Nearly ten years have passed since the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, launched in 2015 by the Canadian government to free the voices of thousands of victims of residential schools for Indigenous people, on whom the authorities voluntarily carried out a squandering operation. culture and identity. And almost five years have passed since in Quebec Commissioner Jacques Viens tabled his final report on relations between Indigenous people and public services, with his main conclusion relating to systemic discrimination. On this National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, are we highlighting the efforts made or the immense land that remains fallow?
These ambitious operations, forged against a backdrop of terrible human tragedies and heartbreaking confessions, allowed at the very least an awakening of the Quebec and Canadian populations, because it must be recognized that they were plunged into an abyss of ignorance: the tragedy of the residential schools for Indigenous people, an acculturation operation led by our governments took place before the eyes of citizens, in total ignorance. The multiple forms of violence suffered by First Nations led, among other things, to the holding of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, launched by Canada. Five years after the final report was submitted, actions intended to reverse the trend have been largely ignored.
We can, unfortunately, conclude on the same note with regard to the inventory carried out by the Viens commission. This was launched in Quebec in 2016 after allegations of sexual and physical assaults committed by police officers were denounced by indigenous women from Val-d’Or, in Abitibi, in a report byInvestigation. Last year, the Public Protector also concluded that there was inertia on the part of political authorities supposed to do everything possible to make changes. In a recent interview with The PressCommissioner Jacques Viens asks a central question: why did François Legault’s government apologize after the publication of the report if it did not agree to recognize the systemic discrimination that was present in his report? How can we envisage satisfactory changes if the criticisms made are not recognized in their entirety?
However, there was no shortage of electroshocks to awaken political courage. Let us just think of the tragic death of Joyce Echaquan, a 37-year-old Attikamek mother, who died in a Joliette hospital following pulmonary edema, under racist insults from staff members. Without the videos filmed by Mme Echaquan, who revealed the horrible comments suffered by Manawan’s wife, has this story been passed over in silence? How many other Joyces have experienced discrimination resulting in mistreatment in the health care system? This equitable access to health care is at the heart of the Joyce Principle, demanded in particular by the Attikamek community and the husband of the deceased Joyce Echaquan, Carol Dubé. This request has not yet been heard. The Quebec government has systematically refused to recognize discrimination or systemic racism, because it undoubtedly believes that such an admission would risk alienating a precious portion of voters.
Without these strong gestures of recognition of fundamental problems, what are the processes of rapprochement worth? Is this a facade reconciliation? Political indolence leads to the multiplication of errors and prejudices. We risk going crazy, as with the creation of the National Museum of Quebec History, where thinkers openly flirted with the idea of excluding from our founding story the essential sections traced by the indigenous presence.
We also risk swimming in complete unease, as when the signals sent by the authorities create total confusion: how can we not raise eyebrows at the news revealed by journalist Thomas Gerbet, of Radio-Canada, according to which unpaid hydroelectricity bills by members of around fifteen indigenous communities in Quebec totaling $250 million? The Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador deplores this media outing, which only reinforces prejudices, but why is such an inequitable regime tolerated by the state corporation, despite all the agreements which have restricted the use of natural resources in certain territories in exchange for discounts? If a parallel regime tolerated by both Quebec and Hydro-Québec exists, well, let us enshrine it in a formal agreement, or simply put an end to it.
The primary impetus for reconciliation must be political. Without real courage and consistency, actions on the ground will remain anemic, and the cycle of indifference and intolerance will perpetuate. How can we explain other than a lack of courage that even today, dozens of indigenous communities in Canada do not have access to drinking water, even though they are a fundamental right?