March 31, 2011 - 4:20pm | by Anonymous
The recent joint announcement by INAC Minister Duncan and AFN National Chief Atleo of a blue ribbon panel on FNs elementary-secondary education has the hand prints of INAC officials all over it. First of all, who but INAC would advance the absurd idea that a non-FNs chair should lead the panel in this day and age? There are more than enough seasoned and qualified FNs educators and academics in Canada today who could easily fill the role and with such a critical mandate as elementary-secondary education, the entire panel should be composed of qualified FNs. One can only conclude that INAC and by extension the Harper government lacks faith in FNs to determine what reforms are necessary for the successful education of their children.
Second, the composition of the panel makes one seriously question the panel's ability to recognize what reforms will be required to improve FNs elementary-secondary education. The two FNs members both lack on-the-ground experience in FNs schools as does the Chair. This critical lack of experience will make it difficult if not impossible for the panel to separate the wheat from the chaff during the anticipated eight regional conferences and one national conference on education they will convene. On what basis will they accept some proposals that will emerge from these sessions and reject others? Only INAC would constitute such a panel for such a critical initiative - one that could have profound impacts on FNs youth.
However, it would be unfair to lay all the blame for this on INAC, given that the AFN National Chief has approved the panel membership. Atleo campaigned on an education platform and this initiative is the first major step by him on education. If this is the best that he can do, then it is indeed a poor reflection on his commitment to elementary-secondary education and it strongly suggests that he has been subordinate to both INAC and the minister during the entire process.
Someone, if not Atleo or the two FNs members, should have said no to the selection of a non-FNs chair. It should have been a deal-breaker as far as any potential FN member of the panel. One has to ask two fundamental questions: why does this panel exist in its present form, and why has the panel been given a measly four months in which to provide its report? Blue ribbon panel, indeed - more like blue ribbon window dressing.
