of these treaties were between communities in eastern and central parts of present day Canada (OECD, 2022). Majority of the communities in western and northwestern regions remained without such treaties. In response to comprehensive treaties governing this relationship, some First Nations, Metis and Inuit negotiated comprehensive land claim agreements which came into force in 1975. Some of the treaties contained self-governance provisions while others did not. The evolution of this jurisprudence since the 1980s and increasing public enquiries have resulted in a complex legal quandary regarding indigenous people’s land rights and other rights. Since 1982, the Canada’s government relationship with the indigenous is entrenched under Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 (The Lancet, 2021). The Act provides constitutional protections and guarantee treaty rights and other legislations involving the indigenous people.

During Canada’s colonisation, there were multiple philosophical clashes between the settlers and the indigenous communities which have continued to impact on the differences in living situations. These clashes were on religion, land ownership and knowledge of the world among others. As more people settled in indigenous communities’ territories, they acknowledged the urgency of managing the ‘Indian Problem’ (The Lancet, 2021). The enactment of the Indian Act ensured that the federal government was constitutionally responsible for the affairs of the indigenous people. Moreover, the federal government could now make unilateral decisions regarding the Indians and their lands. These led to several treaties between the government and the indigenous communities. The primary goal of these treaties was to gain access to land and reduce autonomy of the indigenous people over their lands. For instance, some of the treaties restricted the indigenous people to reserve lands, and limited fishing and hunting rights. In exchange, the federal government provided education and health services. The Indian Act of 1876 was formulated to ‘civilise the Indians’. The Act entrenched inequality within the Canadian society of the 19th century as it spread the beliefs that Indigenous people were uncivilised and inferior (Kulchyski, 2011). The Act continues to define several aspects of socio-cultural, political and spiritual lives of the Indigenous people.

The Indian Act imposed new systems which had mixed effects on the Indigenous cultures, values and beliefs. For instance, the introduction of new education, religion, land rights and government systems forced the indigenous people to abandon their treaty and status rights (Kulchyski, 2011). Majority of the new ideas were inconsistent with the existing governance, social order and moral principles of the indigenous people. For example, section 12 of the Indian Act undermined the status and rights of indigenous women. It stated that women who were married to non-indigenous person could not be registered. Without registration, the woman would lose her status rights such as health benefits, property inheritance and so on. The gender bias created by the Act resulted in negative outcomes for families and communities. While recent amendments such as the McIvor Decision (2012) sought to address this problem, the extent of gender inequality among indigenous people could not be addressed by just legislation. Other than the legislations, there have been no persistent and far-reaching reforms intended to solve these problems which originated from the colonial rule.

Systemic racism is also conspicuous at the inequalities and social injustices associated with the implementation of the Indian Act, treaties and legislations related to the indigenous people. Though they were viewed as attempts to guarantee and protect the rights of the indigenous people, the intentions of the Act and treaties were very different. According to Kulchyski (2011), the Indian Act created structures aimed at eliminating indigenous ways and assimilating the people into ‘Canadian mainstream’. This was done against the will of these communities. In an address to Parliament in 1920, the Deputy Minister for Indian Affairs stated that the objective of the government was to ensure that all Indians were absorbed into Canada’s body politic. These structures continue to influence patterns in indigenous people’s health and education. They also increased the levels of social inequalities, and inaccessibility to other public services (Kassam, 2018). With these structures still existing today, provision of public services in Canada systematically follow colonial and racially discriminating governance systems.

Feelings of inequality among the indigenous people are driving many debates on the needed reforms in Canada. Multiple points of arguments have emerged from the debates regarding indigenous rights in Canada. The primary debate points include self-governance, land use conflicts and economic development and the role of the indigenous ideas in policy formulation (Heatherton, n.d.). Currently, many First Nations are calling for an end to the Indian Act’s jurisdiction. For several decades, the lives and status of indigenous people were controlled by the Indian Act. Though the federal government’s relationship with the communities has changed in recent years, the changes depend on whether they live on or off reserve. The Act jurisdiction resulted in various conflicts on land use and economic development which scupper the Indigenous-settler relations. In recent years, the validity, applicability and constitutionality of the Indian Act in modern Canada has drawn a lot of debates (OECD, 2022). Many critics view the Act as a metaphor for the unjust colonialism period in Canada. It was a control and containment tool that aimed to eliminate Indigenous people and left irredeemable damage on their ways of life and existential rights.

Despite the calls for the abolition of the Indian Act, many First Nations reject these changes for several reasons. First, there is little trust among the First Nations that the changes would bring the desired legal condition that they desire. The pessimism arises from the shaky relationship between the First Nations and the government for centuries. They argue that in case of any change, they must lead the process. Second, the First Nations fear the unknown. According to Roth (2020), the Indian Act has defined political and social lives of the First Nation people in the reserves for at least eight generations. They are familiar with the system and fears that changes might lead to adverse impacts. Third, the abolition of the Act would have several other unintended consequences. Roth (2020) explained that the Act defined the relationship between the First Nations and the federal government thus offering protection treaties, land tenure regulations and federal responsibilities. They fear that without the Act they may lose their treaty rights. Finally, abolition of the Act would imply that the political values and institutions that have survived for decades would also collapse. It is difficult to understand how the new institutions will rise and adapt to the nature of the relationship with the government.

Systemic racism creates political controversies on the definition of the lands which were originally ‘discovered’ by European settlers. Despite the controversial nature of the term ‘discovered lands’, it is undeniable that the arrival of the European settlers defined formation of states, settlement patterns and politics in Canada (Roth, 2020). Today, the issue of the ‘discovered lands’ is discussed on many fronts especially on its contribution to systemic racism and centuries of inequality and injustice within Canada lands. First, many indigenous communities support autonomy and self-governance as a replacement to Indian Act administration. Second, capitalism and unfair land use strategies led to economic disadvantages to the native populations thus the high levels of inequality. Third, lack of indigenous knowledge in public policy making, including economic and environment policies, lead to policies that disproportionately hurt the indigenous populations. According to Coulthard (2007), Indigenous people desire for greater autonomy away from the 21st century British colonial policy, the Indian Act. They demand greater protection for their lands and minimal conflicts regarding land use and resource exploitation. However, they suffer from the dilemma on how to move about these desired changes. For instance, Indian Act and other treaties protect their values and cultures which may be degraded in an outsider-led transition from the Indian Act to a new dispensation. It would also adversely impact on the structure of the Canadian political structure.

[...]

• Note: A
• Autor: Mourine Atsien (Autor:in)
• Erscheinungsjahr: 2022
• Seiten: 12
• Katalognummer: V1326040
• ISBN (PDF): 9783346813350
• Sprache: Englisch
• Schlagworte: effects, canadian