Self government

Self government

The Governor General uses her trip to Nunavik to highlight the importance of self-government

Governor General Mary Simon says she wants to see Indigenous communities take back the power they held before colonization

Governor General Mary Simon wasted no time this week on her first trip to Nunavik in three years, using the visit to encourage leaders to advance self-government negotiations.

Simon, originally from Kuujjuaq and former president of Makivik Corp., has her own experience as a lead negotiator in the Nunavik self-determination process.

On her first day in the area, she brought up the issue during a meeting with Makivik Corp. and other representatives of Inuit organizations from Nunavik, emphasizing the need to negotiate a new agreement with the Government of Quebec.

She also worked on the other side of the table, pushing Quebec Premier François Legault to appoint a negotiator. During briefings with Makivik executives on Monday, she assured that the work had paid off.

“[Legault] committed in the meeting with me to appoint a negotiator,” she said. “I asked him to say it twice, so he said it publicly.”

Simon sat down with Nunatsiaq News during her five-day tour of Nunavik this week, to discuss why the quest for self-government in Nunavik is so important to her.

“The goal of negotiating self-determination or self-government agreements in, I think, all parts of Canada, Indigenous communities, is to bring back the power that we had before colonization,” she said. .

Simon said one of his visions for Inuit self-determination is that infrastructure and social development in the Arctic should match some of the development that has happened in the rest of Canada.

However, she says, development in Nunavik must be led and controlled by the region’s Inuit.

“For Inuit, it’s important that there is a mesh of ways of looking at how infrastructure is developed, and that infrastructure supports different things like education, health, municipal services,” said she said.

“All of these different services that are in the communities are going to be encompassed by this self-government agreement, you have to watch how these things evolve as you negotiate self-government.”

There are areas where Nunavimmiut are leading the charge on social issues, through the Isuarsivik Regional Recovery Center in Kuujjuaq and the Unaaq Men’s Association in Inukjuak.

“I’m really happy to listen to the challenges that people face in their communities, I’m also really happy to listen to the success stories, so hopefully I can bring that to a wider audience in Canada,” said Simon, after meeting with representatives of these groups.

“Communities, on the one hand, have a lot of social problems, but on the other hand, they also thrive, they speak their language, they practice their culture, and in some of the schools that we have been, the people who work there speak to students in Inuktitut.

Simon’s Nunavik tour included stops in Kuujjuaq, Kangiqsualujjuaq and Inukjuak. A planned visit to Kangiqsujuaq was canceled on Wednesday due to poor flying conditions, with Simon calling on community representatives to apologize and promising to return in the future.

She described her visit to Nunavik as “comforting” and “gratifying”.

Governors general generally serve a five-year term. In the four years remaining in Simon’s term, she said she hopes to be able to visit all the communities in Nunavik and see as much of Nunavut, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon as possible.

“I have a lot of traveling to do,” she said.

Each time Simon returns to Nunavik, she will be welcomed with open arms, said Mary Johannes, Mayor of Kuujjuaq and friend of Simon’s family.

“It was a special time for us, and for our community, our city, and to welcome him into our home,” Johannes said. “It’s a special week for us and we hope to see her again.”

Simon’s Nunavik tour ended on Friday.

Next, she will travel to Toronto for the Juno Awards, where she will present the Humanitarian Award to Inuk singer-songwriter Susan Aglukark.

read more
Self government

Florida Governor DeSantis signs bill eliminating Disney self-government and certain other special districts

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, Florida. –Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has signed a bill that eliminates special districts created before 1968, including Disney’s Reedy Creek Improvement District.

The governor signed several bills into law during a ceremony at a South Florida charter school on Friday afternoon, including the special districts bill introduced by Rep. Randy Fine. The Reedy Creek Improvement District – created by state legislators in 1967 – acts as Walt Disney World’s own government with two towns and lands in Orange and Osceola counties.

[TRENDING: WATCH: Mike Tyson caught on video punching man on flight to Florida | READ: Florida shares examples from rejected math textbooks | Become a News 6 Insider (it’s free!)]

A d

The initial conversation about repealing the Reedy Creek Improvement District began when Disney spoke out against signing the “Parental Rights in Education” bill, dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill. As the bill approached DeSantis’ desk earlier in March, multiple protests were held calling on Disney to do what it could to speak out against the legislation and halt its momentum in the Florida legislature.

DeSantis commented on Disney’s action at Friday’s press conference and said that while “none of this happened, it’s the right thing to do,” calling Disney’s government “unlike to everything we know in the state of Florida.”

A d

“No individual or business in Florida is treated this way, and it’s not fair to have this similar treatment. But you know, they had wielded a lot of power over the years. It was never something that was debated. In fact, I don’t even know if I even knew the name of it before it became something that was live for the past few months,” he said.

According to the wording of the bill, it will dissolve “any independent special district established by special statute prior to the date of ratification of the Constitution of Florida on November 5, 1968, and which has not been reinstated, re-ratified, or otherwise reconstituted by a special law or a general law subsequent to November 5, 1968.

Although the details are far from clear, the proposal could have huge tax implications for Disney. Democratic state lawmakers who oppose the bill have also warned that it could result in hefty tax bills for owners if they had to absorb the costs the company used to pay.

A d

Orange County Mayor Jerry Demings, whose county is partly home to Disney World, said it would be “catastrophic to our budget” if the county had to bear the cost of public safety at the theme park. Reedy Creek is currently reimbursing the Orange County Sheriff’s Office for public safety costs.

Fine said Disney and its Reedy Creek District were not the target of the bill, but Disney “chose to kick the hornet’s nest” leading to this legislation.

Disney could reapply to the legislature for its special district; otherwise, it would disband in June 2023. The measure allows for the reinstatement of the districts, leaving room to renegotiate its future.

A d

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Copyright 2022 by WKMG ClickOrlando – All Rights Reserved.

read more
Self government

Florida Senate Strips Disney of Self-Government Over ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Critics

The Florida Senate voted on Wednesday strip the Walt Disney Company of special privileges in regulating and maintaining 38 square miles of central Florida, home to its six theme parks and resorts.

The 23-16 vote on SB 4 came a day after Governor Ron DeSantis said he wants the Legislature to repeal the governance structure for Disney properties in Florida.

The entertainment giant was caught up in the election-year culture war when its CEO pledged to work to repeal the Parental Rights in Education Act – which opponents decried as the “Don’t don’t say gay.

As lawmakers debated the measure, the DeSantis campaign for governor sent in a fundraising pitch stating that Disney had chosen to fight “the wrong guy” and for contributors to “join the fight against corruption.” democratic machine and awaken the leaders of Disney”.

Democrats protested Republicans’ rush to punish the state’s largest private employer for political speech that degraded the legislative process.

“With all due respect, this is not a meaningful legislative review. It’s a punishment. This is political theater, and we are better than that,” said Sen. Loranne Ausley, D-Tallahassee.

DeSantis vs. Disney:

Sen. Jennifer Bradley’s R-Green Cove measure includes a carrot-and-stick approach in that it won’t go into effect until June 2023, enough time for Disney, in the words of the sponsor. of the House, Rep. Randy Fine, R-Brevard, to reconsider his criticism of the Florida law.

“It’s a bit like parents imposing restrictions on their children. Clean up your act, apologize, say you’re sorry, and agree to change your behavior. Maybe you’ll get your phone or other privileges back” , observed Ausley.

At issue is the Reedy Creek Improvement District, a special district established in 1967 that provides Disney with unprecedented tax and regulatory authority to build an entertainment empire that has become the world’s number one tourist attraction.

The House and Senate repeal sponsors argue that Disney is not in compliance with a 1997 law that required districts to seek recodification. Disney would have a year to put its paperwork in order and ask the legislature to reauthorize Reedy Creek.

‘I let you down’:Disney CEO apologizes for response to ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill

DeSantis vs. Disney:DeSantis Says He’ll Sign So-called ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Bill Soon, Criticizes Disney Again

The GOP follows suit:Fetterhoff and Barnaby return contributions to Disney for ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill

“Everyone in this room knows it’s not going to happen”

Sen. Jason Pizzo, D-Fort Lauderdale, complained during the debate that the Legislative Assembly was wasting everyone’s time.

If Reedy Creek were dissolved, he pointed out, Orange and Osceola counties would have to shoulder more than $1 billion in debt and be responsible for maintaining a network of roads and facilities. wastewater treatment plant, as well as a 3,000-member fire and paramedic team.

“Everyone in this room knows that’s not going to happen,” Pizzo said of saddled two counties with billions in debt.

Pizzo told Bradley he was sorry she had to “do some penance” for voting no against “Don’t Say Gay” by sponsoring Disney’s repeal measure.

Addressing the Republican majority, he said they struggled to explain to people what lawmakers are doing in Tallahassee: “When we’re here for special sessions, we get spoon-fed bills that none of you didn’t write, that neither of you had any input on, then have to pass.

Bradley responded that the Legislature will make sure the “parade of horribles” described by Democrats does not happen.

Senate Speaker Wilton Simpson said Disney and the state will take a “deep dive” over the next year to prepare for the dissolution of Reedy Creek.

“The folks at Disney are going to get their legal team together. They’re going to meet with our legal team, the House, the Senate, and the governor’s office. We’re going to get the teams together to start coming up with a plan,” Simpson said.

Rep. Spencer Roach, R-Fort Myers, has lobbied to review the Reedy Creek layout because he believes it gives Disney an unfair advantage over other theme parks.

“I have a theme park in my district. It’s the oldest and oldest tourist amusement center in southwest Florida, called Shell Factory. They would like to have their own government, but that’s not It’s not,” Roach said, portraying the battle as one between a “cockroach and a mouse.”

The House accepted the Senate bill on Wednesday afternoon, and Speaker Chris Sprows said the chambers would consider it Thursday morning.

Never miss a story: Subscribe to the Tallahassee Democrat using the link at the top of the page.

read more
Self government

Pending self-government draws more citizens to Métis Nation of Ontario

It’s a “very exciting time” to be Métis in Canada and Ontario, says Margaret Froh, president of the Métis Nation of Ontario.

With Métis self-government on the horizon, the number of Métis in Ontario registering their citizenship with the MNO is increasing, she says.

People “want to be a part of Métis history, as well as access to the variety of services we offer that will only grow and expand as we move forward, especially under self-government,” said Froh in an exclusive interview with Windspeaker. com.

In 2019, the MNO signed a Métis Government Recognition and Self-Government Agreement with Canada. It outlines the steps to be taken for the federal government to recognize the inherent self-government rights held by the Métis communities represented by the MNO and authorize the MNO to implement those rights on behalf of these communities.

Similar agreements have been signed by the federal government with the Métis nations of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

In 2017, the MNO and the Ontario government announced that there were seven “historic Métis communities in the province that met the Powley test criteria”. Powley is the name of the defendants in a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision on Métis hunting rights. The court established a set of criteria that the Metis must meet in order to have these hunting rights.

“We represent Métis who are historically connected to historic Métis communities in Ontario, such as the Powley community (in Sault Ste. Marie) and we also represent Métis who are connected to the Métis Nation homeland west of Ontario,” said Froh.

MNO’s most recent registry numbers sit at around 28,000 citizens.

“The new Métis government will have recognized law-making powers in the areas of citizenship, leadership selection and internal operations. The Self-Government Agreement has “locked in” these steps so that they cannot be swept away by changing winds or political circumstances. In this way, the Self-Government Agreement “sets the table” for the next steps the ORM will take to implement the agreement,” reads the ORM’s website.

The progress of meetings needed to take those next steps has been affected by the coronavirus, Froh says, noting that public gatherings were banned in early 2020 as a way to combat COVID-19. It was therefore difficult, but not impossible, to reach regional and local leaders.

“One of the most important things we have to do is build our constitution…through dialogue with citizens across the province working from scratch,” Froh said.

The constitution will address issues such as who the Métis are, the governance structure, how to elect leaders, and how to resolve disputes.

Now that most COVID restrictions have been recalled or lifted, Froh said they will move forward with a “deep level of engagement…in order to hear from people around what they want to see in terms of our Métis government 30, 50, 70 years into the future. It’s a really exciting process. It’s really engaging people.

She adds that the interest comes from both young people and elders.

While this larger work is underway, the MNO is also working on policy. Two of his new policies ensure that MNO resources, programs, services and appointments go where they are supposed to go.

“Our concern is that when we negotiate benefits on behalf of Métis rights holders, they go to Métis rights holders and we deal with that,” Froh said.

The Eligibility Policy for Direct Benefits Programs and Services now requires full MNO citizenship record status to be eligible. These programs and services include Early Learning and Child Care Programs, Post-Secondary Education, MNO COVID Relief Programs, Home Improvement and Housing Stabilization.

The MNO is also tackling the issue of people claiming to be Métis and receiving post-secondary appointments. These false claims have come to the fore over the past year.

The MNO has adopted a policy of verifying the status of the MNO’s citizenship file with other governments and third-party institutions. It provides a mechanism for a government or third-party institution (such as a university) to verify the citizenship record status of an MNO citizen applying to receive an award, benefit or recognition, where proof that an individual is a Métis rights holder is a factor in the decision.

Froh says such a check only works if a Metis from Ontario is on the MNO’s registration list. However, not being on this list does not mean that someone is not Métis.

“In this case, it is a little more difficult for you to be able to demonstrate to any institution,” she pointed out.

The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples also represents Métis, as well as off-reserve status and non-status First Nations, and southern Inuit.


Conversations are opinions of our readers and are subject to the Code of conduct. The Star does not share these opinions.
read more
Self government

Normani on his new era of ‘self-government’ and the vulnerable song ‘Fair’ (exclusive)

Normani on his new era of ‘self-government’ and the vulnerable song ‘Fair’ (exclusive)

Norman enters a new era. ET’s Denny Directo spoke to the 25-year-old singer about her latest track, “Fair,” and her decision to release music that reflects her, even if it’s not what fans expect.

“With ‘Fair’, I feel like it was really the perfect record to be vulnerable, to share my innermost thoughts and feelings and what grief feels like to me,” she said. to ET. “I’m always introducing myself. Yes, everyone knows I can dance and I can be this confident, diva performer, but there’s so much more.”

Although Normani was very attached to the song’s release, being so vulnerable was still “absolutely terrifying” to her.

“I always say it’s such a cheeky move, because I know what people want from me and I know what my fans want, but at some point it’s like, where do I put me in there?” she asked. “I know what it’s like to put out records that I don’t necessarily believe in and do things that are expected of me, but I have to put out records that really reflect the growth of the last three years that I’ve grown. I’ve had.”

Manufacturing the music video because the track was equally nerve-wracking and rewarding for the singer.

“I feel like it was therapeutic in a way. Just filming the visual was definitely triggering. It was the first time I felt like I could really tap into my acting abilities, which I’m really proud of,” she said. “I think obviously there was a little nervousness because I really have to emotionally go there and go back to where the song was written from, which was incredibly triggering and difficult.”

Normani added that “in the end, after all the tears and screams…it was really awesome. I feel like it’s one of my best. I’m proud of it.”

The success of the song and the fan response it generated made Normani more confident in her abilities.

“[I’ve learned] trust me more. Trusting my abilities and knowing that God has given me all the tools I need,” she said. “I don’t need to search for anything. I have everything I need to step into the destiny he is creating and the path he has given me, so I just need to do this.”

As she enters this period of “self-government”, Normani does not leave her fans behind, as she remains extremely grateful for their support.

“For someone who always felt very neglected and was the only black girl in a group, mentally that was a lot for me. There were times when I felt unseen and unimportant, and my vocal ability wasn’t as amazing,” she said. “To come out of it, I feel my resilience, but also the people who have been riding with me since day one. I’m so grateful for that.”

With that in mind, Normani promises her fans that the songs they’ve been waiting for are “all coming this summer.”

“It will definitely be worth the wait. Hope you like it as much as I do,” she said of her upcoming album. “I obviously spent a few years on it…I just hope they feel closer to me, honestly. That’s the beauty of music. People can interpret it any way they want, but once that it’s theirs, I hope they enjoy it.”

As they eagerly await the new music, fans can check out Normani’s version of “Take me to the ball game‘, which she recorded as part of her partnership with Cracker Jack, in the midst of their Cracker Jill campaign.

“I wanted to keep it as close to the original as possible while adding my vocal textures and leads to Normani-fy a bit,” she said of the beloved track. “It didn’t take much because it’s so classic. I didn’t want to lose the integrity of what the record was. That’s the beauty of it. It was fun, though. C was fun shooting the clip.”

As for the campaign itself, Normani is honored to be a part of it, as it celebrates the groundbreaking achievements of female athletes.

“She comes out of it with a vengeance and with full force,” Normani told ET of Cracker Jill. “It was a long time coming and I feel very late. But here we are and I’m truly honored to have been asked to be a part of such a monumental moment for the brand.”

“I was really inspired by a lot of women at a young age, whether it was in music, whether it was sports, whether it was fashion or modeling,” she added. “To me, that representation is so essential, and it’s not every day that you associate yourself with a brand that aligns with your vision and what you sincerely believe in.”

Normani gives soulful performance of new single on ‘The Tonight Show’

Normani releases vulnerable new track “Fair”

Normani Teases New Album And When Fans Can Expect It (Exclusive)

read more
Self government

Manitoba Metis Federation Takes Another Step Towards Self-Government

By Chelsea Kemp

Journalist of the Local Journalism Initiative

The Manitoba Metis Federation fine-tuned the verbiage of its constitution at its annual general meeting over the weekend, strengthening its ability to serve in the Red River Metis national government.

The Annual General Meeting was held from Friday to Sunday and presented 23 resolutions to amend the MMF constitution, election regulations

Leah LaPlante, Vice-President of the Southwest Region of the Manitoba Métis Federation

The MMF is in negotiations with the federal government to establish a treaty process and establish the rules around being a government for the Red River Métis. An agreement between the parties was reached on July 6, 2021, when the Manitoba Métis Recognition and Implementation Agreement was signed. Together, they are working to advance the document and the government-to-government relationship based on the affirmation of rights, respect, cooperation and partnership with the Red River Métis.

The document was jointly developed by all parties and marks a historic agreement that will support MMF’s vision of self-determination and self-government, said Leah LaPlante, MMF Southwest Region Vice President.

The agreement recognizes the right of the Manitoba Métis to self-government and the mandate of the MMF to serve as the government of the Manitoba Métis. This includes recognition of the MMF’s jurisdiction over citizenship, leadership selection, elections and operations relating to Red River Métis citizens.

The constitutional amendments in the MMF assembly are a vital part of history, LaPlante said, and mark the fulfillment of generations of hard work on behalf of the Métis people.

Sometimes she had doubted that she would ever be able to witness this historic moment.

“I think sometimes we still pinch ourselves thinking that we’ve finally been recognized after so many years.”

LaPlante was 16 when she first joined a local MMF south of Boissevain. It’s amazing how far the organization has come since its launch in 1967, she said.

The MMF has faced adversity over the years that has taken hard work and dedication to overcome, LaPlante said, but the end result has been the empowering experience of forging treaty rights and self-reliance. governmental.

“When it’s in your heart. When it’s your people. When you’re telling your story and wanting to make people’s lives better, you’re really trapped and I think that’s part of who you are.

The Manitoba Métis Recognition and Implementation Agreement marks a moment of empowerment for Métis citizens, she said, and for younger generations who take over from their parents who are fighting for these rights. since many years.

She was impressed by the number of young people who attended the assembly and who pledged to fight for the future of Métis citizens.

Youth are essential Métis citizens, she said, as they will move the MMF forward into the future while listening to elders to understand the stories of the past. They need to know the struggle that unfolded to see where they want to go.

“It’s the perfect learning experience for teens to sit, listen and ask questions.”

Over 2,000 Métis citizens attended the in-person assembly at Assiniboine Downs over the weekend. Although most health measures related to the COVID-19 pandemic have been lifted across Manitoba, the organization continues to focus on the safety of its citizens, including proof of vaccination, wearing mask and sanitation in the meeting.

LaPlante is part of the team of justice, constitutional, natural resources and citizenship ministers who have worked on constitutional changes over the past two years. The final product of the federation-approved resolutions will recognize the MMF as the pre-existing democratic representative government of the Métis of Manitoba, which has the responsibility to provide responsible and accountable self-government to its Red River Métis citizens.

“We are going to grow in a very big way, there are exciting times ahead.”

Chelsea Kemp Isa Local Journalism Initiative reporter who works at the Brandon Sun. The Local Journalism Initiative is funded by the Government of Canada. Turtle Island News does not receive funding from the LJI government.

Add your voice

Is there more to this story? We’d love to hear from you about this or any other stories you think we should know about. Make your voice heard on our contribution page.

read more
Self government

Florida lawmakers consider stripping Disney of its power of self-government

Two Floridian powers clash again. On Monday, Governor Ron DeSantis spoke about Disney in what became the latest development in an ongoing battle. The back-and-forth comes after the company denounced the state’s new “Don’t Say Gay” law, as critics call it. This week, lawmakers said they were considering stripping Disney of some of its power in the state. Years before Cinderella Castle opened, Walt Disney himself proposed to state legislators that Disney World have authority over the territory. Months after his death in December 1966, the Governor and Legislature in 1967 granted the society, under the leadership of Walt’s brother Roy, the creation of the Reedy Creek Improvement District, to govern the property that would eventually become Disney World. But now Disney’s independence is under the microscope following the company’s denunciation of Florida’s new ‘Parental Rights in Education’ law, or the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ law. “. In a tweet, State Rep. Spencer Roach, who represents the North Fort Myers area, wrote that lawmakers have already met twice to discuss repealing the Reedy Creek Improvement Act. He said, “If Disney wants to embrace the woke ideology, it seems appropriate that they should be regulated by Orange County.” On Friday, DeSantis said he supports lawmakers’ review of Disney’s power. “They basically put this one company on a pedestal and treated it differently, not only than other companies, but even other theme parks,” DeSantis said. Under Florida law, Reedy Creek landowners, like Disney, can regulate their own water, electricity, and emergency services. DeSantis said their power doesn’t end there. “I was shocked to see some of the things. They can build their own nuclear power plant. Is there any other private company in the state that can just build a nuclear power plant on their own?” to do things that no one else can do. So I think they’re right to look at that and reevaluate and have a level playing field for everybody I think that’s way better than basically to allow a company to be a law on itself.” So what are the chances of Florida dethroning Disney? “Right now, I would say, it’s more talking than doing. Surprise me,” said Aubrey Jewett, a UCF political science professor. “If I were Disney, I would definitely take this threat seriously.” He said this battle between DeSantis and Disney could get a lot uglier. before it gets better. just, to me, shocking and usual to see the head of disney and the governor of florida shoot each other. and i haven’t seen anything like it in florida politics for 30 years let me study it,” Jewett said. As for what happens next with the Reedy Creek Improvement District, the governor said it was up to the Florida legislature to decide. “I as governor could be presented with changes to that, and I think I said I would be receptive to that, but ultimately the legislature would have to move on,” said DeSantis. WESH 2 News has contacted Disney. The company has not responded, but in a previous statement it pledged to have the Parental Rights in Education Act repealed or struck down by the courts.

Two Floridian powers clash again.

On Monday, Governor Ron DeSantis spoke about Disney in what became the latest development in an ongoing battle. The back-and-forth comes after the company denounced the state’s new “Don’t Say Gay” law, as critics call it.

This week, lawmakers said they were considering stripping Disney of some of its power in the state.

Years before Cinderella Castle opened, Walt Disney himself proposed to state legislators that Disney World have authority over the territory. Months after his death in December 1966, the Governor and Legislature in 1967 granted the company, under the leadership of Walt’s brother Roy, the creation of the Reedy Creek Improvement District, to govern the property that would eventually become DisneyWorld.

But now Disney’s independence is under the microscope following the company’s denunciation of Florida’s new “parental rights in education” law, or the “Don’t Say Gay” law.

In a tweet, State Rep. Spencer Roach, who represents the North Fort Myers area, wrote that lawmakers have already met twice to discuss repealing the Reedy Creek Improvement Act.

He said, “If Disney wants to embrace the woke ideology, it seems appropriate that they be regulated by Orange County.”

On Friday, DeSantis said he supports lawmakers’ review of Disney’s power.

“They basically put this one company on a pedestal and treated it differently, not just from other companies, but even from other theme parks,” DeSantis said.

Under Florida law, Reedy Creek landowners, like Disney, can regulate their own water, electric, and emergency services. DeSantis said their power doesn’t end there.

“I was shocked to see some of the stuff in there. They can build their own nuclear power plant. Is there any other private company in the state that can build a nuclear power plant by itself? ” he said. “They are able to do certain things that no one else is able to do. So I think they’re right to look at that and re-evaluate and have a level playing field for everybody I think that’s a lot better than allowing a company to be a law on it -same.

So what are the chances of Florida dethroning Disney?

“Right now I would say it’s more talking than doing. But that said, this governor and this legislature would not surprise me,” said Aubrey Jewett, professor of political science at UCF. “If I were Disney, I would definitely take this threat seriously.”

He said this battle between DeSantis and Disney could get a lot uglier before it gets better.

“It’s just, to me, shocking and customary to see the head of Disney and the Governor of Florida shoot each other. And I haven’t seen anything like it in Florida politics in the 30 years I’ve studied it. “said Jewett.

As for what happens next with the Reedy Creek Improvement District, the governor said it’s up to the Florida legislature to decide.

“I as governor could be presented with changes to that, and I think I said I would be receptive to that, but ultimately the legislature would have to move forward,” DeSantis said.

WESH 2 News has contacted Disney. The company has not responded, but in a previous statement it pledged to have the Parental Rights in Education Act repealed or struck down by the courts.

read more
Self government

Gwich’in get a glimpse of what self-government would look like

On the second day of the Gwich’in Tribal Council’s Annual General Meeting in Inuvik, Northwest Territories, Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik painted a picture of what a Gwich’in government might look like.

“The current model of service delivery by the Government of the Northwest Territories is simply not working for our people,” Kyikavichik said. And he said the Indian Act “continues to diminish the role and authority of band councils in our communities.

“The Gwich’in government, in our view, offers opportunities to change that.”

The Gwich’in Tribal Council has been negotiating a self-government agreement for over two decades. This work began shortly after the Gwich’in signed a land claims agreement in 1992.

Gwich’in Tribal Council Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik said Wednesday he wanted to clarify why, after more than two decades of negotiations, the council continues to pursue the establishment of its own government. (Mackenzie Scott/CBC)

How a Gwich’in government would be structured, its powers and how long it would take to put it in place were the focus of discussions at the Gwich’in Tribal Council on Wednesday.

Kyikavichik said self-government negotiations have been divisive in the past. He wanted to clarify why, after all these years, the Gwich’in Tribal Council continues to pursue the establishment of its own government.

“First and foremost, we need a more effective government system for the Gwich’in,” he said.

Kyikavichik presented a list of goals for a Gwich’in government. They include: reconnecting with land and culture; language revitalization; improve people’s health and quality of life; improve homes and infrastructure; create jobs and business opportunities; and include youth and elders in decision-making.

Dinjii Zhuh Regional Government

Under the draft agreement in principle, Kyikavichik said, the Gwich’in Tribal Council would become the Dinjii Zhuh regional government. He would have a great leader (Dinjii Iisrits’at Chit) and its capital would be Fort McPherson, NWT

Within the Dinjii Zhuh government, Fort McPherson, Aklavik, Tsiigehtchic and Inuvik would each have a local government with its own leader (Dinjii Khehkai) and the board.

The Dinjii Zhuh government would serve as a “coordinating body” and represent the Gwich’in in meetings with the governments of the Northwest Territories and Canada, Kyikavichik said.

“That’s what our tribal council, or our Dinjii Zhuh regional government, should be about, it’s about supporting our communities, not consolidating power,” he said.

Currently, Kyikavichik said, each of the four communities has a Gwich’in council president and a band council chief, which is confusing.

The Dinjii Zhuh government would merge the Indian Act band council and designated Gwich’in organization from each community into one government.

The municipal governments of the four communities would remain.

“We’re not targeting public government, which includes non-Gwich’in governance,” Kyikavichik said.

“We are opting for aboriginal government, which involves only our Gwich’in people, and governance in the Gwich’in settlement area outside of municipal boundaries.

Power of taxation

Money is obviously an important part of actualizing self-government.

“We don’t want this government unless we have the money to be able to deliver,” Kyikavichik said.

He said the ability to impose taxes, such as a liquor tax, would help generate the cash needed to provide government services.

The prospect of taxing powers was welcomed by Willard Hagen, a delegate representing the Nihtat Gwich’in Council in Inuvik.

“Self-government without taxation…is an oxymoron,” he said.

“You’re not self-sufficient if you don’t have your own free-flowing funding.”

The process can take years or even decades

To be sure, building responsible government for things like health care, justice, and education systems is a daunting task.

For this reason, Kyikavichik said, the Gwich’in Tribal Council has decided to focus on seven “primary jurisdictions” in its final agreement negotiations with the governments of Canada and the Northwest Territories.

They are: governance, fiscal relations, land, housing, culture and language, taxation and economic development.

After a final agreement is reached, the Gwich’in government would seek to take over services such as education, justice, health and income support – a process that would likely take more than 15 years, said Kyikavichik.

The Gwich’in government could also explore responsibility for the regulation of alcohol and cannabis, marriage, adoption and gambling.

The goal is to finalize a tentative agreement and have it approved at the Gwich’in Tribal Council’s next annual general meeting in August, Kyikavichik said.

“The tentative agreement stage allows us to engage with our people,” he said.

The tentative agreement would then be submitted to Canada for approval, which Kyikavichik said could take more than a year.

The Grand Chief estimated that final discussions on the self-government agreement would take three to five years. The council has set 2027 as the year it hopes to finalize an agreement with the Gwich’in government.

This process is not the only option, however.

Kyikavichik said they could also choose to skip the tentative agreement phase and go straight to final deal talks, or put the entire process on hold.

Some delegates urged the assembly to move forward.

“Let’s not take a break, let’s not take a break. We have so many successful Gwich’in working for us,” said Barry Greenland, a director of the Nihtat Gwich’in Council.

“We can’t sell ourselves short saying we can’t do it.”

read more
Self government

Self-government in Peril: Commentary on the Quebec Court of Appeal’s Reference to An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis Children, Youth and Families – Government, public sector

The Quebec Court of Appeal has obstructed the federal government’s efforts to address the overrepresentation of Indigenous children in the child and youth protection system. On February 10, 2022, the Court ruled that key sections of the federal government An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families (the “Act“) were unconstitutional. Act aims to ensure that Indigenous children receive a minimum level of services and enables Indigenous governing bodies to develop child protection solutions. Although the Court concluded that there is an “Aboriginal right” to self-government in child and family services, affirmed by section 35 of the Canadian Constitution (theConstitution“), the Court invalidated Articles 21 and 22(3) of the Act who provided
real self-determination on these issues. The Court’s decision leaves us with a contradiction: it affirms the existence of the right of Aboriginal self-government but annuls the provisions of the Act which has made it possible to exercise this right in a meaningful way.

A look at the Act

the Act was jointly developed by the federal government and Indigenous partners and came into effect on January 1, 2020. It seeks to affirm the right of Indigenous peoples to exercise jurisdiction over child and family services and, by extension, the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (“UNDRIP“) in Canada. the
Act also establishes “national standards” that guarantee a minimum level of services for all Aboriginal children.

Under the Act, Aboriginal governing bodies can either pass their own laws regarding child and family services or seek to enter into a coordination agreement with the federal and provincial governments. Prior to the Court’s decision, Sections 21 and 22(3) provided that Indigenous laws passed under a coordination agreement had the same force of law as federal laws and prevailed over any conflicting or inconsistent provisions of the laws. applicable federal or provincial authorities.


Two weeks after its entry into force, the Government of Quebec is asking its Court of Appeal to rule on the question of whether the
Act is unconstitutional. The Attorney General of Quebec argued that the Act undermines the province’s general jurisdiction over child welfare and unilaterally alters the scope of section 35, threatening the structure of the Constitution. Canada responded that issues under the Act falls within the broad reach of the federal government’s authority over Aboriginal peoples under section 91(24) of the Constitution and that the ActThe interpretation of section 35 is consistent with case law.

Constitutionality of the Act

The Court’s constitutional analysis focused on two elements: the constitutionality of national standards and the Aboriginal right to self-government in the regulation of child and family services. The Court concluded the Act is constitutional, with the exception of sections 21 and 22(3).

On the first element, the Court held that subsection 91(24) grants the federal government jurisdiction over the welfare of Indigenous peoples and their interpersonal relationships. the
Act fully falls within this jurisdiction because its purpose is to “[ensure] the well-being of [Indigenous] children, promoting culturally appropriate services to reduce their overrepresentation in provincial child welfare systems” (para. 34). The Court also concluded that the Act does not dictate how provinces are to provide child and family services in Indigenous spaces, as national standards are consistent with provincial child welfare legislation.

Ultimately, Quebec’s position that the Actcontrary to the principles of federalism and democracy was rejected.

The Court’s assessment of the second element concluded that Aboriginal peoples have always maintained a form of self-government arising from original sovereignty. The Court traced the historic right to self-government, holding that the Act is compatible with the notion of Canadian sovereignty, because the record shows no proof of the extinction of the aboriginal right. Linking the law to child and family services, the Court said that:

“The central purpose of s. 35 is to achieve reconciliation and preserve constitutional space for Indigenous peoples to enable them to live as peoples – with their own identities, cultures and values ​​– within the Canadian framework As a normative system, Indigenous customary law relating to children and the family is part of these values, and the child and the family are the main vehicle for transmitting markers of Indigenous identity. regulation of child and family services by Aboriginal people themselves cannot be divorced from their Aboriginal identity and cultural development” (at para. 48).

The Indigenous right to self-government in child and family services is not distinguished by the federal-provincial division of powers – it extends to all Indigenous peoples because of its importance for cultural continuity and survival.

Deletion of sections 21 and 22(3)

Despite the general constitutionality of the Act, the Court identified problems with Articles 21 and 22(3). Together, the two provisions allowed Indigenous laws developed under coordination agreements to have the same status as federal legislation and the legislative primacy of such laws over provincial legislation. The Court found that it was unconstitutional because it changed the architecture of the Constitution and it was not within the jurisdiction of the federal government to allow Indigenous laws to prevail over conflicting provincial laws. This principle – known as “federal paramountcy” – applies only to validly enacted federal laws.

Furthermore, the federal government did not have the power under the Constitution to give absolute priority to an Aboriginal right under section 35. The constitutional principle of coordinated governments prevents the federal government from legislating over all aspects of provincial relations with Aboriginal peoples. In the future, provincial legislation cannot supersede legislation that an Indigenous governing body has enacted pursuant to its Aboriginal right of self-government over child and family services, unless the regime provincial legislation fails to meet the long-standing section 35 test of impairing impairment and reconciliation.

Without the application of sections 21 and 22(3), there remains no apparent incentive for Aboriginal governing bodies to negotiate or enter into coordination agreements. Indigenous governing bodies may choose to simply notify the federal and provincial governments of their intention to exercise legislative authority over child and family services.

One step forward, two steps back

The Court of Appeal’s decision is riddled with contradictions that run counter to the advancement of Aboriginal self-government. On the one hand, the Court pointed out that the parliamentary intention behind the Act was “clearly intended to break with the past” by providing Aboriginal peoples with the “flexibility and functional independence” to choose their own solutions (at paras. 17 and 18). The decision confirmed that Indigenous communities can create their own legislation to protect and improve the lives of Indigenous children. The Court also noted that the legislative process behind the Act was guided by UNDRIP and that at the international level, UNDRIP affirms the existence of the right to indigenous self-determination. By affirming an Indigenous right to self-government in child and family services, both presently and historically, the Court made its decision consistent with UNDRIP. On the other hand, the Court invalidated the very provisions conferring the primacy and real self-determination, which aligned with the principles of UNDRIP and marked a break with the past.

Reactions to the decision were equally divided. In one joint press releasethe Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador and the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission (“FNQLHSSC“) declared that their First Nations communities will exercise their legislative and inherent right to implement their own child welfare legislation. On January 17, 2022, the Opitciwan Atikamekw Social Protection Act (the Act respecting the social protection of the Atikamekw of Opitciwan) came into force and about fifteen communities will follow in its footsteps. The Chairman of the FNQLHSSC Board of Directors, Derek Montour, stated that they ask the Government of Quebec to actively collaborate with their communities and organizations for an optimal application of Bill C-92 and the adoption of Indigenous laws. . It is likely that a negotiated approach to the implementation of Indigenous child welfare laws will be the best approach to ensuring the well-being of Indigenous children.

Where does that leave aboriginal self-government? A decision rendered on appeal from outside the province is, at best, persuasive to British Columbia courts. It is also likely that an application for leave to appeal will be made to the Supreme Court of Canada. Indigenous Services Minister Patty Hadju saidthat Ottawa is committed to upholding its Indigenous Child Welfare Act and will work to ensure autonomy for First Nations people in Indigenous Child Welfare, but time will tell. Stay tuned for future updates on this decision and its treatment.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide on the subject. Specialist advice should be sought regarding your particular situation.

read more
Self government

The Congress assessed the application of the European Charter of Local Self-Government in Belgium

A delegation from the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, made up of rapporteurs Matthias Gysin (Switzerland, ILDG) and Magnus Berntsson (Sweden, EPP/CCE) carried out the first part of the monitoring visit to Belgium from 8 to 10 March 2022 to assess the implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government from the previous follow-up report passed by Congress in 2014.

The rapporteurs had exchanges of views on the latest developments in the field of local self-government in Belgium with representatives of local authorities and regional parliaments, including certain institutions in Brussels. Meetings were planned with Roger Stevens, First President of the Council of State, with representatives of the Constitutional Court as well as with Marc Bertrand, Mediator of Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, Bart Weekers, Mediator of Flanders, Marlene Hardt , Mediator of the German-speaking Community and with Catherine De Bruecker, Mediator of the Brussels-Capital Region.

Meetings also with Liesbeth Homans, President of the Parliament of Flanders, Rudy Demotte, President of the Wallonia-Brussels Federation/Parliament of the French Community as well as with Philippe Close, Mayor of Brussels, Pierre Rolin, Mayor of Rhode-Saint-Genèse, members of the municipal council of Namur and Wim Dries, mayor of Genk and president of the Association of Flemish towns and municipalities (VVSG).

The Congress delegation also met the members of the Belgian national delegation to the Congress and the Presidents of the Association of the city and municipalities of the Brussels-Capital Region, the Cities and Municipalities of Wallonia (UVCW) and the Walloon provinces (APW).

Belgium ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government in 2004. Countries that have ratified the Charter are bound by its provisions. The Charter requires the implementation of a minimum set of rights which form the essential basis of local self-government in Europe. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe ensures that these principles are respected in the 47 member states of the Council of Europe.

Stéphanie POIREL, Secretary of the Monitoring Committee
Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe
Telephone: +33 (0)3 90 21 51 84
Email: [email protected]

read more
Self government

The John Dickinson Forum: Teaching the Virtues of Self-Government |

“Some educators approach civics in terms of activism and protests,” notes Professor Mark David Hall, “but protest by itself is not useful in civics.” As Hall notes, “Before students can participate in self-government, they must have knowledge of the basic principles of the American constitutional order.”

the John Dickinson forum at George Fox University provides students with this crucial foundation of civic knowledge.

The university’s Herbert Hoover professor of politics, Hall, founded the Dickinson Forum five years ago “to encourage discussion and debate” about “America’s founding principles and current events related to those principles”. . A scholar of American political thought and early American Christianity, Hall has authored or co-edited twelve books, including the most recent, “Does America have a Christian foundation?

A partner program of the Jack Miller Center, the Forum offers a variety of activities for students, including lectures, book and current affairs discussions, and debates. It has partnered with various institutions in the Pacific Northwest, making its programs available to students at other colleges and universities and to the general public.

The Forum is named after John Dickinson, an important but overlooked American founder. Dickinson played a critical role writing pro-liberty pamphlets before American independence, was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787, and was “one of the most thoughtful defenders of liberty in the founding era”. At one time, Delaware’s largest slave owner, Dickinson, influenced by his Quaker upbringing, finally freed his slaves.

The Forum contributes to civic education by bringing in speakers each year to discuss the American founding principles. According to Hall, some speakers also lecture on individuals and movements of later generations that focused on these principles, such as Abraham Lincoln, whose political acumen was heavily influenced by the Declaration of Independence. For example, historian Wilfred M. McClay recently spoke on the role of the Constitution in contemporary civic education.

Speakers scheduled for the spring 2022 semester will include Paul Miller of Georgetown University, Jason Ross of Liberty University, Kevin RC Gutzman of Western Connecticut State University, and tentatively Ian Rowe of the Woodson Center/1776 Unites.

Hall says students who attend the Forum don’t get a simply triumphant account of America. After the 2020 murder of George Floyd, he and an African-American colleague held a book group on the issue of race and the United States. Discussions focused on documents from the 1619 Project and its critics, as well as articles arguing for and against reparations. Hall and his colleagues have worked to promote “ideas rather than protests,” he says, and they “have worked to include students from all sides” of the current debate. He notes that this particular reading group was so popular that a new group had to be created to accommodate any interested students.

Student reading groups are an important part of the Forum’s programming. Groups of about ten students meet each semester to discuss readings on freedom, equality, and human flourishing in America and around the world. Reading articles from The Economist and other leading periodicals, students debate controversial topics such as the justice of Harvard’s affirmative action policies. Group members are also invited to attend dinners with the speakers that the Forum brings to campus each semester.

Hall believes that one of the main threats to civic education is the magnification of political discourse. He points to the efforts being made in Florida public schools as an encouraging sign that states are beginning to take civics more seriously.

An accomplished student of early American Christianity, Hall also emphasizes the important connection between maintaining a “moral commitment to freedom” and religion, an increasingly overlooked aspect of civic education today. He points to a famous syllogism proposed by James Hudson of the Library of Congress on the relationship between religion and morality: virtue and morality are necessary for free republican government; religion is necessary for virtue and morality; therefore, religion is necessary for republican government.

Hall acknowledges that our circumstances have changed significantly since the founding, when disputes were primarily between competing denominations of Christianity; today, different religions compete for respect in the public square. Nevertheless, he cites the teaching of George Washington that a society is unlikely to function well without a shared morality supported by religious instruction. Although he admits that Washington suggested that certain individuals could be moral without being religious, this realization is highly unlikely for society as a whole.

Promoting the virtues of self-governance, as well as the importance of morality and religion, the John Dickinson Forum seeks to strengthen the foundations of American politics.

Mike Sabo is the editor of RealClear’s American Civics Portal.

read more
Self government

Reviews | Midterms Are a Dangerous Threat to DC’s Self-Government

Many “ifs” must occur before the city can be stripped of the limited self-governing authority it currently enjoys: House passage of a possible repeal measure, Senate agreement, and presidential signature. So the odds of some House GOP members achieving their goal of killing Home Rule next year are slim with the White House in Democrat hands until at least 2024.

But that’s no reason for the residents of the district to breathe sighs of relief. A Republican-controlled house means big trouble for the district regardless. Today, under the Home Rule Act, all DC council and mayoral laws are still reviewed by Congress, which retains authority over the city’s budget. Let it sink in.

Although DC’s relationship with Congress fell on notable turmoil (the near-final collapse of the city and Congress’s imposition of a Board of Financial Control come to mind), for most of the Nearly 50 years of Home Rule, DC’s elected leaders have managed to exercise their delegated powers without major congressional interference. We can expect a House of Representatives under the hammer of Republican President Kevin McCarthy (California) drive recklessly on the city. Republican Rep. Michael Cloud (Texas) of the House Oversight Committee made that clear in a comment directed to the right. daily call“Keeping the DC government in check will surely be a Republican priority…when the hammers are in our hands.”

Another Republican committee member, Georgia Rep. Andrew S. Clyde, went even further, telling the caller he was working with colleagues on a bill to repeal the 1973 Home Rule Act. . McCarthy’s office did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday on whether he, as House GOP leader, would support a repeal effort.

Having served as a senior official on the then U.S. Senate Committee on the District of Columbia when the autonomy legislation was enacted, and having witnessed and expressed his opinion on an autonomous DC while he was perched on the editorial board of the Post for decades, I can say with confidence and great fear that the prospect of today’s Republican Party holding the levers of power over the district is a nightmare.

An immediate result of the Republican takeover would be a further decrease in the DC delegate to the House. Of the. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) (or her successor) would no longer have a vote in the all-important Committee of the Whole. The city’s annual budget appropriations bill would be stolen by Republican extremists and stripped of anything objectionable. Expect carefully crafted, locally funded spending programs to be upended or outright rejected by House owners. City officials can expect summonses to House hearings for haranguing and harassment — all for the benefit and pleasure of voters in congressional districts at home. And worse.

Expressing outrage at the threat of repeal, Norton noted the temerity of House Republicans treating the district like a remote colony. The city, she said, “has a population larger than two states, pays more federal taxes than 21 states, pays more federal taxes per capita than any state, has a larger budget than 12 states, has a larger gross domestic product than 17 states, has a triple-A bond rating, and federal funds constitute a small[er] percentage of its budget than the percentage of total government revenue. Norton shouldn’t even have to resort to this argument. District residents should have the right to run their own affairs, with their own money, without Republican overseers, as local communities do nationwide.

Residents of the district, it must not happen like this, at least not without a fight.

Keeping the House out of Republican hands is as much in the interests of the district as it is of the country as a whole.

The city has a role to play in keeping Congress in safe and healthy hands.

DC residents determined to retain the limited democracy they currently enjoy should be prepared to devote their time, talents and cash to the efforts of Pelosi and the national Democratic organizations designed to secure congressional districts across the country. to representatives who understand and respect DC Home Rule and the clutches of McCarthy and his Republican cronies. The city’s political leaders should take the lead in organizing and managing the city’s campaign to stop the McCarthyites from attacking Home Rule.

It will be as crucial a DC undertaking as deciding the future direction of the city in this year’s primary and general elections. Because if the house is captured by the GOP, DC City Hall will be reduced to a punching bag, as locals watch helplessly.

The threat is so serious. It’s time for voters in the district to start acting on it.

read more
Self government

As initial deadline passes, Colville Lake looks to 2024 for self-government

Colville Lake is now looking to 2024 for self-government after its target deadline from last year was missed.

“Our plan for 2021 was to conclude the first part of our self-government,” said David Codzi, chairman of the Ayoni Keh Land Corporation. “We had to push it back to 2024 now.”

As to why the talks have taken longer than expected, Codzi explained that one of the reasons is that the territorial government has not implemented the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

The Government of Canada has adopted UNDRIP into federal law in June 2021.

The 19th Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories announced early in its term that the implementation of UNDRIP was a priority.

The territorial government must reveal a implementation plan by summer 2022.

Self-government negotiations are being conducted between representatives of Colville Lake, the territorial government and the federal government, which Codzi said have been more accommodating than the territorial government.

“They’re more open to suggestions,” Codzi said of the feds.

David Codzi, chairman of the Ayoni Keh Land Corporation, says Colville Lake will achieve self-government one day, he just hopes it will be sooner rather than later. (Kate Kyle/CBC)

The federal government did not agree to an interview. A spokesperson wrote in an email that the discussions were confidential.

“The Government of Canada is committed to supporting Indigenous peoples in their work to rebuild and reconstitute their nations, to advance self-determination and, for First Nations, to facilitate the transition away from Indian Act toward self-government,” wrote Matthew Gutsch, a representative with Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs.

Codzi said he thinks the process would be faster if the territorial government would step aside and allow Colville Lake to negotiate directly with the federal government.

“We’re all on our feet and talking and not going anywhere,” he said.

But the Government of the Northwest Territories is one of the signatories to the land claims agreement.

The Government of the Northwest Territories did not accept an interview with CBC News or respond to email questions by the deadline.

But in an earlier email statement on Jan. 11, Todd Sasaki, spokesman for the Department of Executive and Indigenous Affairs, said the territorial government was negotiating “to clarify how the Sahtu Dene and Métis of Colville Lake will implement exercise their ancestral right to self-government.”

“Want to move forward”

Joseph Kochon, the community’s chief administrative officer, said the last round of negotiations, which took place in mid-January, went well.

He said the territorial government has a new chief negotiator, who took over a few months ago, but who had previously worked on the negotiations in another capacity.

Colville Lake chief Wilbert Kochon said the relationship with the new negotiator has been positive so far.

“She’s ready to learn and she’s ready to move on,” he said. “The first time we met her was pretty good.”

As for Codzi, he said Colville Lake is more than ready for self-government because the band office already provides most services to the remote community of about 150 people.

Codzi said the community will one day achieve self-government, it’s just a matter of how long it will take.

“The faster we do these things, we’re not spending all the money talking about something that we know we’re going to achieve,” he said.

read more
Self government

Ulmer: Meetings Offer Lessons in Improving Self-Reliance | Columnists

My father spent 26 years of his career as executive vice president of the North Dakota Association of Rural Electric Cooperatives. I remember accompanying him to a few annual local co-op meetings where free lunch, door prizes and self-government attracted hundreds of co-op members/owners. Dad and I were walking through the lunch line and he was so distracted by people wanting to chat with him that it didn’t take long for me to realize I was alone. So I’ll just take a full plate and find a seat.

Meetings were usually held in a small municipal gymnasium or community center/church/fallout shelter and were always packed. I was always hungry back then and the rural people were especially good at filling your bag with food. Best of all, their hospitality always made me feel at ease.

The purpose of these annual meetings is to nominate and elect the board of directors of their cooperatives. Very often, the races for jobs were very competitive. Each member, essentially anyone connected to rural electric power, was given one vote and only members present were allowed to vote; proxy votes were not permitted. Many people traveled long distances, so the free lunch became more of a necessity than a luxury.

People also read…

Sometimes it took a while to nominate candidates and count votes, gaps were filled with speeches, and door prizes were awarded during downtime. In fact, it was quite an event and Dad was in his element.

It was in the 1960s/70s when rural electric cooperatives created the electrical system we still rely on today. Back then, investing in building power plants and mining coal in North Dakota were just plans that would require billions in investment to complete. So Dad would deliver his statewide and nationwide membership speech in hopes of convincing members to risk the investment. Not all meetings welcomed Dad to the podium. It was not uncommon to hear John Birchers better dead than red heckling with “This government-sponsored co-op thing is socialism and you’re a communist!” It always bothered me because it was the era of McCarthyism; but dad seemed to take it in stride explaining that there were no private investment utilities willing to risk their capital on the basis of one customer every six miles or so so rural electric co-ops had to fill the void.

In the end, member owners voted in favor of low-interest Government Guaranteed Loans (REAs) to electrify rural America. Dad’s job was to convince the state and federal governments to provide the loans the co-ops needed to build the factories, power lines and extract the coal.

Dad didn’t do all of this alone; he knew his people/owner members would support him because they knew he cared about the little guy on the phone. Next, its members owned coal mines, power plants, and power lines that led to their property.

The trips home allowed Dad and I to discuss all sorts of things at length, and I’m pretty sure it was here that my interest in political science eventually led to my majoring in college. My studies involved a massive and deep appreciation of all types of governments and political shenanigans that convinced me that there is no perfect form of government, but the ones that work best understand that the little guy in the end of the line is just as important. like the guy on top of the heap. These meetings have been a great example of how we can govern ourselves better.

Dan Ulmer is a parent, grandparent, retired teacher, counselor, politician, lobbyist, public servant, non-profit leader and opinionated citizen who believes we should do what we can to make the world better than we found it.

read more
Self government

How far can gross irrationality support self-government? Can the wisdom of the community outweigh the howls for the chaos of the mob?

Image Credit: Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call

Trump-proof elections – with dynamic platforms, expanded voting, critical thinking and compassion

Like delivery companies, food production, and all manner of machinery, democratic autonomy must work to be viable. This means spreading enough wealth, services (especially medical), housing, clothing and education to motivate enough key workers to sustain the intertwined supply chains. Viability therefore depends on reliable correlations with the real world since black swans – storms, fires, drought, food shortages, pandemics, natural disasters and pugnacious neighbors – overwhelm even the most rational human decisions.

Civilization boils down to applying real-world technology to maximize gains and minimize damage, more or less with shared benefits (clean air and water, emergency services, toll-free highways, and the Internet). Thus, the disruption of the crowd that emphasizes critical thresholds jeopardizes any autonomous democracy. Against single-minded folly, gross stupidity or bellicose denials of what is, the fragile self-government must be nurtured. Entropy in politics accelerates when one party fuels a cacophony of chaos, increasing disruption from climate change and pandemics.

Reason clinging to reality

Confirmations of reality reflect ingrained modes (reason, logic) by which independent methodology (science, computation, replication) examines raw data, producing reliable and working representations (descriptions, applications, new theories). This supports high-level consensus knowledge – which in turn fuels political judgments and decisions that honor reason and reality. Anything that breaks confirmation, be it ignorance, partisan fads, religion, or superstition, destroys what exists and how we know it. Thus irrationality threatens democratic states.

Thanks to the first rogue president who dared an autocratic, election-killing coup, epic questions and schisms are erupting – if tons of irrationality can destroy democracy, endanger majority rule, even incite to violent confrontations to resolve what the Civil War apparently did not do – who and what governs a Federal Union. Although we are not close to civil war, the question of which entity governs what simmers and tests the national balance.

Can a still tiny and delirious number of spitting militants boast of having the means and the intelligence to attack the world’s great military power? Isn’t pulling off a coup much harder than failing a presidential election, let alone being an incumbent ruining your own re-election chances? Tying insurgency fantasies to an inflated Mar-a-lago float, already leaking at the seams, exposes activists’ double miscalculations. Successful revolutionaries must outmaneuver the formidable ruling powers that are installed, backed by an army, and which require multiple unproven skills.

That doesn’t make the current battle lines any less troubling. Slightly oversimplified, in this corner, weighing like a light minority, the Party of unreason, autocracy, rigidity, cruelty and lies opposes the more populous Party of reason, science , suffrage, compromise, collectivism and relative truth. In summary: is the MAGA minority, as full of itself as it is devoid of strategic thinking, stealing the majority elections? It’s not as if budding strongmen, already willing to replace peaceful voting with brutal violence, have any calculations or hidden agendas, that MAGA’s ends justify any nefarious and illegal means.

Reason against unreason

Although economists once spoke of the rational consumer, few political scientists defend today’s global electorate as particularly rational, knowledgeable, or unbiased. The media, advertising, propaganda and reflexive identification of family/tribe/party incite the aggrieved right to indulge in obsessive hatred of Democrats – and goofy, demonic projections about “the other” . Aren’t true believers defined by low-level critical thinking, especially when they step out on a limb? As with expertise, unreasonable eye-testing and analysis, even the possibility that they are wrong, is sacrilege; this is how faith-only fundamentalists embrace the crook who alone can fix everything. Rationals know best, not only that new evidence demands a change of position, but that the worst human delusion is to believe oneself divine, incapable of error – irrationally trusting your selfish “visceral” instincts when higher intellectual powers say opposite. Try flying too close to the sun with wings held in wax.

I admit that reality has shaken my views: I once trusted that more MAGA fans, like smarter consumers, would learn from demonstrable failure, full of lies, and eventually dismiss transparent fraud without delivery. Did Trump reverse job offshoring, push infrastructure building, or even attempt better and cheaper health care reform for all, as boringly promised? Improved a chaotic foreign region? Not one, failures make failures worse. Except on racist and anti-immigration divisions, as well as demonizing liberals, Trump has failed to deliver on his promises. Instead, he hypocritically (knowing better from the start) let a pandemic become a deadly death trap for countless innocents and his own sucked-up, vaccine-resistant base. I missed how rage and attitude overwhelm the real world.

I’ve come to see how much the cult of Trump despises America, not just conservative values, but the Constitution, law, order, or the integrity of the Capitol. Barely alone, I was shocked at the degree of cowardly cynicism behind an insurgency known today for its criminal singularity and monumental folly. Likewise, how long and how much Trump would turn his Stop the Steal empty lie into a crusade. Truly, the absurdity of losers being declared winners if they complain enough. Elections are just trivialized gestures if the losing side turns defeat into a mere campaign season. Finally, I expected the Justice Engines to already indict Trump and the chilling enablers for countless crimes, violations, and contempts. I’d be glad I was wrong here, but time and timing matter: I get six months of investigations, but justice delayed is clearly justice denied. Subject: the GA video tape!

The reality of the disruption

We all know now, with horrifying impact, how Trumpism has corrupted the Right, bristling with MAGA irrationalities: 1) what once reigned supreme, a candidate’s character – followed by principles and qualifications – is obsolete, replaced by just the opposite; 2) that incitement to blind rage, not positive reform, defines Trumpism, its persistent diatribe that Democrats only exist to destroy the “real America”; 3) that any Big Trump lie is as good as any demonstrable truth; 4) that extremist and minority mob violence rightly displaces eternities of peaceful, democratic voting and majority rule; and 5) that a losing demagogue can aggressively disregard voters and results, then commit voter fraud, then start an insurrection – and so far escape punishment and remain a national leader.

Thus, years of confirmed evidence impose new conditions of engagement. For decades we have invoked various functional descriptors – right versus left, rich versus poor, liberal versus conservative, urban versus rural, religious versus secular, or educated versus less educated. Such dichotomies fall by the wayside next to this global enlightenment: the Party of Reason, even consensus truth versus the Party of Unreason and delusions that numb reality. Full screen, for all to see, captures our nightmare: the Party of Reality, trusting in reason, faces off against the Party of Unreality, loyal to fabrication and manipulation.

After all, what could be more illogical than choosing to be a candidate, knowing that elections strictly define winners from losers, and then throwing tantrums and shouting, “It’s all rigged.” What could be more irrational than complaining that only elections won by Trumpers are legitimate, as if right-wingers never rig anything? Behind this fake scandal lies the most dangerous position of all, that Only My Side Counts, this shrill party (run by a sleazy, convicted real estate scammer) holds all truth and justice. This is how Trumpism, backed by the absolutism of faith alone, corrupt democracy, beaten reason, shit on the Constitution and turns politics into a sectarian theocracy of the fittest.

The final question, the lack of accountability for gross violations of American values, id what changes the dynamic? If system-breakers and law-breakers aren’t penalized for trying to corrupt everything they touch — and fool enough voters to cede control of Congress this year, the times will be increasingly difficult for what remains of representative autonomy. If Trumpism offers no other positive, it exposes on a platter the alternatives of today. No one can say we weren’t warned. Some routes once taken come without a clear return map, leaving the messy but defensible national balance stranded perhaps at our fingertips. Again, voting also needs fingertips.


If you liked this article, please donate $5 to keep NationofChange online through November.

read more
Self government

“Populist” promises: why cities need more autonomy

A few days ago, a researcher friend based in Chandigarh asked if there was a provision in the Local Bodies Acts to ensure that election candidates, candidates and parties, make achievable promises. And if they were to promise something beyond the scope and capacity of the municipality, can they be sued. How I wished we could apply such a law to our Prime Minister’s promise of Rs 15 lakh to every Indian’s bank account. Indeed, candidates should only promise what they can deliver.

The researcher friend echoed a former mayor of Chandigarh, who lost in the municipal elections recently held in the Union Territory. The mayor was likely referring to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) promising to replicate its “Delhi model” in Chandigarh. The AAP became the largest party, overtaking the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the polls for the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation. Not only did some of the former BJP mayors lose despite the party’s high decibel campaign, but its defeat was more brutal since the UT is under Center control and its MP is also from the BJP.

The main promises of the AAP were to provide 20,000 liters of free water to all households every month, to clean the garbage from the Dadumajra landfill, to install CCTV cameras and to make wifi accessible throughout the city. These poll promises necessitate a debate on issues of urban governance.

The demands and slogans of the Chandigarh municipal elections, such as free water, free electricity and social housing, resonate and reinforce the concept of “democratization of surplus”. BR Ambedkar, the architect of the Indian constitution, spoke of “one person, one vote”. It should also mean “one man, one economic unit”, but these slogans are becoming more relevant due to widespread and vast inequality.

Cities have become centers of capital accumulation through expropriation, especially over the past four decades. Twin processes were at work. First, the state, which provided essential services to citizens, passed this agenda on to private capital. Services such as water supply, education, health care and even housing are now areas of expansion for private capital. According to one estimate, real estate is the primary driver of capital accumulation in some cities.

The other reason people have lost their ability to acquire or hold assets is the nature of capitalist production in cities. According to one estimate, most workers – nearly 94 percent – are engaged in the informal sector. This has drastically reduced the bargaining power of workers in the cities.

The city itself has become a center of capitalist accumulation. As several urban planners have pointed out, cities are the centers of surplus production and should therefore be seen as factories. The democratization of the surplus in these urban centers and the slogans related to this idea, such as free water and electricity, more health centers, are neither gifts nor populist ideas but linked to the class demand of the workers .

Even in Chandigarh, the middle class elite still voted for the BJP, while the poorer and marginalized sections voted for the AAP and Congress.

Such democratization of surplus in cities is taking place in different parts of the world.

In many cities, remunicipalisation is being implemented in service delivery. For example, in Barcelona, ​​progressive groups raised the slogan “Win ​​Barcelona” and, after winning the elections, worked to democratize the urban commons, especially in the digital realm. Similarly, in Montreal, there has been an attempt to shift the city’s mobility from elevated privately driven vehicles serving the interests of oil and automobile capital to mass transit.

Next comes the question of the role of local self-government. After more than a quarter century of the 74th amendment to the constitution, functions, officials and finances have not been transferred to local governments across the country except Kerala.

The universally transferred function is that of a garbage collector. We will even soon have the registration of births and deaths transmitted to the central government. The cities are more like annexes of the State or the Center. The demand for municipal cadres corresponding to the services of state cadres has not been implemented anywhere.

Cities are to be governed by the principle of democratic decentralization envisioned in the 74th Amendment. Urban planning, apart from other functions, must be conveyed to the city council, preparing plans through meetings of neighborhood committees and community participation. However, the reality is that citizens are removed from the decision-making process.

Third, the debate over candidate and political party pledges and their feasibility – pledges are made to break the inertia of the existing delivery system and according to the class of people a political party represents.

Architect Charles Correa, chairman of the first urban commission formed in 1986, felt that urban governance in India was in desperate need of accountability. He said that more and more cities around the world are run by political leaders directly elected by the people of that city. So they defend the interests of citizens, otherwise they will not be re-elected. Unfortunately, in India, we find that cities are run by Chief Ministers of State who are not elected by the citizens of the city and therefore completely unaware of the demands and demands of the city.

Therefore, accountability in elections should not just be limited to promises made in elections, but should be drawn into a broader canvas of ‘autonomy’ in cities. This should be done by ensuring not only wider participation of people, but by democratizing the whole process.

(The author is a former Deputy Mayor of Shimla)

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.

Check out the latest DH videos here:

read more
Self government

‘Panchayat Talks’ to raise awareness of local self-government

Will a local organization provide compensation for a stray dog ​​bite? Can a member of the panchayat work abroad after being elected to a local administrative body? What are the duties and responsibilities of a panchayat president? These questions seem simple to answer, but they are difficult to answer for many, including many members of local government bodies at three levels.

The Panchayat Talk Series, a comprehensive YouTube channel program to raise awareness about the three-tier local government system started by Wayanad District Panchayat member Junaid Kaippani of Vellamunda Division, focuses on answering questions from the public.

Although the Kerala Panchayati Raj Act was enacted in 1994, most members of the public are unaware of details such as the duties and responsibilities of a member of the local administrative body and the incentives provided by a grama panchayat to citizens, said Mr Kaippani, who is also the chairman of the district panchayat standing welfare committee. “I have provided such useful information in each of my two- to three-minute series to the public, including members of local bodies,” he said.

As many as 21,900 members of local administrative bodies are elected every five years in grama panchayats, block panchayats, municipalities and enterprises, but most of them lack a clear idea of ​​their duties and responsibilities. , did he declare. “When I was elected a year ago, I also faced such problems. Later, I learned that many elected officials faced such problems, and that inspired me to start the program,” Mr. Kaippani said.

A graduate in business and psychology, he said he attended a course on “decentralization and administration of local bodies” jointly offered by KILA and Sree Narayana Guru Open University for interested members of local government bodies, and it l helped launch the web series.

“I have gathered useful advice for the public after consulting books and court orders regarding issues that I would like to discuss in the episodes over the next few days,” Mr. Kaippani said, adding that the program, launched there. about nine months, was approaching 200 episodes. .

read more
Self government

Dispute between agriculture and local self-government departments over LIFE mission continues – KERALA – GENERAL

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The dispute between the Departments of Agriculture and Local Government over the vetting of new applications for LIFE Mission, the government’s free housing scheme, continues to escalate. While the local self-government department said agriculture department employees would show up for verification of new applications, the agriculture department maintained that it would not provide agricultural assistants for the process. of verification.

Earlier, the local self-government department issued an order deploying agricultural assistants to verify applications. However, the crisis began when the Department of Agriculture issued an order stating that it will not provide farm assistants for non-farm purposes. With this, the draft list could not be released on December 1. Following this, the Chief Secretary called a meeting of senior officials and staff representatives from both departments to resolve the issue. However, the meeting, which was due to take place on Saturday, was postponed at the last minute. Meanwhile, on the same day, in a meeting held at the office of the CM without the knowledge of the officials of the Department of Agriculture, it was decided to carry out the verification with the help of agricultural assistants. The local self-government department hopes that an ordinance will soon be issued in this regard. This will invalidate the order issued earlier by the director of agriculture and will force the agricultural helpers to go for verification. In this case, officials of the Department of Agriculture can call a strike.

The Department of Agriculture alleges that panchayat employees have been excluded from the vetting requirement in about 80% of panchayats. Employees informed the minister that if the agricultural assistants are deployed for verification, activities such as crop damage assessment, crop insurance and distribution of one crore of young fruit trees will come to a halt.


read more
Self government

Dispute between agriculture and local self-government services over LIFE The mission continues – KERALA – GENERAL

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The dispute between agriculture and local self-government departments over verifying new applications for LIFE Mission, the government’s free housing program, continues to escalate. While the local self-government department has claimed that agriculture department employees will come forward for verification of new claims, the agriculture department has maintained that it will not provide farm assistants for the process. of verification.

Previously, the local self-government department issued an order deploying agricultural assistants to verify applications. However, the crisis started when the Agriculture Ministry issued an order stating that it would not provide farm assistants for non-farm purposes. With this, the draft list could not be released on December 1. Following this, the chief secretary called a meeting of senior officials and staff representatives of the two departments to resolve the issue. However, the meeting, which was scheduled to take place on Saturday, was postponed until the last minute. Meanwhile, on the same day, at a meeting held at the CM office without the knowledge of the officials of the Ministry of Agriculture, it was decided to carry out the verification with the help of agricultural assistants. The local self-government department hopes that a decree will be issued soon in this regard. This will invalidate the order issued earlier by the director of agriculture and force agricultural assistants to go for verification. In this case, officials of the Department of Agriculture can call a strike.

The Agriculture Department alleges that panchayat employees were excluded from the duty of verification in about 80 percent of panchayats. Employees informed the minister that if agricultural assistants are deployed for verification, activities such as crop damage assessment, crop insurance and the distribution of one crore of fruit plants will stop.


read more
Self government

America needs self-government, not American corporate government

Jim Simon’s defense of stakeholder capitalism (November 13) should invite a chorus of responses. Mine takes place along two tracks. First, Simon’s rosy gaze for stakeholder capitalism blurs the structural commitments that make capitalism, well, capitalism.

After:Can American companies meet needs that the government does not?

And second, his belief that an enlightened business sector can overcome public problems obscures a dangerous paradox: such insistence will require embracing the debilitating restrictions of privacy.

Jeff Kurtz lives in Newark, Ohio, and teaches at Denison University in Granville.

Feeling good while doing good forgets that stakeholders always and always navigate social and political issues through a disheartening fog of loneliness. Government, at its best, invites us to wrap ourselves in the mantle of citizenship. This title is infinitely more important than that of stakeholder.

Simon’s logic in the name of stakeholder capitalism is compelling. How to be disappointed by the fervor of millennial workersof which 63% believe that “the primary objective of companies should be to ‘improve society’?”

The condemnation of these new workers will inspire companies to get on the right side of climate change, immigration, health, education, race relations, income equality and countless other issues. The conference room will set us free! The promised land is adjacent to the water fountain!

The problem with Simon’s argument is this: the practices of capitalism are baked into the recipe for structure and cannot be reconciled with genuine altruistic engagement with the aforementioned public issues.

Uncompromising attention (because attention must be paid) to the profits, bottom lines, margin losses and mercenary results that capitalism demands means that the structural system cannot be spiced up with clever substitutes. Mashed potatoes call for butter. Lots of butter. Olive oil can be an alternative, but let’s face it, you’re not eating real mashed potatoes.

Socially minded stakeholders may want companies to do more for the public good; workers may want the companies to which they donate their valuable labor to do more than scan budget sheets and count their stock earnings.

But the truth is harder to accept: capitalism revolves around an ethos of necessary exploitation – resources, time, labor – essential to the momentum and success of the structure. No sugar or gluten in this birthday cake? You may as well eat porridge. And everyone knows it.

The disturbing crux of Simon’s meditation is the resignation she projects on politics and governance. Yes, polls confirm that the federal government is among our least trusted cultural institutions. Yes, partisanship has too long acted as the purpose for the government.

After:Two-party system like a “flesh-eating virus” that kills from within, we need a third

But we also know that self-government can push us to confront issues at local, regional and national/global levels that take us beyond the easy belief of stakeholder capitalism that “ethical behavior” will follow when corporations revel in of their “social purpose”.

Stakeholder capitalism will never achieve this public spirit. It draws on our private feelings, feelings of complacency, easy engagement, detached stewardship as social conscience.

Make no mistake: stakeholder capitalism is your great-grandmother’s capitalism. It is the capitalism of Henry Ford and British Petroleum, of Mark Zuckerberg and Steven Jobs. He is implacable, indifferent and indifferent to the public good. The more things change, the more they stay the same. You do not believe me ? Check your wallet.

Unlike Ronald Reagan about the anxieties that follow when the government knocks on the door and offers help, we must seize the opportunities the government offers to solve pressing public problems. COVID-19 vaccines were not isolated industry triumphs. The government mattered. Hitler’s fascism was not defeated in the workshop. The government mattered.

But government cannot be a passive business. We must be responsible for the practices that genuine self-government requires: we need government, as Lincoln knew, to do what we cannot do on our own, things we can accomplish when we work towards ideals greater than ourselves.

Instead of stakeholders, we need citizens. Instead of socially conscious businesses, we need to double down on self-government and regain public trust.

Langston Hughes understood this well: America can become America again. Not because of compassion capital, but because we believe in each other.

Jeff Kurtz lives in Newark, Ohio, and teaches at Denison University in Granville.

read more
Self government

America Needs Autonomy, Not “Compassionate” Capitalism

Jim Simon’s defense of stakeholder capitalism (November 13) should invite a chorus of responses. Mine runs along two tracks. First, Simon’s optimistic look at stakeholder capitalism blurs the structural commitments that make capitalism, well, capitalism.

Following: Can American businesses meet needs that the government is not meeting?

And second, its belief that an enlightened corporate sector can overcome public problems masks a dangerous paradox: such insistence will force one to embrace debilitating restrictions on privacy.

Jeff Kurtz lives in Newark, Ohio, and teaches at Denison University in Granville.

Feeling good by doing good ignores the fact that stakeholders always navigate social and political issues through a disheartening fog of loneliness. Government, at its best, invites us to wrap ourselves in the mantle of the citizen. This title is infinitely more important than stakeholder.

Simon’s logic on behalf of stakeholder capitalism seems compelling. How can you be disappointed with the fervor of millennial workers, 63% of whom believe the “primary goal of businesses should be to improve society?” “

Sentencing of these new workers will prompt companies to side with climate change, immigration, healthcare, education, race relations, income equality and countless other issues. . The boardroom will set us free! The Promised Land is adjacent to the water fountain!

The problem with Simon’s argument is this: the practices of capitalism are baked into the recipe for structure and cannot be reconciled with genuine altruistic engagement with the aforementioned public issues.

Uncompromising attention (because attention must be paid) to profit, to results, to loss of margin and to the mercenary productions demanded by capitalism means that the structural system cannot be adorned with intelligent substitutes. Mashed potatoes call for butter. Lots of butter. Olive oil can be an alternative, but let’s face it, you aren’t eating real mashed potatoes.

Socially minded stakeholders may aspire to see companies do more for the public good; workers may want the companies they give their valuable work to to do more than sift through budget sheets and count their profits in shares.

But the truth is more difficult to accept: capitalism rests on a necessary ethics of exploitation – of resources, time, work – essential to the momentum and the success of the structure. No sugar or gluten in this birthday cake? You can also eat porridge well. And everyone knows it.

The troubling knot of Simon’s meditation is the resignation it projects on politics and governance. Yes, polls confirm that the federal government is one of our least trusted cultural institutions. Yes, partisanship has acted like the purpose for the government.

Following: Two-party system like a “flesh-eating virus” that kills from within, we need a third

But we also know that self-government can push us to confront issues at the local, regional and national / global levels that push us beyond the easy belief of stakeholder capitalism that ‘ethical behavior’ will follow when decisions are made. companies will revel in their “social purpose”.

Stakeholder capitalism will never achieve this public spirit. His claim is about our private feelings, our feelings of self-righteousness, easy engagement, detached stewardship as a social conscience.

Make no mistake: Stakeholder capitalism is your great-grandmother’s capitalism. It is the capitalism of Henry Ford and British Petroleum, of Mark Zuckerberg and of Steven Jobs. She is relentless, indifferent and indifferent to the public good. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Do not believe me ? Check your wallet.

Contrary to Ronald Reagan’s mind about the anxieties that arise when government knocks on doors and offers to help, we must seize the opportunities the government offers to resolve pressing public issues. COVID-19 vaccines weren’t isolated triumphs of the industry. The government mattered. Hitler’s fascism was not defeated in the fabrication shop. The government mattered.

But government cannot be a passive business. We need to be accountable for the practices that genuine self-government requires: we need government, as Lincoln knew, to do what we cannot do for ourselves, things we can accomplish when we work towards ideals greater than ourselves.

Instead of actors, we need citizens. Instead of socially conscious businesses, we need to redouble our efforts on self-government and regain public trust.

Langston Hughes got it right: America can become America again. Not because of compassion, but because we believe in each other.

Jeff Kurtz lives in Newark, Ohio, and teaches at Denison University in Granville.

This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: America Needs Autonomy, Not American Corporate Government

read more
Self government

Is self-government the answer to the Canada-Indigenous relationship?

From the lack of clean water in some Indigenous communities to the lingering anger over residential schools, Canada’s relationship with its Indigenous citizens needs to be repaired. Symbols like lowering the Canadian flag or declaring a national holiday may score political points, but they do not address any of the main concerns of Indigenous Canadians. One proposed solution is to take Ottawa out of the equation and let Indigenous communities govern themselves. Another is to open the doors to economic development – ​​both resource and otherwise.

In this edition of The Andrew Lawton Show, we discuss the economic and political climate surrounding First Nations in Canada. Joining the discussion are public policy expert Melissa Mbarki, an Indigenous veteran of the oil and gas industry, and researcher Heather Exner-Pirot, both of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.


We ask readers, like you, to help support the factual and independent journalism of True North.

Unlike mainstream media, True North does not receive a government bailout. Instead, we depend on the generosity of Canadians like you.

How can a media outlet be trusted to remain neutral and fair if it receives government assistance? We don’t think they can.

This is why independent media in Canada is more important than ever. If you can, please make a tax-deductible donation to True North today. Thank you so much.

read more
Self government

Nunavut Inuit organization plans to seek self-government

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., which represents approximately 30,000 Inuit in Nunavut, plans to advance self-government negotiations.

“What we would like to see is that there are better services provided to the Inuit of Nunavut that incorporate Inuit worldviews and end the current model of public government,” said NTI President, Aluki Kotierk.

It is good that the Government of Nunavut, established when the territory was created in 1999 by the Nunavut Act, was intended to serve its majority Inuit population.

But it hasn’t worked after 22 years, as evidenced by widespread poverty, hunger and a high incidence of suicide, Kotierk said.

“All of these different determinants that would determine whether or not lives are improving continue to be alarming. And so, it makes us think, is there a better way to meet the needs?” she told CBC.

“When we work with the Government of Nunavut, or want these specific programs, the answer is often, ‘But this is public government.'”

Therefore, NTI, which is the entity responsible for protecting the rights of Inuit under the Nunavut Agreementmust seek alternative means to meet the specific needs of Inuit, she said.

A resolution to this effect was passed Nov. 16 by delegates at NTI’s Annual General Meeting in Rankin Inlet.

Nunavut agreement not honored

According to Kotierk, one of the ways the public government has failed the Inuit is by not respecting some of the articles of the Nunavut Agreement, which was signed by the Inuit and the federal government in 1993 and sets out the Inuit land and other rights in the territory.

These include section 23, for example, which covers Inuit employment in the public service.

The article states that Inuit employment should reflect the percentage — approximately 85% of the 39,000 population — of the territory’s Inuit population.

A presentation on self-government at the annual general meeting noted that the goal was never achieved. A June territorial government report shows that Inuit make up only 50% of the Government of Nunavut’s workforce and only 20% of senior management.

This impacts how programs and services are designed and developed and the well-being of Nunavummiut, Kotierk said.

The result is “very evident in the way we continue to self-harm and the way we continue to have violent outbursts in our communities,” Kotierk said.

“And these are just symptoms of what continues to happen in our communities, and the system of public government is supposed to help alleviate this. And instead, it continues to deteriorate our sense of well-being.”

Kotierk, center, appears in the Nunavut Court of Justice in Iqaluit to file a lawsuit against the Government of Nunavut in October 2021. The lawsuit alleged that the Government of Nunavut discriminates against Inuit by not providing education in Inuktut at the same level as English and French. (Nick Murray/CBC News)

Legal action for discrimination in progress

The resolution comes after a year of disputes with the Nunavut government. In October, NTI filed a lawsuit against the Government of Nunavut alleging that it discriminates against Inuit by not offering education in Inuktut to the same degree as English or French.

Also in October, NTI considered a lawsuit over a change made by the Government of Nunavut to the way taxes are collected on Inuit-owned land.

Earlier this week, NTI’s presentation offered three options for AGM delegates to consider: reach an agreement with the Government of Nunavut to take over the services; develop NTI’s ability to provide services directly to Inuit; or committing the federal government to establishing formal self-government in Canada.

“If we pursue the comprehensive land claims approach, we know it will take many years,” Kotkierk said. “But we also know that if we go through an agreement right now that takes some responsibility for public services, that could be something that could start to address some of the issues that we have in our communities more immediately.”

As a first step, the adopted resolution asks the organization to obtain this negotiation mandate with the federal government.

“I think we’ve now been instructed to do the practical work of going to the federal government to ask for this warrant,” Kotierk said. “And we will work with our board of directors to come up with a constitution or a vision statement.”

A change of direction

But now there is a new player on the NTI field, new Premier PJ Akeeagok, who was elected Premier by his colleagues on Wednesday.

PJ Akeeagok speaks to the media following his selection as Premier of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut on Wednesday. (David Gunn/CBC)

Prior to entering land politics, Akeeagok led the Qikiqtani Inuit Association and served on the board of directors of NTI, where he supported the decision for self-government.

On Thursday, the day after his selection, Kotierk spoke to Akeeagok about areas they can work on.

“I suspect he will be very supportive of all the things Inuit organizations are trying to achieve through Inuit self-determination,” she said.

The two plan to meet on Monday, Kotierk said.

read more
Self government

Local Self-Government Forum in Ukraine: a key annual event

What is the agenda for democratic governance in Ukraine and other parts of Europe? What are the main achievements and challenges of the decentralization reform underway in Ukraine? What will be the constitutional amendments on decentralization and reform of state representation at sub-national levels?

These issues were addressed in the framework of the VI Forum on Local Self-Government in Ukraine, held on November 11-12, 2021. Other issues included: the right of association of local authorities; democratic governance in metropolitan areas; the development of mountain areas; protection of the rights of internally displaced persons.

The Local Self-Government Forum has been organized annually since 2017 to discuss the development of local self-government in Ukraine, including in conflict-affected regions (Donetsk and Luhansk). In 2021, the Center of Expertise for Good Governance, together with national partners, widened the target audience, and the Forum became a national level with the participation of local authorities from all over Ukraine.

The 2021 Forum brought together more than 750 participants from Ukraine via an online platform and 65 speakers. In addition, more than 1,100 viewers followed the broadcast live via social media, and National Broadcaster Radio posted 10 interviews with Forum speakers and guests.

In her video address, Ms Snežana Samardžić-Marković, Director General for Democracy, underlined that “… the good news is that you are not alone… at your request, the Council of Europe will continue to do its best. to support Ukraine in its efforts to improve democratic governance and respect for human rights and the rule of law.

The event was organized by the Center of Expertise for Good Governance through its program “Strengthening decentralization and reform of public administration in Ukraine” in cooperation with the Parliamentary Committee on State Building, Local Governance, Regional and Urban Development, Ukrainian Ministry of Community and Territory Development, Donetsk Oblast State Administration, Lviv Oblast State Administration and Luhansk Oblast State Administration.

read more
Self government

The Messenger – Second round of self-government elections took political polarization to a new level

The Messenger – Second round of self-government elections took political polarization to a new level<br>

Messenger logo

By Malkhaz Matsaberidze

Thursday November 11

The second round of autonomous elections on October 30 gave the results announced by the ruling National Movement. The authorities won the expected victory everywhere except Tsalenjikha. However, according to the opposition, fair and equitable elections no longer took place in Georgia and the Georgian Dream did not win, but instead rigged the elections.

The advantage of the Georgian dream winner in number and percentage does not seem very impressive – a few hundred or a thousand votes, which may be less than the number of canceled ballots in the respective constituency. The government and the opposition are trying to present two different images of the elections.

According to Georgian Dream, the elections were held according to all the rules and there can be no doubt that the ruling party will win again. No election will take place in the country before 2024, the country must calm down and start to rebuild itself.

The United National Movement and its affiliated opposition parties speak of outright electoral fraud and stolen victory. The issue of holding early parliamentary elections has not been removed from the opposition’s agenda. On the contrary, the issue of electoral administration reform has become more active and attached, as electoral commissions no longer deserve the trust of the opposition and are seen as falsifiers of election results.

According to the opposition, it is first necessary to open the electoral lists of the enclosure and it will become clear that “electoral carousels” have been turned on behalf of many emigrants or individuals. Name many facts about voter pressure and corruption.

Opposition members are already demanding that the government show the public Mikheil Saakashvili’s situation in any way, even by taking him to court, which the former president was not allowed to do yesterday. Some thought that after the October 30 elections, the government would take Saakashvili to hospital or send him for treatment abroad, say after President Salomé Zourabishvili’s pardon.

But on November 3, the 34th day of Saakashvili’s hunger strike, Zourabishvili declared for the second time that she “would never forgive” Saakashvili. The statements of the leaders of the Georgian Dream do not help to calm the situation either.

The Prime Minister announced that according to the law, “a person has the right to commit suicide”. According to Irakli Kobakhidze, Saakashvili’s hunger is a simulation. But what will happen and how will things turn out if Saakashvili’s body can no longer withstand hunger?

Saakashvili has many supporters and sympathizers who worry about the health of the third president and resort to various forms of protest, including the start of a hunger strike.

Saakashvili himself, despite the worsening situation, remains motivated and goal-oriented, sending messages through his teammates. According to Saakashvili, on October 30, the people won and an electoral revolution took place, and the government falsified the election results.

There is now a post-electoral revolution in Georgia, which must determine the outcome of the electoral revolution. Saakachvili, if he manages to get out of prison, promises to “carry out early elections within 10 days”. In another letter, Saakashvili called on Georgian emigrants to return to their homeland for a day and “that day will come soon”. Such statements by the hungry president are likely to worry the authorities.

Some opposition lawmakers are refusing to stand in the legislative elections in protest. Not all opponents will, but if 37 MPs resign, then constitutional changes will not be possible. The amendments were adopted at first reading on September 7. According to the project, the next two elections, which will be held in the proportional system, will be won by the parties which collect 2% of the vote.

It is in the interest of the small opposition parties. According to Mikheil Saakashvili, the opposition should only leave parliament after the adoption of these changes.

After the second round of elections, the word ?? revolution ?? is heard more and more often. According to one of the leaders of the opposition in this country, “the election has lost its meaning because its results are not written down by the voters”. According to the second leader of the opposition, if extraordinary elections are not organized by 2024, Bidzina Ivanishvili will be able to suffocate all the real opposition parties and only the puppet opposition will remain on the political scene.

Opposition groups have called for a change of government on social media and social media, prompting SUS to announce on November 3 that it has issued public statements calling for “revolution and the violent overthrow of the government, including by violence. The statement says that a person could be jailed for 3 years because of it.

According to the coalition, the government has announced a wave of repression, which will bring Georgia even closer to Belarus. In response, many opponents declared the need for a revolution.

read more
Self government

The Congress held debates on local self-government in Cyprus and North Macedonia, as well as recovery from Covid-19, hate speech and fake news, territorial integration, opportunities for young people, relations with the diaspora and Roma integration

On the second day of the 41st session, Wednesday October 27, 2021, the Congress adopted reports on local self-government in Cyprus and North Macedonia. The report on Cyprus was presented by Gunn Marit Helgesen (Norway, EPP / CCE) and Marc Cools (Belgium, GILD). The debate was followed by an exchange with the Cypriot Minister of the Interior Nicos Nouris. Zdenek Broz (Czech Republic, ECR) and Harald Bergmann (Netherlands, GILD) presented the report on North Macedonia, which was followed by a statement by the Deputy Minister of Local Self-Government of North Macedonia, Zoran Dimitrovsky, who also answered questions from the floor.

Members of Congress held a plenary debate on “Covid: the road to recovery?” “. The aim was to address the urgent issues facing European cities and regions: how can societies get out of the crisis when the health situation seems to be stabilizing in many European countries? OECD Deputy Secretary General Ulrik Vestergaard-Knudsen underlined the heterogeneity of the economic and social impact of the pandemic between regions. CEB-appointed Governor Carlo Monticelli underlined the role of local and regional authorities as “valuable allies when it comes to delivering high impact social investments to communities most in need”.

Local and regional elected representatives across Europe are faced with the rise of fake news and hate speech in recent years, especially on the Internet and social networks. As such, a thematic debate was organized by the Chamber of Local Authorities in order to determine the responses to be provided and the tools to be developed to meet the challenge of fake news and hate speech. The project will explore ways to detect these phenomena and possible legal and technical actions against them. At the opening of the exercise of the President of the Chamber of Local Authorities, Bernd Vöhringer, drew attention to the increase in hate speech and fake news on the Internet and the impact of these negative phenomena on the working environment for mayors and councilors.

In plenary, Hungary’s State Secretary for Security Policy Péter Sztaray underlined the key priorities of the Hungarian Presidency: artificial intelligence and digitization, protection of national minorities, environmental issues, l anti-Semitism and youth issues during his speech to Parliament Committee of Ministers.

On the same day, the Chamber of Regions debated interregional and cross-border cooperation for better territorial integration in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. The Congress in particular called on member states to use Protocol No. 3 to the Madrid Convention, which constitutes a legal basis for transfrontier co-operation in Europe. Congress also called for special legal provisions for “cross-border communities” with legal status, to overcome obstacles created by different legal regimes on either side of the border, as well as to strengthen cross-border governance and “horizontal subsidiarity” through the transfer of skills and operational resources to cross-border communities.

The Chamber of Regions also discussed the challenges to expand vocational training and lifelong learning for young people at regional level, shared measures and best practices to address these issues, and considered additional measures. that the Congress wishes to undertake on this subject. This was achieved through a debate on lifelong education to ensure / secure lifelong employment prospects for the younger generations, a challenge for the regions.

Members of the Chamber deepened the role of relations with diaspora communities as a contribution to regional development and regional mechanisms to engage diasporas in order to promote commercial and cultural exchanges, attract foreign investment, facilitate technology and knowledge transfer, and to seize other socio-economic benefits of diaspora ties during its third debate on Wednesday morning.

At the opening of the session, the President of the Chamber of Regions, Harald Sonderegger, called for a re-decentralization of powers and resources to the regions and their better distribution with an improved system of multi-level governance. This is because during the Covid-19 crisis, many powers were recentralized to the national executive and many decisions were taken without proper consultations with regional authorities – despite the multi-level governance that s has proven to be more efficient and flexible in responding to the pandemic. , when it was used.

Also on the agenda is the Dosta! -Congress Prize awarded to municipalities in Portugal, Greece and the United Kingdom for initiatives aimed at integrating Roma and Travelers. The first place went to the Portuguese municipality of Torres Vedras, which has drawn up a unique plan strengthening cohesion between local communities and the Roma. The second place was awarded to the Greek municipality of Argostoli for the improvement of the living conditions of the Roma community, the conditions of school attendance of children, as well as for housing and health care support for the population. rom on the island of Kefalonia. British Salford won the 3rd prize for the implementation of an educational exhibition.

The Chamber of Local Authorities elected John Warmisham (UK, SOC / G / PD) and Oksana Derkach (Ukraine, EPP / CCE) respectively 6th and 7th Vice-President.

Videos of the proceedings: Plenary session | Chamber of Local Authorities | Chamber of Regions

*** 41st Congress Session ***

Agenda – Documents: ENG | FRA | DEU | ITA | RUS
41st session webpage: live stream, photos, videos and useful links

read more
Self government

The Congress will organize debates on local self-government in Spain and the Netherlands, as well as on migration, housing sharing platforms and the projects of young delegates

In his opening communication of the 41st session, on October 26, 2021, Congress President Leendert Verbeek recalled the importance of the European Charter of Local Self-Government as an unprecedented international treaty, unique in the world and testifying to the importance that the Council of Europe and its member states attach to local self-government. At the same time, he underlined the impact of the cuts in the budget allocated to Congress to carry out its tasks. The Bureau of the Congress will continue its ongoing discussions aimed at strengthening the capacity of the Congress to implement its priorities.

At their plenary session on the same day, members adopted a report on the situation of local self-government in Spain, presented by Bryony Rudkin (UK, SOC / V / DP) and David Eray (Switzerland, GILD), and a report on local self-government in the Netherlands, presented by Vladimir Prebilić, (Slovenia, SOC / G / PD).

The report on “Housing sharing platforms: challenges and opportunities for municipalities” was presented by Jelena Drenjanin (Sweden, EPP / CCE), rapporteur and chair of the Governance Committee. The Congress calls on local authorities to adopt a long-term vision of cohabitation practices which must be framed by flexible, simplified and accessible regulations, including various tools such as building permits, town planning, taxation and health and Security. standards.

The Congress also discussed the challenges of migration issues for cities and regions during a debate on “Migration: permanent challenges for cities and regions”, organized with the participation of Ambassador Drahoslav Štefánek, Special Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe on migration and refugees, and Erini Dourou (Greece, SOC / G / PD), Congress rapporteur on migration issues. The debate highlighted the need for coordination between all levels of government, a clear and coherent legislative framework at European level and support from national governments and at European level to enable local and regional authorities to implement policies for the reception and integration of migrants and refugees.

Members of Congress also reviewed the field projects carried out by the 38 young delegates as part of the “Rejuvenating Politics” initiative that has been running for the past two years. Projects implemented in 2020 focused on youth participation during a pandemic with a particular focus on cross-cultural exchanges, mental health, community bonds and targeting fake news. The objective of the 2021 projects is to promote communication between youth workers and representatives of local communities.

*** 41st Congress Session ***

Agenda – Documents: ENG | FRA | DEU | ITA | RUS
41st session webpage: live stream, photos, videos and useful links

read more
Self government

Local self-government elections will take place in Armenia

The first municipal elections organized under a new local voting format will be held today in Armenia. Before June 2020,

Photo: OSCE Parliamentary Assembly

The first municipal elections organized under a new local voting format will be held today in Armenia.

Before June 2020, multi-day local elections in Armenia resulted in the direct appointment of city mayors. In contrast, today’s elections will see voters elect individual candidates, who will then form city councils which will choose new mayors.

The electoral threshold was also reduced to 4% for political parties and 6% for coalitions, against 6% and 8% respectively. Since today’s election was originally scheduled to take place on an earlier date, two more election days are scheduled for November 14 and December 5.

In the medium and long term, expect that the change in the electoral threshold will strengthen the pluralities of parties and national minorities. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, however, has appointed acting mayors – who are also running for office – as the dates for the current municipal elections exceed the five-year term limits of incumbent mayors. As such, expect deputy mayors to have access to greater administrative resources than their opponents. With Pashinyan’s popularity continuing in rural areas, expect the acting mayors appointed by Pashinyan to receive a large chunk of the rural vote, thus consolidating the administration’s political influence in various municipalities across the country.

Wake up smarter with a review of the stories that will make the headlines in the next 24 hours. Download The Daily Brief.

read more
Self government

Kerala Local Self-Government Department relaxes earth excavation standards for house construction

From now on, the building permit will be sufficient to prepare the specific land for foundation work by earthworks or for leveling the land.

The Department of Local Self-Government has relaxed the standards for land extraction as part of house-building activities. The building permit will be sufficient to make the specific land ready for foundation work by excavating earth or for leveling the land.

In the case of those applying for mining transit passes, details should be submitted with the construction plan when applying for the permit to the respective local body. The applicant must submit the area of ​​the land to be leveled, the quantity of soil to be extracted for construction and the dimensioned plan and sectional drawing.

Local body officials who perform site inspections before approving the building permit should also assess the area of ​​land to be excavated as submitted with the construction plan.

Subdivisions of plots

The previous requirement for a development permit for such excavations has been removed. The development permit is now only applicable in cases where subdivisions are carried out. In such cases, the development permit must also be approved together with the permit and the building plan.

In cases where a mining pass is required, a copy of the building permit and plan must be sent to the district geologist within three days of the permit being approved. During inspections at the plinth level by the officials of the local body, it should be checked whether more earth excavation than indicated in the construction plan has been carried out, in which case this should be reported to the secretary of the local body.

read more
Self government

Without self-government, Indigenous Peoples Day does not honor the Wabanaki tribes of Maine

The Opinion BDN section operates independently and does not set newsroom policies or contribute writing or writing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on

Clarissa Sabattis is leader of the Maliseet band in Houlton. Kirk Francis is the leader of the Penobscot Nation.

To celebrate Indigenous Peoples Day, you must first appreciate and respect Indigenous peoples. You must understand the importance of the inherent sovereignty which is the backbone of our heritage and our culture. You must trust us for the autonomy. The only real way to celebrate the indigenous people of Maine is to change the system that treats us differently from all other tribes in the country.

Due to a 40-year-old settlement called the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act, the Wabanaki tribes of Maine generally have more restrictions on our rights than the 570 other federally recognized tribes across the country. The settlement resulted from a federal lawsuit, based on claims by the Passamaquoddy tribe and the Penobscot nation in the 1960s and 1970s that Maine illegally took two-thirds of state land from tribes in direct violation of federal law.

Finally, in 1980, the land claims of the Passamaquoddy Tribe, the Penobscot Nation and the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians were settled amicably through a settlement agreement and state law. , the Maine Implementation Act. At the time, our tribes believed that we would be partners with the state and not be treated as wards of the state. Our tribes believed that we would be able to redeem the lands promised in the laws, build our tribal governments, and uplift our communities and economies.

The Federal Settlement Act states that any law passed by Congress for the benefit of Native tribes after 1980 does not apply in Maine if that law affects state jurisdiction, unless Congress specifically includes them. tribes of Maine. While the Wabanaki tribes are not specifically included, we do not benefit from them, unlike the other 570 tribes recognized by the federal government. Since 1980, there have been 151 beneficial laws for the Indian country. These laws cover the gamut from the protection of Wabanaki women against the epidemic of violence against indigenous women to the protection of the environment and access to safe drinking water.

Maine has interpreted state law, Maine’s implementing law, to place tribes under the control of the state. The intention of federal and state law was for tribes and state to work together and solve problems that the settlement law could not foresee. This is why the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission was created. But unfortunately the commission did not play this role of intermediary between the State and the tribal sovereigns. So what happened instead?

For more than 40 years the tribes and the state have been in costly litigation. The state chose to keep paternalistic and aggressively defend the relics of its colonial power over the tribes. And what did it do? It has caused lasting damage to rural communities by interfering with the ability of tribes to provide basic government services, pursue economic development, and take advantage of the benefits and funding provided by federal law.

For example, the state’s treatment of tribes has encouraged foreign mining companies to target Maine due to the perceived lack of Indigenous rights.

Last July, Ron Little, CEO of Wolfden Resources, a Canadian mining company, said in an investor presentation, “there are no indigenous rights in the state of Maine” and that this lack of indigenous rights ” simplifies the authorization process ”.

In all other states, tribes have a seat at the table and can work with federal, state, and local government to create mutually beneficial results. In Maine we face a government that has consistently fought our efforts to protect the environment and we have it now. We shouldn’t have to fight foreign companies to protect our land and our drinking water. Yet this is what we must do because the state largely ignores the rights of the Wabanaki.

Our sovereignty, our right to self-determination, our ability to grow as a community ended in 1980 and the pain persists today. The tribes could not have foreseen the distress in which future generations would have to live because of the colonization law.

We were personally just children at the time. We are not here to debate the intentions of the people who sat around the table in 1980. We are here to say that now – more than a generation removed from the Settlement Act – the law needs to be modernized.

The Maine legislature has investigated and reviewed the Settlement Act and is about to approve a significant change that will put Maine tribes on an equal footing with tribes across the country. There is currently legislation, LD 1626, in Augusta that would remedy much of what afflicts the tribes of Maine.

LD 1626, if passed, will show that people understand, trust and appreciate the tribes of Maine. When this law is passed and hopefully signed by the governor, we can all truly celebrate Indigenous Peoples Day. Until the system is changed, Indigenous Peoples Day does not honor the Wabanaki tribes.

read more
Self government

Letters to the Editor, September 26, 2021: Rational Self-Government column is a troubling notion | Letters

“Rational autonomy”

column a disturbing notion

David Marion’s recent commentary column, “Voting Rules and Rational Self-Government,” leaves a disturbing impression.

He defines his position by asking rhetorical questions, such as “Who, after all, wants incompetent, ill-informed, or ad hoc governance, deliberations, voting or decision-making?” – as an argument for his call for voting rules and rational autonomy. He calls on the American people to follow the example of the founders of our country, as set out in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Those who disagree with his argument practice “power politics”, which he seems to define as “emphasizing the importance of individual will or desires in governance”.

Our founding fathers established a number of positive principles as the foundation of self-government. However, it is clear that they have also practiced “power politics” in a number of compromises around fundamental issues, such as the restriction of the freedoms and rights of enslaved individuals.

The politics of power frequently determine the design of electoral districts. The aggressive efforts of many states to adopt restrictive voting rules are certainly power policies designed to limit voting opportunities for those seen as a threat to the grip of power by those in office. If the United States is to finally deliver on its equal rights promise, we must focus on the right to vote and improve, not restrict, access to voting opportunities.

read more
Self government

Chronicle Stepankowsky: Knowledge of history is essential for self-government | Chroniclers

Boston’s Old South Meeting House brings history to life and reminds you that it repeats itself often.

It was here, for example, that 5,000 Bostonians protested against British taxes, prompting settlers to dump 342 cases of imported British tea into Boston Harbor on December 16, 1773.

Just outside the 300-year-old brick walls, a sidewalk medallion marks the location of the Boston massacre, when nine British soldiers fired at settlers rioting against the presence of redcoat troops in Boston March 5, 1770. The first of five victims was docker Crispus Attucks, who was of African and indigenous descent. He and the other four are buried in the nearby cemetery, next to Samuel Adams.


You can almost imagine Adams’ voice ringing and echoing through the white walls and galleries of the Old South Meeting House. A failed brewer but a gifted orator and politician, Adams is known as one of the fathers of the American Revolution. He was a signatory of the Declaration of Independence. He propagated the Boston Massacre and helped organize the Correspondence Committees, which coordinated affairs and civic resistance to British rule.

Sadly, I would bet that more people today know Samuel Adams as a 21st century beer company than as a patriot. And this is one of the points of this column.

People also read …

Yes. My daughter and I visited the Samuel Adams Brewery (not related to the revolutionary except for his name) on a four day visit to Boston earlier this month. The tour quenched both my thirst for beer and eastern seafood. It also fulfilled my need to refresh and deepen my understanding of our nation’s roots during this time of upheaval.

Boston, then a city of nearly 16,000 inhabitants (a little larger than Kelso), became the cradle of the American Revolution. I learned that the British had sent around 4,000 troops to the city and ordered the settlers to pay to quarter them. Bostonians got angry when their city became a military fortress.

Yet about half of the city has remained loyal to the British Crown. Imagine how much the Loyalist businessmen must have felt when the Correspondence Committees “asked” them not to do business with the British. It looks a bit like the companies’ pinch today to exclude opponents of masks and vaccines.

We have learned that John Adams, who later became the second president of this country, was the lawyer who successfully defended the British soldiers who killed Crispus Attucks and the other victims of the Boston Massacre. Adams, like all Founding Fathers, abhorred mob rule. During the soldiers’ trial, he portrayed Attucks as a terrifying figure who led an intimidating mob against British soldiers. However, Adams (a first cousin of Sam Adams) later took inspiration from Attucks’ actions.

Without a doubt, the British viewed Attucks and his countrymen as thugs. Doesn’t this reflect the clamor for the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol, seen by myself and most Americans as the work of a mob, but as a patriotic act? by a few? History is often in the eye of the beholder.

Visiting Boston’s many historic sites leaves you convinced that British authority over its settlers was stubborn and harsh. Yet were their actions so horrific as to warrant a bloody revolution? Most of the settlers’ objections were to the Townsend Acts, which required the American colonies to pay for the North American war against France and to protect the settlers from the native tribes. Sounds reasonable. But the settlers oppose it, shouting “no taxation without representation”. Americans today share that independence, as do many who resist vaccine and mask mandates, legal and justifiable as they are.

The real value of tours like this is to be grounded in history, to be inspired by it, and to understand that it is not one-dimensional, as is often taught in schools. How cool, for example, to see Paul Revere’s pistol, which he perhaps carried on his famous nighttime ride and which reminds us of the risks the early Patriots took to build this nation. (British soldiers detained Revere briefly before he could complete his entire mission).

Visiting the homes and graves of our revolutionary patriots, visiting the places where they worked and spoke, makes history more tangible and sparks thoughts and questions, even action plans. Invoking the founders of our nation today to guide decisions is a risky controversial strategy. Who knows what they would have thought of modern problems, however complex and burdensome they are? They had flaws: they were prejudiced (the majority of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were slave owners), excluded (only wealthy white males could vote in early U.S. history), and suspected to give too much power to the people.

Yet understanding their motivations – as well as the pressures and conflicts they faced – inspires and reminds us that they have grappled successfully with the same basic questions we still grapple with today: what is the appropriate role of government? When is violent resistance justified? How far should the popular will reign? When does the good of many outweigh the good of the individual?

Unfortunately, knowledge of our history is woefully poor. The 2020 Annenberg Constitution Civics Survey, for example, found that half of American adults could not name all three branches of government. A 2018 survey found that only one in three Americans could pass the civics exam for U.S. citizenship.

Knowing our history is essential for self-government. An inscription in the magnificent Boston Public Library reminds us: “The Commonwealth requires the education of the people as a safeguard of order and freedom.

Maybe more of us should visit Boston.

Andre Stepankowsky retired in August 2020 after a 41-year career as the city’s reporter and editor at The Daily News. He has won or shared many prestigious journalism awards, including the 1981 Staff Pulitzer Prize for coverage of Mount St. Helens. His column will appear on the editorial page every other Wednesday.

read more
Self government

It’s time for Sabah to achieve self-government status – Jeffrey

Jalumin Bayogoh (seated left) and Yong Teck Lee (right) watching Sabah Day. celebration via the Zoom screen.

KOTA KINABALU: STAR President Datuk Seri Dr Jeffrey Kitingan has said it is time for Sabah to achieve self-government status.

According to him, Sabah Day, when published in the Gazette, complements Malaysia’s training.

“This will open the door to more opportunities for Sabah in the future and elevate the status of Sabah as a region which was announced by the eighth Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin in Sarawak earlier this year,” Jeffrey added in his recorded speech for the 58th Sabah. Celebration of the day broadcast online using the Zoom app.

The Deputy Chief Minister is very optimistic that Sabah Day will be published in the Official Gazette and will become the official celebration of Sabah from next year.

“The chief minister basically approved the publication in the Sabah Day Gazette, just like the other members of the Cabinet,” he added.

Jeffrey also said the proposal document was being finalized and would be tabled in Cabinet for further action.

Yesterday’s Sabah Day celebration was broadcast live hybrid from the SAPP headquarters in Likas, Kota Kinabalu.

He had to stand virtually due to SOP compliance.

A total of 300 participants participated in the video conference comprising leaders of SAPP, STAR and party members as well as activists from various NGOs such as Mosik, Sorak Sabah, Mondopitan, Padaras and others.

Veteran political figure Datuk Haji Mohd Noor Mansoor called on Sabah rulers to act bolder and immediately realize the dream of publishing on Sabah Day.

“If Sarawak can proudly celebrate July 22 every year since 2016 as Sarawak Day, why not us with Sabah Day,” he said.

The former finance minister in the Berjaya government also called on the people of Sabah to always be united and not to follow an immature political culture.

He also recalled that Malaysia was not formed as a new Federation until September 16, 1963, 58 years ago.

Recalling the events of August 31, 1963, he said that Sir William Goode, Governor of North Borneo (Sabah) issued a declaration regarding Sabah Day, Sabah autonomy and Sabah independence ending rule British.

SAPP Chairman Datuk Yong Teck Lee has high hopes and is confident that Sabah Day is published in the Official Gazette and officially celebrated by the government every August 31st will become a reality.

Yong also expressed his enthusiasm for the positive developments among Sabah residents, legal entities and political leaders who have started to put the hashtag “Sabah Day” in the social media network.

“Sabah Day is our common struggle, 2023 is one of the greatest challenges of celebrating the 60th Diamond Jubilee of Sabah Day. Hopefully we can celebrate it on a large scale all over Sabah, ”he added.

Yong, who is also an appointed state assembly member, called on activists to continue their efforts to educate the community about Sabah’s history and to work hard to promote Sabah Day.

Japiril Suhaimin, the third chairperson organizing the celebration, concluded that the celebration of Sabah Day has proven that SAPP and STAR have always been consistent in their struggle.

He thanked all participants from all over Sabah as well as overseas Sabahans staying in the peninsula.

He added that in addition to participating through the Zoom app, the organizers also shared it via Facebook live.

read more
Self government

President Zurabishvili confirms October 2 for local autonomy elections

Georgian President Salomé Zurabishvili has confirmed October 2 as the date for Georgia’s autonomous local elections.

Several hours before Zurabishvili confirmed the date of the elections, the Georgian parliament elected Giorgi Kalandarishvili as the new chairman of the Central Election Commission for a six-month term on August 3.

On July 28, the ruling Georgian Dream party revoked its status as a signatory to the EU-brokered April 19 deal that resolved a six-month political crisis in the country following the 2020 parliamentary elections and brought proposed large-scale electoral and judicial reforms.

The leader of the ruling party, Irakli Kobakhidze, said the agreement “had served its purpose” and accused opposition parties of failing to honor it.

Kobakhidze also said holding the October 2 municipal elections as part of the EU-negotiated deal when opposition parties refuse to sign it would be “harmful to Georgia’s interests.”

Irakli Kobakhidze noted that the ruling party is ready to “show good will” and accept the holding of repeated legislative elections even if it obtains 53% of the total vote in the municipal elections, instead of 43% as this was proposed in the EU mediation. agreement.

read more
Self government

Letter to the Editor: The Truth About Local Self-Government | Opinion

The truth about local autonomy

Local self-government began with the recognition of individual rights protecting freedom and taking into account inalienable rights. State autonomy represents the doctrine that created the Confederacy of States, declaring a revolutionary war with England rejecting colonial rule that acted in the name of corporate influence. At the end of this war, the Articles of Confederation were rewritten by a constitution forming “this United States of America”. This was inspired by corporations and their investors to streamline trade with regards to growing as a centralized nation. Until this centralization, local self-government governed the 13 states, including boroughs, cities and townships.

Local self-government was co-opted by the Home Rule Doctrine, and each state could independently choose whether its constitution recognized this doctrine. New Hampshire, the ‘live free or die’ state, turned away from local autonomy and instead specifically stated that any local government authority would be decided by the state and not by the needs and wishes of governing bodies local. This governance structure is known as the doctrine of Dillon’s rule, according to which municipalities are mere tenants of the state and therefore members of the community waive our inalienable rights under a republican form of government. representative.

New Hampshire reflected the arrangement of its state constitution after the Articles of Confederation, having its first part the Bill of Rights, followed by the duties of the branches of the state’s governmental powers. The state retained the town meeting process by which municipalities were authorized to make ordinances (law), but only regarding matters that the state authorized (authorized).

Here, I testify to the blunder of the moral person. We the people must be governed by our consent. Our differences and opinions are always caught up in power struggles for equality, indifference to who rules our collective at all. It is problematic that corporations are recognized as having human rights. Endowed with inalienable and civil rights recognized by the courts, the moral personality upset the whole ideal of freedom and equality. The judges, by their decisions recognizing legal personality, pulled the rug out from under the feet of all the inhabitants of each commune.

Properly understood, local autonomy with all the responsibilities of civility, patience and human decency would follow a brighter path. Without it, we as a nation will never be able to solve the problems of this nation. I am personally of the view that local self-government takes precedence when it is a right and not a privilege bestowed by the state, with due respect to all humanity and central representative governmental authority, from bottom to high.

read more
Self government

Manitoba Metis Federation signs self-government agreement with federal government

According to President David Chartrand, an agreement signed with the Canadian government brings the Manitoba Métis Federation one step closer to its long-awaited official recognition as a government under Canadian law.

Chartrand and Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Carolyn Bennett signed the Manitoba Métis Self-Government Recognition and Implementation Accord on Tuesday at a ceremony at Upper Fort Garry in downtown Winnipeg, home of Louis Riel’s provisional government during the Red River Resistance over 150 years ago.

The agreement sets out steps to formally recognize the jurisdiction of the Manitoba Metis Federation over its citizens, elections and the operations of Métis government. It also recognizes the constitution and the general assembly of the federation, the federation said in a statement.

“Whether it be any party in this country, even the Liberals, we will not give up our rights and our place in Confederation to anyone,” Chartrand said.

“This is ours, we have earned it, we have bled for it and we are dying for it. It is a country that we have built, a province that we have built as a people and we will defend it with everything. what we have. ”

Chartrand said the agreement applies to all Métis in Manitoba, no matter where they live.

The deal builds on a $ 154 million funding agreement signed in 2018.

Tuesday’s announcement took place at Upper Fort Garry Heritage Provincial Park in downtown Winnipeg. (Jeff Stapleton / CBC)

Some of the money was to be invested to improve the social and economic well-being of the Métis in Manitoba, in areas such as housing, health, child care and early learning.

The plan also began a process of working towards a self-government agreement, which would recognize the federation as a Métis government.

At the time, Chartrand said the Métis Federation was forced to structure itself as a society due to federal and provincial laws, which meant that other governments did not recognize its authority.

The agreements follow a 2013 Supreme Court ruling that found the federal government broke a promise made to the Métis people when Manitoba entered Confederation in 1870.

In a 6-2 decision, the highest court in Canada declared that “the federal Crown has failed to implement the land grant provision set out in section 31 of the Manitoba Act of 1870 in accordance with in the honor of the Crown ”.

This section promised to set aside 5,565 square kilometers of land – including what is now the city of Winnipeg – for 7,000 Red River Métis children.

As the federation celebrated its deal on Tuesday, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Grand Chief Arlen Dumas criticized the deal.

In a statement, Dumas said he was “alarmed” that the federal government has signed an agreement with the Manitoba Metis Federation without considering the implications for Manitoba First Nations, who are also negotiating their own self-government agreements and claiming much of the same land as the Métis.

Next steps following the agreement with the Métis Federation include negotiating a treaty and passing implementing legislation in Parliament.

read more
Self government

La Linea de la Concepcion takes another step towards autonomy

La Linea de la Concepcion.

LA LINEA de la Concepcion takes a new step in its autonomy project

The municipal government team of La Línea de la Concepción, in the province of Cádiz, has taken another step in its aspiration for the municipality to become an autonomous community as Ceuta and Melilla, and will present to the ordinary plenary session of July 8 an agreement to launch the procedure allowing the holding of a popular consultation.

The report of this proposal, which will certainly go ahead, since the party that governs the town hall of this municipality of Cádiz, La Línea 100×100, has an absolute majority, and bases its argument on a supporting report prepared by the town hall of La Linea itself, on the advisability of holding this consultation and of addressing the Cortes Generales and the Spanish Government the application of the constitutional mechanism – which is provided for in article 144/9 – to obtain the statute of autonomy.

The question to be asked in said consultation is the following: “Do you think it is appropriate for the town hall of La Línea de la Concepción to present a petition to the Spanish government and to the general courts, to request the conversion of the municipality into an autonomous community , in accordance with Article 144 a) of the Spanish Constitution? “.

The achievement of this objective would allow this municipality to benefit from an organic-functional government regime, of competence and policy similar to that established in the autonomous regions of Ceuta and Melilla.

In any case, as the town hall indicated in its press release, it would be up to the Cortes Generales to grant the possibility of providing La Línea de la Concepción, through an organic law, with the condition of becoming a autonomous community, as indicated by


Thanks for reading and don’t forget to check The Euro Weekly News for all your up-to-date local and international news.

read more
Self government

La Linea de la Concepcion takes a new step towards self-government

La Linea de la Concepción.

LA LINEA de la Concepcion takes a new step in its autonomy project

The team of the municipal government of La Línea de la Concepción, in the province of Cádiz, has taken a new step in its aspiration for the municipality to become an autonomous community like Ceuta and Melilla, and will present the ordinary plenary session of July 8 , an agreement to initiate the procedure allowing the holding of a popular consultation.

The report of this proposal, which will certainly go ahead, since the party that governs the Town Hall of this municipality of Cadiz, La Línea 100 × 100, has the absolute majority, and bases its argument on a justifying report prepared by the Municipality of La Linea itself, on the advisability of holding this consultation and directing to the Cortes Generales and the Spanish government the application of the constitutional mechanism – which is provided for in article 144/9 – to obtain the statute of autonomy .

The question to be asked in the said consultation is the following: “Do you think that it is appropriate for the town hall of La Línea de la Concepción to address a request to the Spanish government, and to the general courts, to request the conversion of the municipality? as an autonomous community, in accordance with article 144 a) of the Spanish Constitution? “.

The achievement of this objective would allow this municipality to benefit from an organic-functional regime, of competence and of political government similar to that established in the autonomous regions of Ceuta and Melilla.

In any case, as indicated by the town hall in its press release, it would be up to the Cortes Generales to grant the possibility of providing La Línea de la Concepción, by an organic law, with the condition of becoming an autonomous community, as indicated through


Thanks for reading, and don’t forget to check out The Euro Weekly News for all your up-to-date local and international news.

read more
Self government

Local self-government in Armenia: positive developments but still room for improvement

Despite the positive developments of local self-government in Armenia, the powers of the municipalities have not been extended, their role in the provision of public services remains limited and local authorities do not have sufficient funds, says the monitoring report adopted today by the Council of Europe Congress local and regional authorities, which also provides recommendations to the Armenian government on improving the situation.

The report based on a country visit in May 2019 welcomes the fact that Armenia has ratified all the provisions of the European Charter of Local Self-Government. It also welcomes the consolidation of communities and the government’s legislative initiatives in the area of ​​local referendums, public hearings and financial aid to municipalities.

Despite these good developments, the powers and duties of the municipalities have not been extended to enable them to manage a substantial part of public affairs under their own responsibility. Municipalities have a limited role in the provision of public services, which goes against the principle of subsidiarity.

In addition, there is no legally guaranteed consultation procedure between the State and the municipalities, the local authorities are not adequately involved in the decision-making process concerning their finances and the local authorities are not consulted on the modifications of their territorial limits.

Congress website

read more
Self government

Congress monitors the implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government in the UK

A delegation from the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe followed the application of the Charter in the United Kingdom from 21 to 23 June 2021.

The delegation was composed of the co-rapporteurs Vladimir Prebilič (Slovenia, SOC / G / PD) and Magnus Berntsson (Sweden, EPP / CCE). They held meetings with local and national authorities in the UK to assess the implementation of the Charter. The previous monitoring report and recommendation on local and regional democracy in the UK were adopted in 2014. All meetings were held remotely due to the current health crisis.

The rapporteurs had an exchange of views on the latest developments in the field of local government in the UK with officials from the Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government as well as with the Chairman of the Housing Committee, communities and local governments of the British Parliament. Remote meetings were also scheduled with the Statutory Deputy Mayor of London and representatives of the Greater London Authority.

The delegation had also scheduled remote meetings with officials from the Scottish Department of Social Security and Local Government, the Welsh Parliament, the Assembly of Northern Ireland and the Office of the Secretary of State for Wales.

The Congress delegation met with members of the UK National Delegation to Congress, the Local Government Association (LGA), the Northern Ireland Local Government Association (NILGA), the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA), as well as members of Edinburgh. Belfast City Council and Mayor.

The resulting report will be examined by the Monitoring Committee at one of its forthcoming meetings.

The UK ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government in 1998. Countries that have ratified the Charter are bound by its provisions. The Charter requires the implementation of a minimum set of rights which constitute the fundamental basis of local self-government in Europe. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe ensures that these principles are respected in the 47 member states of the Council of Europe.


Stephanie POIREL, Congress of Local and Regional Authorities
Secretary of the monitoring committee
Telephone: +33 (0) 3 90 21 5184
e-mail: [email protected]

read more
Self government

Bougainville envisages self-government in 2022

Bougainville President Ishmael Toroama has called for his autonomous region of Papua New Guinea to have a self-government in place by next year.

PNG Prime Minister James Marape (right) shakes hands with Ismaël Toroama, president of the Autonomous Region of Bougainville, on February 5, 2021.
Photo: PNG MP Media

Toroama said this was part of the message he conveyed to PNG Prime Minister James Marape during the talks last month.

The talks were the last step in consultations between the two sides on how to proceed with the outcome of the Bougainville independence referendum, held in 2019.

In the non-binding referendum, 97.7% of Bougainvilleas voted for PNG independence. However, the PNG parliament must ratify the result for it to enter into force.

During the talks, Toroama told Marape and his delegation that Bougainville is expected to gain independence by 2025.

While PNG is reluctant to commit to a timeline for independence, the Bougainville Autonomous Government is working to give momentum to preparations to prepare for independence in the region.

In the meantime, Toroama is pushing for self-government as a practical step towards full independence.

Toroama spent the past week in southern Bougainville to launch what the government calls the “Independence Ready Mission” for three constituencies.

At events in Lato, Ramu and Kopi constituencies, the president presented his government’s schedule.

President Toroama said the road would be difficult, but the results of the referendum clearly showed the desire of the people to be an independent sovereign nation.

He called for the unity, hard work and perseverance of the people to accomplish the political destiny of Bougainville.

read more
Self government

Gwich’in leaders lead the way to self-government

For almost 30 years, the Gwich’in Tribal Council has negotiated a self-government agreement with the federal and territorial governments.

The Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement, signed in April 1992, was touted as a necessary first step at the time in restoring Gwich’in control over their lands. It sets out a framework for eventual self-government with the goal of “enabling the Gwich’in to conduct their affairs and administer resources, programs and services as the Gwich’in situation requires.”

Almost three decades later, the process is far from over.


Gwich’in Tribal Council (GTC) Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik estimated that a final self-government agreement would be at least five years away.

“To tell you the truth, we didn’t think self-government would last that long with the negotiation process when we signed the land claim in 1992,” he told Cabin Radio.

“We often thought at the time that self-government would follow in the decade and unfortunately that never materialized. A lot has happened in the 24 years since we started trading – a lot of stops and starts and I know the frustration at times.

A successful self-government agreement for the Gwich’in would see both the federal and territorial governments give the Gwich’in the authority to deliver programs and services, as well as the ability to create and implement laws.


Other Aboriginal communities and regions in the Northwest Territories are pursuing similar agreements.

The Tłı̨chǫ government and the Sahtu community of Délı̨nę both have self-government agreements. Ongoing negotiations include the Inuvialuit, Dehcho First Nations, Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories, and Sahtu Dene and Métis of Colville Lake, among others.

The JWG is now making an effort to advance self-government, according to Kyikavichik.

Negotiators strive to update a tentative agreement that outlines a timeline, framework and goals for a final agreement. The draft document will be presented to the CTG’s Annual General Meeting in Inuvik in August, where Gwich’in citizens can provide comments.

Kyikavichik has made a habit of frequently updating JWG members on Facebook, describing what he is looking for in negotiations and what self-government means to the Gwich’in people.

He said the goal is to help citizens better understand the process and its complexities so that they can share their thoughts and concerns.

CTG Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik in Inuvik. Meaghan Brackenbury / Radio cabin.

“Ultimately they will have to ratify a deal with the Gwich’in government,” Kyikavichik said, “and critical to this process will be a solid understanding of what that can mean, what the impacts are and how things will change. . .

“At the end of the day, we can do all of this great work by negotiating a deal. However, if our people are not behind and support it… then we are not much further ahead than we are today.

What are the T & Cs looking for?

The GTC pursues a regional model of self-government.

Three of the four Gwich’in communities – Aklavik, Tsiigehtchic and Tetlit Zheh (Fort McPherson) – are represented by the GTC in the negotiations.

Nihtat Gwich’in Council in Inuvik has been seeking a separate self-government agreement since 2018, although it remains on the JWG board of directors.

There are seven areas that the JWG has identified as “priority jurisdictions”. These are governance, fiscal relations, housing, land use planning, culture and heritage, economic development and taxation.

Kyikavichik said the hope is to assume authority over these jurisdictions over the next five years.

“Priorities are really what’s important to the Gwich’in,” he explained. “The reason we are seeking a deal on Gwich’in government is to restore our historic methods of government.

“It comes through clear leadership lines at the community level, involving our youth and elders in decision-making, but also understanding that we don’t want government unless it has the funding to do it. to be able to support it. “

Other areas such as health, social services and justice will follow over the next 20 years, Kyikavichik envisages.

Bands and DGO exploded

Along with identifying priority jurisdictions, a key discussion was to determine what sovereign self-government would look like at regional and local levels.

While the Gwich’in Tribal Council is responsible for administering the rights and benefits set out in the land claim at the regional level, the agreement establishes “Designated Gwich’in Organizations” – or DGO, for short – in each of the four Gwich’in in communities to do it locally.

The four DGOs are the Nihtat Gwich’in Council in Inuvik, the Tetlit Gwich’in Council in Fort McPherson, the Gwichya Gwich’in Council in Tsiigehtchic and the Ehdiitat Gwich’in Council in Aklavik.

These organizations are distinct from band councils, which administer the rights and benefits accorded to members under the Indian Act as opposed to land claim – although in Aklavik and Tsiigehtchic, DGOs and band councils do not. one.

“In fact, the organizations were cauterized between designated Gwich’in organizations and Indian Act band councils for the most part,” Kyikavichik explained. “In our larger communities, they are separate organizations, and sometimes the mandates can be different.

“However, the reality is that whether you are a band council or a designated Gwich’in organization, the rights and interests of our people should come first. The plan is to eventually merge the band council and the designated Gwich’in organization into a single community government.

“To do this, we need the active participation of chiefs and band councils, and we have work to do in this regard. “

Community or regional autonomy?

In Inuvik, the Nihtat Gwich’in Council and the Inuvik Native Band are two separate organizations that each serve the city’s Gwich’in. The two have been working together since 2018 to pursue their own self-government agreement.

Chief Robert Charlie-Tetlichi of the Inuvik Indigenous Band said leaders at the time believed the process could work best at the community level.

“Between the Nihtat Gwich’in and the Band, we may be able to come to a self-government agreement sooner rather than going for a regional process,” he said.

The Nihat Gwich’in board has undergone a leadership change, with new chairman Kelly McLeod being elected to the post in March.

Now, McLeod said, the board is “reassessing” where it is in the process and how to proceed. A board meeting in Inuvik was held on Saturday to brief members and discuss whether to pursue their own deal or join the regional deal.

Charlie-Tetlichi said he would like to see the band and council stick together to the community model, but the decision ultimately is “for the members to determine how we move forward.”

“If Nihtat joins the regional process, then the group will also have to meet with its members to see how they want to proceed,” he said.

“We see nothing”

Nihtat Gwich’in Council and the Inuvik Native Band are not alone in reconsidering the regional model.

Fort McPherson is currently one of three communities included in the GTC negotiations. However, Chief Wanda Pascal of the Teetl’it Gwich’in Band Council told Cabin Radio that she plans to call a band meeting next week to reconsider whether to step down.

“This is what we wanted from the start,” Pascal said. “There’s just a small group of people who didn’t like it, but… it’s not mine or my board – it’s the community. I really think I should go back to the community and ask them.

Pascal said the move was prompted by growing frustration within the group – which is separate from Tetlit Gwich’in Council, the designated local organization of the Gwich’in – over a perceived lack of collaboration and financial support from the group. of the GTC.

“The funding that goes to Tribal, they don’t help us at all,” she said. “We don’t see anything. It’s really hard to work with people who don’t want to work together.

“I don’t know how we’re going to work as a regional government if they can’t even work as partners now. It is really frustrating.

Pascal said that she and band representatives would like to go to the AGM in Inuvik in August to discuss these issues, but that they will need to be invited by the CTG.

Cabin Radio has attempted to contact all of the Gwich’in chiefs. Chief Danny Greenland in Aklavik declined an interview request, while Chief Phillip Blake in Tsiigehtchic could not be reached.

Kyikavichik acknowledged that one of the greatest challenges facing the Gwich’in self-government process is the lack of unity.

However, he is committed to working so that each of the communities – including those that go it alone – is once again on the same page.

“One of the things I ran on was to bring our communities together again,” he said. “I have always believed that the four groups and communities are the strongest when we work together.

“I continue to see what we can do to get back to our original intention with the Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement, which called for four communities to work together for the benefit of all Gwich’in.

“It will certainly be a challenge for the future. “


read more
Self government

Self-Government Framework Agreement signed by Canada, the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories and the Government of the Northwest Territories to guide negotiations

FORT SMITH, NT, May 19, 2021 / CNW / – The Government of Canada, the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Northwest Territories signed a framework agreement that will further advance reconciliation, the right to self-determination, work towards building strong Indigenous nations and negotiations on Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories (NWTMN) land claims.

Today, the Honorable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations of Canada, alongside Garry Bailey, President of the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories, Arthur beck, Interim President of the Métis Government of Fort Resolution, Trevor Beck, Chair of the Hay River Métis Government Council, Allan Heron, President of the Fort Smith Métis Council, and the Honorable Caroline Cochrane, Premier of Northwest Territories, signed a Framework Agreement that will pave the way for their vision of self-determination – a prosperous, self-sufficient, healthy, united and self-reliant Métis Nation in the Northwest Territories.

The Self-Government Framework Agreement will guide negotiations towards a final self-government agreement as part of the NWTMN land claims negotiation process. It describes the process of self-government negotiations, including governance of Métis Nation entities of the Northwest Territories, the legal status and capacity of Métis governments, land administration, Métis government finances. , legislative power, implementation plans and elections for Métis government. It also supports the principles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The government of Canada and the government of Northwest Territories remain committed to renewing nation-to-nation and government-to-government relationships with the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories on the basis of affirmation of rights, respect, cooperation and partnership.


“The Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories (NWTMN) is pleased to begin self-government negotiations under the Framework Agreement on Self-Government Negotiations. The self-government negotiations will advance our land claims negotiations, which have been underway since 1996 and have been the missing piece of our land claims negotiations. The negotiation process will allow the NWTMN to advance the self-determination rights and governance interests of our Indigenous Métis members and three Métis councils. Building on our successes to date, we now have the ability to plan for our governance future.

The signing of the Framework Agreement on Self-Government is a key aspect of the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The agreement paves the way for the development of the NWTMN constitution to govern the relationship between the NWTMN, the three Métis government councils and our Indigenous Métis members. Self-government will recognize the NWTMN and Métis Government Councils as legislative authorities with the capacity to continue to provide programs and services to our members in accordance with the NWTMN Constitution. We have a lot of work to do to engage our members about self-government options and negotiations with Canada and the GNWT. The Self-Government Framework Agreement is another positive step for the Métis of the NWTMN and clearly shows the government’s commitment to reaching an agreement with the NWTMN. “

Garry Bailey,
President of the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories

“The Métis Government of Fort Resolution recognizes that self-government is critically important to our members as it will empower the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories (NWTMN) and the councils to effectively manage the lands and Métis finances and to continue to provide programs and services Canada, the government of Northwest Territories and the NWTMN. We have a lot of work to do to mobilize our members and solicit their input to inform the negotiations. We look forward to starting this negotiating process. “

Arthur Beck,
Interim President of the Métis Government of Fort Resolution

“After many years of perseverance and struggle, the Hay River Métis Government Council is pleased that we have reached an agreement on the Self-Government Framework Agreement and recognize that we have a lot of work to do. We look forward to working with our members to develop a constitution and shape self-government for the Métis of the Northwest Territories, which will benefit the Native Métis of the Northwest Territories for generations to come. Métis Nation and Métis Councils, and continue to provide much needed programs and services to our members. “

Trevor Beck,
Hay River Métis Government Council Chair

“The signing of the Framework Agreement on Autonomy is symbolically an important step in Canada and the government of Northwest Territories’ recognition of our status as a Métis nation as an Aboriginal government. The signing of this agreement will allow the Fort Smith Métis Council to intensify its efforts to achieve an Indigenous Métis government that reflects our distinct identity and our continued contribution to Canada and the Northwest Territories. It will also allow the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories and the Métis Councils to be legislative authorities capable of continuing to provide programs and services to our members. “

Allan Heron,
President of the Fort Smith Métis Council

“Our government is committed to working with Indigenous leaders to support their right to self-government. Achieving a self-government agreement will advance reconciliation and recognize and affirm the treaty rights of the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories. The framework agreement is an important step in this process. It is a testament to the work of all parties to find common ground and demonstrates the strength of the relationship we have built. ”

The Honorable Caroline Cochrane,
Premier of the Northwest Territories

“Strong and self-sufficient Indigenous Nations, able to govern effectively and exercise their right to self-determination, are essential to enhancing the well-being and economic prosperity of Indigenous communities in the North. Congratulations and thank you to the president Garry Bailey, President Arthur beck, President Trevor Beck and president Allan Heron for your leadership and determination. By signing this framework agreement today, our government is taking a fundamental step towards advancing reconciliation and transforming our relationship with the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories. ”

The Honorable Carolyn Bennett, MD, PC, MP,
Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations

“Ensuring that Indigenous governments are able to achieve self-government is essential to reconciliation. My congratulations to the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories on this historic milestone, and I look forward to seeing further progress made through this framework agreement.

Michael mcleod,
Deputy, Northwest Territories

Fast facts

  • Section 35 of from Canada Constitution Act, 1982 recognizes the ancestral rights of the first
  • Nations, Inuit and Métis.
  • Today’s announcement marks a key step in the ongoing negotiations to advance reconciliation under this framework agreement.
  • A framework agreement defines the subject of the negotiation and describes how the negotiations will unfold. Negotiations will begin with a view to an Agreement in Principle, a detailed document that forms the basis of a final agreement and addresses most of the issues outlined in the framework agreement.

Related links

Stay logged in

Join the conversation on Indigenous Peoples in Canada:

Twitter: @ GCIndigene
Facebook: @GCIndigenous
Instagram: @gcindigenous

Twitter: @CrownIndigene
Facebook: @CrownIndigenous

You can subscribe to receive our press releases and speeches via RSS feeds. For more information or to register, visit

SOURCE Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada

For further information: media may contact: Ani Dergalstanian, Press Secretary and Communications Advisor, Office of the Honorable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, 819-997-0002; Media Relations: Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, 819-934-2302, [email protected]; Todd Sasaki, Department of Executive and Aboriginal Affairs, Government of the Northwest Territories, 867-767-9168 ext. 15015, [email protected]; President Garry Bailey, Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories, 867-621-2767, [email protected]

read more
Self government

The Congress followed the implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government in Spain

A delegation from the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe followed the application of the Charter in Spain, from 18 to 20 May 2021.

The delegation is made up of rapporteurs Bryony Rudkin (United Kingdom, SOC / G / PD) and David Eray (Switzerland, EPP / CCE). They held meetings with local and national authorities in Spain to assess the implementation of the charter. The previous monitoring report and the recommendation on local and regional democracy in Spain were adopted in 2013. All meetings were held at a distance due to the current health crisis.

The delegation met the Spanish National Delegation to Congress, the national associations of local and regional authorities, the Parliament, the Ombudsman, the Ministry of Territorial Policy and Public Administration, the Ministry of Finance, the Constitutional Court and the Court. accounts. They also met the mayors of Madrid, Ohanes and Valladolid.

The resulting report will be examined by the Monitoring Committee in autumn 2021.

Spain ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government in 1988. The countries which have ratified the Charter are bound by its provisions. The Charter requires the implementation of a minimum set of rights which constitute the fundamental basis of local self-government in Europe. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe ensures that these principles are respected in the 47 member states of the Council of Europe.


Stéphanie POIREL, Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, Secretary of the Monitoring Committee, Tel. : +33 (0) 3 90 21 51 84,
E-mail: [email protected]

See also:

Interview with rapporteur David Eray

read more
Self government

The Congress followed the implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government in North Macedonia

A delegation from the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe followed the application of the Charter in North Macedonia, from 20 to 21 April 2021.

The delegation, made up of the co-rapporteurs on local democracy, Harald Bergmann (Netherlands, GILD) and Zdeněk Brož (Czech Republic, ECR) met the authorities of North Macedonia at local and national levels to discuss the implementation of the Charter. The last report and recommendation on local democracy in the country was adopted in 2012. All meetings will be held remotely due to the current health crisis.

Meetings were held with the North Macedonian national delegation to the Congress, the Association of Local Self-Government Units of the Republic of North Macedonia, the Parliament, the Court of Auditors, the Ombudsman, the ministries of self-government Local and Finance and Constitutional Court. The co-rapporteurs also met the mayors of Skopje, Vinica and Centar Župa.

The resulting report will be examined by the Monitoring Committee.

North Macedonia ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government in 1997. The countries which have ratified the Charter are bound by its provisions. The Charter requires the implementation of a minimum set of rights which constitute the fundamental basis of local self-government in Europe. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe ensures that these principles are respected in the 47 member states of the Council of Europe.


Stéphanie POIREL, Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, Secretary of the Monitoring Committee, Tel. : +33 (0) 3 90 21 51 84,
E-mail: [email protected]

read more
Self government

Leendert Verbeek: “Respect for the European Charter of Local Self-Government is essential for the resilience and sustainability of local democracy”

Addressing the General Assembly of the Network of Associations of Local Authorities of South East Europe (NALAS), on April 13, 2021, Congress President Leendert Verbeek underlined the importance of the European Charter of local self-government to ensure the sustainability of local democracy and local self-government. -government. He also expressed concern about the negative impact of Covid-19 on human rights, local democracy and constitutional values. “The pandemic has worsened the so-called recurring problems in the application of the Charter. These include the lack of consultation, an inadequate distribution of powers and financial resources and excessive supervision, ”warned President Verbeek.

He called on the member states of the Council of Europe to support local communities in their fight against the pandemic without compromising local autonomy, which is essential for building democratic and sustainable societies. “It is our responsibility, as local and regional elected representatives, to be alongside our citizens, to preserve democracy and to create an environment conducive to the sustainable economic development of our cities and regions”, underlined the president. .

The General Assembly of NALAS was opened by the President of the Republic of Moldova, Maia Sandu, the President of the Congress of Local Authorities of Moldova, Tatiana Badan, and the Mayor of Chisinau and head of the Moldovan delegation to the Congress, Ion Ceban . They welcomed the cooperation with Congress, including the post-monitoring roadmap and the technical assistance provided for various projects.

President Verbeek underlined that the partnership between the Congress and NALAS plays a key role in the discussions on decentralization and local self-government in the South East European region. He also underlined the excellent cooperation with the Moldovan authorities and the importance of the post-monitoring roadmap to be signed with the authorities.

See also:

read more
Self government

Scottish law incorporates the European Charter of Local Self-Government

The European Charter of Local Self-Government (Incorporation) (Scotland) bill was incorporated into Scottish law after Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) voted unanimously to approve it.

Introduced by Andy Wightman MSP, the bill aims to strengthen local government in Scotland, made up of 32 councils.

The European Charter of Local Self-Government was established in 1985 by the Council of Europe and sets out 10 principles to protect the basic powers of local authorities with regard to their political, administrative and financial independence, and was ratified by the UK in 1997.

The Council of Europe is an international organization which promotes democracy and protects human rights and the rule of law across the European continent and the UK is one of its 47 member states.

Mr. Wightman said that the incorporation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government The Bill in Scottish Law would allow the Charter to be directly relied on to settle matters in Scottish courts and would allow individuals and organizations to challenge the Scottish Government in the courts if its laws or rulings are inconsistent with the chart.

The bill also contains a section which places a general duty on the Scottish government to promote local government.

Commenting on Twitter, Mr Wightman said: ‘Delighted that my European Charter of Local Self-Government (Incorporation) (Scotland) bill is passed unanimously by the Scottish Parliament. Thanks to all the supporters. The culmination of decades of efforts by COSLA and others.

Chair of the Scottish Local Authorities Convention (COSLA) Councilor Alison Evison added: “I am absolutely delighted, it is a long-standing ambition of COSLA to see this charter incorporated into national law.
“This is a major achievement for local government and for communities.

“This means that the status and position of local government as a democratic representative of local communities will be strengthened by enshrining international legal rights in Scottish law.

“This in turn will strengthen the voice of our local communities and help achieve better results, the agreed results, with and for them.

“It will mean parity between government partners as we work together, for example on the national performance framework.

“The incorporation of the charter will formalize and integrate better partnership work and ensure that subsidiarity is a flaw in policymaking through the democratic system.

“Most importantly, it will help us achieve the lasting change around empowering communities that we seek.

“Finally, I would like to express our thanks to Andy Wightman MSP for bringing forward a private member’s bill on the charter, his role in bringing us here today cannot be overstated. “

read more
Self government

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. Board of Directors Considering Self-Government Options

“We have to try,” says QIA chairman PJ Akeeagok

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. board members say they want to take a closer look at achieving greater self-government for the Inuit of Nunavut.

How to do this was discussed at NTI’s board meeting in Baker Lake on Wednesday, with several board members expressing disillusionment with the Government of Nunavut and the low number of Inuit among its leadership.

Kunuk Inutiq, director of self-determination of NTI, presented a report on the subject. She said that self-government for the Inuit of Nunavut would not fundamentally change its public government and that territorial leaders could still represent Nunavummiut.

“Inuit self-government would build on the elements of Inuit governance that already exist, quite logically through land claims organizations,” its report said.

But Inuit self-government would require these regional Inuit organizations to include institutions “that can better serve the interests of the Inuit and the Inuit.”

Options moving forward include negotiating with the GN to create an “intergovernmental services agreement,” she said.

Under such an agreement, NTI could take over the delivery of social programs such as education for Inuit in Nunavut.

Another option would be to develop Inuit-focused programs and services independent of the GN.

Or NTI could ask the federal government to enter into a formal self-government agreement, which could take up to 20 years.

PJ Akeeagok, president of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, said it was worth exploring the possibilities.

“We have to try,” he said after listening to the report.

Inutiq mentioned how Makivik Corp. set a precedent for Inuit seeking a form of self-government that would operate alongside regional public government.

“While Canada’s preference is for public government, federal policy and law do not exclude the possibility of Inuit self-government in Nunavut,” said Inutiq.

The GN would be unable to prevent the Inuit of Nunavut from pursuing a self-government process based on section 35, she said.

Section 35 is the part of the Constitution Act that recognizes and affirms Aboriginal rights and the inherent right of self-government.

But GN involvement would likely be required in all discussions with the federal government, she said.

And if self-government were sought under the Nunavut Accord, the GN would almost certainly be involved.

Either way, NTI said the GN couldn’t stop it from pursuing self-government.

The president of the Kivalliq Inuit Association, Kono Tattuinee, declared that he was “totally behind this quest which is ours”.

In a resolution, the board said NTI would reconsider self-government at its next annual general meeting.

read more
Self government

Symbol of local autonomy, democracy and development, according to speaker Lok Sabha | Latest India News

Local self-government is a symbol of both democracy and development Lok Sabha chairman Om Birla said on Friday that it provides a framework for the decentralization of democracy.

The comments of the Lok Sabha chairman came during the inauguration of the awareness and familiarization program for local bodies of the northeastern states in Shillong.

“Local self-government is a symbol of both democracy and development. It provides a framework for the decentralization of democracy. It strengthens democracy at the local level through which citizens have the possibility of becoming part of the local self-government of their region, ”said the speaker.

“There are several provisions in our Constitution offering optimal opportunities for the development of all regions of the country. An Autonomous District Council for these states has been created in Schedule 6 of our Constitution, ”said Birla.

The primary objective of the creation of these Councils is to protect the rights of the tribal communities of the North East, to ensure them equal rights in the decision-making process and to ensure that their administration is carried out in accordance with their traditions and conventions, he mentioned.

“Mahatma Gandhi believed that the soul of India lives in the villages. He believed in rural self-reliance and the development of the nation (Rashtrodaya) through the development of villages (Gramodaya). He believed that every village should be The government is developing policies and plans to make this autonomy a nationwide phenomenon. But an autonomous India can only be possible if we are Vocal for Local, “he said.

Emphasizing the digital penetration in governance, he said that e-Panchyat has been introduced, which has brought about revolutionary changes in the functioning of local self-government.

It is our responsibility to make a collective effort to make democracy strong, transparent and accountable, he added.

Meghalaya Chief Minister Conrad Sangma, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Meghalaya Metbah Lyngdoh, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Industry and Food Processing, Rameshwar Teli and various MPs from the Northeast region also took part in the event.

The program was organized by the Parliamentary Research and Training Institute for Democracies (PRIDE), of the Lok Sabha Secretariat.

The theme of the program was “Panchayati Raj System / Autonomous District Council – Strengthening Decentralized Democracy”.

read more
Self government

Opinion: Helping Xinjiang and Tibet through Divestment and Self-Government

These days, it’s easy to lose sight of what’s going on outside the United States, yet China continues to commit human rights violations in Xinjiang and Tibet with impunity. In fact, the pandemic has increased restrictions. Fortunately, the international community is speaking out, the Member States of the United Nations decry abuses in Xinjiang and human rights experts raise concerns on the “enforced disappearance” of the Panchen Lama. As the number of these convictions increases, we would like to propose two more: the disengagement of companies complicit in human rights violations and the recognition by the United Nations as non-self-governing territories.

Tibet and Xinjiang both have a disputed history of conflict with China, mostly over sovereignty issues. China claims Tibet has been under Chinese sovereignty for 1793. In contrast, the Tibetan government-in-exile claims that Tibet was invaded in 1949-50. Tibet had its own language, currency, army, government, culture, religion and treaties, which display their independence. Meanwhile, in comparison, in Xinjiang, China began asserting more sovereign control over the region – which borders Russia – as it became more interested in trade. A history of separatist violence challenging Chinese sovereignty claims has only heightened China’s resolve.

China’s human rights violations in Tibet and Xinjiang in the name of state sovereignty are truly endless. China has implemented the forced transfer of populations; public executions; murder of demonstrators; torture of monks, nuns and citizens in the country, including Tibet. Tibet also suffered from the genocide. Both regions suffered “re-education” and mass surveillance, and China has denied the basic rights of the two populations. Less direct infringements of rights such as destruction of monasteries, exile of religious leaders, attempted installation of religious leaders and Tibetan flag bans and Dalai Lama photos also took place.

Despite China’s draconian control over the two regions, divestment could be an effective means of exerting economic pressure on China. In Xinjiang, in particular, the divestiture could have the additional effect of ensuring that US-based businesses and consumers are not complicit in these human rights violations. In Tibet, US companies should consider disengaging from strategic sectors that will weaken either Chinese economic growth or the People’s Liberation Army. Meanwhile, in Xinjiang, Americans and US companies own millions of shares in Chinese tech companies like Hikvision and Dahua, which are implicated in human rights abuses, while other US-based companies companies, like Nike and Adidas, can source materials from the forced labor of the Uyghurs themselves, for which these companies should be held accountable. Marion smith, the executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, endorses this approach through Congress. All of these measures may not force China to completely stop the persecution of Uyghurs, but it would make participation in human rights abuses costly for American businesses, investors and consumers.

In addition to divestment, the UN should officially recognize Tibet and Xinjiang as Non-self-governing territories, which is defined as “the territories whose population has not yet reached a full measure of self-government”. A formal label like this would constitute a strong UN challenge to China’s claims to sovereignty in the two regions, and it would require China to report annually on the status of each territory’s progress towards independence. . retaliation, but China status on the UN Special Committee on Decolonization could influence the definition of decolonization, which would also have consequences for the rest of the world. In addition, the presence of Han Chinese settlers, attracted by incentive migration policies, complicates the eventual process of decolonization for the two regions. However, it should be noted that the two regions, which still have high ethnic concentrations of their indigenous populations, can serve as buffer states and benefit from growing international recognition of human rights violations. A more in-depth conversation on this idea would certainly help shed light on the extent of China’s resistance and more details on the effectiveness of this proposal.

As should be evident by now, these propositions are neither simple nor holistic. Our argument is that resuming the debate, even with non-exhaustive solutions, is the only way to find better answers. While talking about the problem isn’t a guarantee of a solution, ignoring it is a sure-fire way to make sure there never is one.

Fatima Bamba, Katie Engsberg, Mitchell Macheske and Sarah Salkowski are masters students at the School of International Service. The opinions expressed by the authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Eagle and its staff.

More from L’Aigle
read more
Self government

Private militias are the enemy of self-government

If we cherish our right to choose our leaders, we must crack down on private armed “militias”.

The US Constitution and all 50 states prohibit armed militias who train together or show up in force at public gatherings. Under Illinois law, it is illegal for people to organize into a private militia without state permission.

Yet national authorities have looked the other way as private militias – truly irresponsible armed offenders – do just that. Authorities have also ignored the dangerous spread of “open port” laws, which allow vigilantes to carry military-style weapons to public gatherings and even to state capitals. Organizations that track militias say they are active in all 50 states.

Climb the steps of the Capitol

When insurgents stormed the United States Capitol on January 6, militias known as Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, and Three Percenters were among them. The video captured men dressed in camouflage marching in an organized line along the steps of the Capitol with combat helmets, bulletproof vests, gloves with knuckle protection and radios. On Monday, the FBI warned of possible armed protests in all 50 state capitals and Washington, DC, in the coming days.

For Americans who believe in democracy, this is very scary.

Reasonable Americans should agree that no elected government can function if armed paramilitaries use force or the threat of force to overthrow the will of the people. How can government function when lawmakers and their families are threatened with violence? Yet the Southern Poverty Law Center says that in 2019 there were around 180 anti-government militias across the country undergoing military-style training.

Ignore at our peril

Government officials have tended to ignore groups because they do not recognize the extent of the threat, do not want to spark a storm of opposition from gun rights groups, or, in some regions sympathize squarely with the militias. In addition, some police and prosecutors claim that anti-militia laws are so vague that they are unenforceable.

Laws need to be updated and enforced.

In court documents filed Thursday, federal prosecutors, without specifically naming the militias, said some of those who stormed Capitol Hill intended to “capture and assassinate elected officials.” They are the kind of people who are drawn to armed militias. And this is not the first time that we have seen an attempt to overthrow duly elected governments. Members of a Michigan militia called Wolverine Watchmen have been accused of plotting the kidnapping of governors, including Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

People who believe in their right to violently overthrow democracy have long communicated with each other and reinforced their twisted beliefs in online chat rooms and in the feverish swamps of message boards. After January 6, it is clear that they represent a clear and present danger.

“We are in the middle of another civil rights movement,” said Kathleen Sances, president and CEO of the Illinois Gun Violence Prevention PAC. “I think it’s an effort to maintain a white supremacist system.”

Some militia members are aligned with the so-called boogaloo movement, which seeks to prepare for or incite civil war.

Easily leads are swept

Chicagoan Lee Goodman, who led the pre-pandemic protests against gun violence, said he always tried to engage with opponents who showed up at his events.

Many of them were people who had perhaps barely passed civic education classes in school and did not really understand a political system based on democratic representation. They are trained by like-minded individuals with violence in mind, he said.

“When you tell them it’s all about personal freedom, they believe it,” he said.

True personal freedom requires democratic government. America’s real strength is that it is a democracy ruled by the will of the people. Private armed “militias” have no place here.

Send letters to [email protected].

read more
Self government

Remembering the day Uganda gained self-government

In the liturgical calendar, today is the first Sunday of Lent. Fifty-eight years ago on this day, Uganda achieved self-government, which in my Lugbara language is called “Ocema Ceni”.

On March 1, 1962, Benedicto Kiwanuka was sworn in as Prime Minister of Uganda, with a cabinet of 13 ministers which replaced the British colonial governor’s Council of Ministers. In substance, not much has changed, but symbolically it was a giant step for the Ugandan people’s struggle for self-determination.

On October 9, 1962, Uganda gained independence, or uhuru in Kiswahili, or driwala in Lugbara. Following the general elections of April 25, 1962, won by an alliance formed by the Uganda Peoples Congress (UPC) and Kabaka Yekka, a new Prime Minister, Mr. Apolo Milton Obote, was sworn in in a colorful ceremony held at Kololo Independence Grounds, in the presence of thousands of jubilant people, including the Duke of Kent who represented Queen Elizabeth II.

Ugandans, especially UPC members, have tended to claim that Obote, the first president of the UPC, was also Uganda’s first prime minister. Let me set the record straight, Benedicto Kiwanuka is Uganda’s first Prime Minister, although he held the post for a very short time.

Unlike Uganda and Kenya, it took five years for Ghana to gain independence on March 6, 1957, after gaining autonomy in 1952, with Kwame Nkrumah as Prime Minister.

I’m told this was the model the British originally planned to use to decolonize their former colonies, but in 1960 the UN General Assembly pressured Britain, France, Portugal and other colonial countries to speed up the process of granting independence to the colonies. countries and peoples.

I was in Year 2 at Sir Samuel Baker School in Gulu on that historic day Uganda achieved self-government, a day that was sadly treated as a footnote by the Ugandan government , especially by the corrupt, morally decadent and self-condemned government. click. Unlike in Kenya, whose Home Rule Day, June 1, 1963, is commemorated annually as a public holiday known as Madaraka Day, here in Uganda the NRM regime prefers to reopen old wounds by reminding citizens peaceful and peace-loving a bloody and fratricidal and useless civil war every year on January 26th.

The struggle for autonomy began in the 1940s, but concrete and decisive actions were taken to advance the cause in the 1950s and 1960s by the Uganda National Congress (UNC), the Democratic Party (DP) and the ‘UPC which were formed in 1952, 1954 and 1960 respectively.

Credit must be given to the visionary leaders and members of the above political parties who led a courageous, patriotic, relentless and selfless struggle for self-determination which culminated in the achievement of self-government on March 1, 1962.

Importance of self-government
First, the just and valiant struggle for Uganda’s self-reliance, human dignity and ultimately independence was not the struggle of one man, one party or one tribe. It was a collective struggle of Ugandans from all walks of life, from all parts of our country and from many political and social organizations.

Unlike some arrogant and self-centered contemporary politicians who behave as if Ugandans owe them a living, the vanguard of Uganda’s struggle for liberation from the yoke of colonialism, such as Ignatius Musaazi, Benedicto Kiwanuka, Milton Obote and Gaspero Oda saw themselves as servants of the Ugandan people, not masters and warlords of the wananchi.

Secondly, Uganda’s struggle for autonomy has received valuable support from friends and supporters abroad, such as Kwame Nkrumah from Ghana, Julius Nyerere from Tanzania, the Fabian Society, the Great Britain Labor Party Britain, church organizations and Sir Andrew Cohen who was a progressive, enlightened and reformist governor of Uganda, to name but a few. We owe them all gratitude.

Third, in my view, Ugandans must urgently rekindle the spirit that guided and motivated the struggle for autonomy and independence, in particular the commitment of political leaders to serve the Ugandan people and to place the interests common interests of Ugandans above and above personal, regional and partisan interests.

Fourthly, I think it is important for Uganda to remember our struggle for self-reliance, like Kenya and many serious African countries, so that Ugandans, especially our young men and women, do not forget the relevant and salient lessons of our history.

read more
Self government

Historic self-government agreements signed with Métis Nation of Alberta, Métis Nation of Ontario and Métis Nation-Saskatchewan

OTTAWA, June 27, 2019 /CNW/ – Today, the government of Canada continued its commitment to renew nation-to-nation and government-to-government relationships with the Métis, based on recognition of rights, respect, cooperation and partnership.

The Honorable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, signed Métis Government Recognition and Self-Government Agreements with the President of the Métis Nation of Alberta Audrey PoitrasPresident of the Métis Nation of Ontario Margaret Froh and the President of the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan Glen McCallum.

These agreements affirm the Métis right to self-government and recognize the mandates of the Métis Nation of albertathe Métis Nation of Ontario and the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan. The agreements also set out the next steps to formally recognize Métis governments as Indigenous governments in Canadian law.

While the Métis Nation of albertathe Métis Nation of Ontario and Métis Nation-Saskatchewan already have well-established provincial governance structures, the agreements signed today address recognition of Métis jurisdiction in key areas of governance (citizenship, leadership selection and government operations). They also set out the processes for negotiating other agreements in other jurisdictions in the future.

A fundamental part of this process will be the Métis Nation of albertathe Métis Nation of Ontario and the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan undertakes extensive outreach and consultation with its citizens to further the implementation of Métis self-government.

The parties also commit to continue to develop shared and balanced solutions that advance reconciliation, enhance community well-being, and respect the rights and interests of all Canadians.


“By signing these historic agreements today, our government is taking a fundamental step in advancing reconciliation and transforming our relationship with the Métis Nation of albertathe Métis Nation of Ontario and the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan. We are committed to advancing self-determination by strengthening our government-to-government relationships. »

The Honorable Carolyn Bennett, MD, PC, MP
Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations

“This is a historic day for the Métis Nation of Alberta. Since 1928, our people have fought with passion and determination for this recognition as the government of the Métis Nation of Alberta. Today marks the beginning of a true government-to-government relationship with Canada based on reconciliation and recognition of our place in the confederation. »

President Audrey Poitras
Métis Nation of alberta

“Our communities and leaders have worked tirelessly for decades to recognize Métis rights and self-government in Ontario. The NMO fought for recognition of Métis rights and won the landmark Powley decision in the Supreme Court of Canada. By signing this Self-Government Agreement, we have taken an important and historic step for the Métis Nation of Ontario, our citizens and our communities. We look forward to continuing to advance our government-to-government relationships with Canada and with Ontario, based on the recognition and respect of our inherent rights to self-determination and self-government. Our Métis citizens and communities will rise to the exciting challenge of developing an authentic, visionary, responsive and accountable 21st century Métis government that will serve our citizens and communities for generations to come. »

Margaret Froh
President, Métis Nation of Ontario

“Today is a day to celebrate the heritage of our Métis ancestors and the future of our children. For more than a century, our people have fought – figuratively and literally – for recognition, respect and a rightful place in Canadian society. This agreement recognizes our people’s right to self-government and a true nation-to-nation relationship. We are able to stand today because we stand on the shoulders of giants and on the cusp of a brighter tomorrow.

Glen McCallumPresident
Métis Nation-Saskatchewan

Fast facts

  • Section 35 of from Canada Constitution Act 1982 recognizes the Aboriginal rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis.
  • The Supreme Court of from Canada 2003 Powley decision was the first major Aboriginal rights case that set out the criteria for Métis rights under section 35.
  • Accelerating the formal recognition of Métis self-government was a priority identified in the Framework Agreements for Advancing Reconciliation signed by Canada and each of the Métis Nation of albertathe Métis Nation of Ontario and the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan in 2017-2018.
  • Today’s announcement marks a key milestone in ongoing negotiations to advance reconciliation under these framework agreements.

Related links

Métis rights
Explore new ways of working together
Métis Nation of alberta
Métis Nation of Ontario
Métis Nation-Saskatchewan

Stay connected

Join the conversation about Indigenous Peoples by Canada:

Twitter: GovCan – Indigenous
Facebook: GovCan – Indigenous Peoples
Instagram: @gcIndigenous

You can subscribe to receive our press releases and speeches via RSS feeds. For more information or to subscribe, visit

SOURCE Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC)

For further information: media may contact: Matthew Dillon-Leitch, Director of Communications, Office of the Honorable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, 819-997-0002; Media Relations, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, 819-934-2302, [email protected]; Rolando Inzunza, Director of Communications and Citizen Engagement, Métis Nation of Alberta, 780-455-2200, ext. 395; Marc St. Germain, Communications Manager, Métis Nation of Ontario, 613-798-1488, ext. 119; John Fenton, Director of Media Relations, Navigator, Métis Nation-Saskatchewan, 416-642-5228

Related links

read more
Self government

60th Anniversary of Self-Government: Singapore’s Pre-Independence ‘National Day’

SINGAPORE: Everyone knows that August 9 is Singapore’s national day, when the country comes together to celebrate independence. But for a few years before 1965, it took place on a different date.

For older Singaporeans, June 3, 1959 was that day to remember. It was at this point that Singapore adopted its own constitution and became a self-governing internal state for the first time in its history (the British still had the final say on external matters, namely defense and foreign affairs. ).

In fact, the National Archives of Singapore (NAS) recorded this momentous day as “the creation of a nation”. It is written on its website: “On June 3, 1959, the 1.6 million people in Singapore woke up to a new beginning – as people of a fully self-governing city-state under the British crown. “

The day was also immortalized through the famous music video of Mr. Lee Kuan Yew’s catchy “Merdeka” call.

Historian Albert Lau told CNA that self-government, while not yet independent, was a milestone in Singapore’s constitutional development.

“Achieving self-government sent an important signal that Singapore still needed new momentum to achieve its goal of freeing itself from colonial rule,” said the associate professor at the National University of Singapore. .

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong also made mention of this historic day during last year’s National Day rally, saying, “Nationally, Singapore’s politics have been fiercely opposed, on different visions of the future. of the colony. In 1959, Singapore gained internal autonomy, a big step forward. towards independence. “

On the 60th anniversary of Singapore’s pre-independence national day, CNA looks back on some of the key events and quotes that shaped its significance.


The general elections held in 1959 were to determine who would lead Singapore into this new period of internal autonomy, but they were also important for another reason: it was the first time that voting had been made compulsory.

Nanyang Technological University assistant professor Ngoei Wen-Qing told CNA that this was the time when “mass politics” reached Singapore.

According to the Chronicle of Singapore, a book published in association with the National Library Board of Singapore, 51 seats were nominated in this election, and the PAP ran against groups like the People’s Alliance of Singapore (SPA), led by Chief Minister Lim Yew Hock, the United Malaysian National Organization (UMNO) and the Workers’ Party founded by David Marshall, the Chief Prime Minister of Singapore.

Singapore’s founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, in his memoir, The Singapore Story, said polls closed at 8 p.m. on May 30 and the vote count started from 9 p.m. before ending at 2:45 am the next morning.

In the end, PAP won 43 of the 51 contested seats, while SPA won four – including Lim’s successful contest against Marshall at Cairnhill – and UMNO won three. Independent AP Rajah won the remaining seat.

“The people’s verdict is clear and decisive. Nothing more can be added to it. It is a victory of good over evil, of the pure over the dirty, of righteousness over evil. – PAP Secretary General Lee Kuan Yew, quoted in Chronicle of Singapore.


Immediately after the election victory, Lee and his colleagues focused on the release of eight men associated with the PAP who had been detained under the Preservation of Public Safety Act. This meant that Mr. Lee and his cabinet would not be sworn in until June 5.

The Singapore Chronicle reports that the eight men were CV Devan Nair (Singapore’s third president), Lim Chin Siong, Fong Swee Suan, S. Woodhull, Chan Thiaw Thor, James Puthucheary, Chan Chong Kin and Chen Say James.

They were union leaders who were among 234 people detained by the government in 1956 following the Chinese high school riots. They were finally released on June 4 – 31 months after being detained.

In his memoir, Mr. Lee explained why the release of the Eight took precedence over the swearing in: “We had thought before the election and concluded that Lim Chin Siong and his company should be released from prison before we took office, otherwise we would lose all credibility.

This was reiterated by Dr Ngoei: “The PAP, before the 1959 elections, pledged to have them released. And once they won this election, Lee Kuan Yew delayed taking office in order to obtain this release… so it is important for the credibility of the PAP.

Sir William Goode, Singapore’s last governor who went on to become its first Yang di-Pertuan Negara (head of state), disagreed with the delay, especially after Lim Yew Hock resigned his post as chief minister once he found out his party had lost the election. But Mr. Lee held on.

Sir William, however, would not wait. He published in the Gazette and brought the new constitution into effect on June 3, Lee said in his memoir.

This is why there was a delay between the recognition of Singapore as a state with internal autonomy on June 3 and the swearing-in of its new leadership on June 5.

Dr Ngoei said this turned out to be “good policy” on the part of PAP.

“It was good policy that the PAP was trying to press so that it separates the release of detainees as a topical event from the constitution being enacted, and identifying the enacted constitution with the will of the people as well. than the victory of the PAP, “he explained.

S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies principal researcher Kwa Chong Guan went further, saying that the day was one of those “turning points” that could have given Singapore’s political and historical development “quite a turning point. different “if Sir William had not done so. accede to Mr. Lee’s request.

“I again countered that we were not to be sworn in until June 5, after Lim Chin Siong, Fong, and the other six pro-Communists were not only released but duly issued a statement publicly endorsing the non-Communist goals of the government. PAP.

“I wanted this endorsement to have full media coverage; so we would only take office on the afternoon of June 5th so as not to compete with him for the headlines. – Mr. Lee in The History of Singapore


The PAP formed Singapore’s first fully elected government and the nine-member Cabinet was sworn in on June 5.

  • Lee Kuan Yew, Prime Minister
  • Toh Chin Chye, Deputy Prime Minister
  • Ong Eng Guan, Minister of National Development
  • Goh Keng Swee, Minister of Finance
  • Ong Pang Boon, Minister of the Interior
  • KM Byrne, Minister of Labor and Law
  • Ahmad Ibrahim, Minister of Health
  • Yong Nyuk Lin, Minister of Education
  • S Rajaratnam, Minister of Culture

They were sworn in at a closed-door ceremony held at Town Hall by Sir William. According to Mr Lee, Sir William arrived at the scene “nothing more formal than a light tawny suit and tie” while the Cabinet wore “white open-necked shirts and pants”.

The swearing-in room was “bare except for a table and a few chairs” as there was no time for decorations, he added.

In addition to an important step towards full independence, the events of June 1959 “also mark the rise of the PAP to political power in Singapore”, underlined the NUS Assoc Prof Lau.

The celebrations for this pre-independence national day took place from 1960 to 1963, according to the National Library Board.

read more
Self government

Are the English ready for autonomy?

“The alleged aptitude of the English for self-government,” writes Bernard Shaw in his preface to Androcles and the Lion, “is contradicted by every chapter of their history. Shaw was, of course, parodying British imperialist rhetoric and his insistence that lesser peoples – including his own nation, the Irish – were not ready to rule themselves. He was villainously provocative, which only the most irresponsible commentators would dare to be in these dire times.

But there is still an element of truth in his words. The ability to be self-governing is not what comes to mind when you look from the outside at what was going on in Westminster last week, when, as Tom Peck so brilliantly put it in London Independent, “the House of Commons was a Benny Acid Hill Race, traversing a Salvador Dali painting in a spaceship en route to infinity.”

Let’s just say that if Theresa May was the head of a newly liberated African colony in the 1950s, Britain’s Tories would have pointed, half sadly, half happily, in her direction and say ‘You see? I told you – they just weren’t ready to rule themselves. At least another generation of guardianship by the mother country was needed.

There is a kind of surreal logic to this. If, as the Brexiteers do, you imagine yourself to be an oppressed colony separating from the German Reich aka the European Union, you may find yourself with a pantomime version of the struggles of the newly independent colonies, including the civil wars that s ‘often follow. national liberation.

And without wanting to touch it, Shaw’s quip highlights two of the deep issues that underlie and undermine the entire Brexit project. First of all, the problem with this imaginary self-government effort is the “self” part. What is the ego of British politics? As in all nationalist revolts, the easy part of “Them versus Us” is Them: in this case the EU. The hardest part is us. Brexit calls for a collective British ego, but it is in itself the most dramatic symptom of the crumbling of this very thing.

Fabulous trip

Westminster Anarchy is the political expression of anarchy in the United Kingdom, the breakdown of a common sense of belonging. Brexit is a fabulous form of displacement – it recognizes a deep and genuine dissatisfaction with the way the British are governed, but sends it back to Europe.

Brexit acknowledges deep dissatisfaction with the way the British are governed, but sends it back to Europe

He simply marked in bright red ink the fault lines that had long been less vivid – the drift of England and Scotland; the economic and cultural divide between what Anthony Barnett calls “England without London” and the rest of the UK (Wales being the obvious anomaly); the social and geographic cleavages between the winners and losers of the long Thatcher revolution. Brexit, in the worst possible time in the world, clears up all of these divisions while doing absolutely nothing to address them. It reveals a regime that cannot create consensus because it lacks a basis in social consent.

Nationalism is a great beast to bring you to the point of independence – and then it becomes a dead horse

The other, closely related issue is English nationalism which is both such a powerful force in Brexit and so poorly articulated. As every former colony knows, nationalism is a great beast in bringing you to the point of independence – and then it becomes a dead horse. Shaw wrote to his friend Mabel FitzGerald (mother of the future taoiseach Garret) in December 1914: sudden and horrible decomposition, that he has been dead for years.

Whipping a dead horse

Brexit is a dead horse, a form of nationalist energy that began to break down rapidly on June 24, 2016, as soon as it entered the realm of political reality. He can’t go anywhere. He cannot transport the British state to a promised land. He can only leave him where he arrived, in a no man’s land between vague patriotic fantasies and persistent irritating facts. But also, due to the result of the referendum, the British state cannot dismount from the dead horse and must continue to whip it.

To fly over this whole idea of ​​English self-government is the myth of loneliness. All independence movements have at their heart the meaning of Sinn Féin – “Ourselves alone”. Being alone is also one of the great motifs of the English self-image, brilliantly visualized in the famous David Low cartoon of June 1940, after the fall of France, showing a Tommy standing on the cliffs of Dover hugging the fist towards the Luftwaffe bombers above their heads. with the caption “Very good, alone”. But Britain was not alone back then (it had a vast empire) and it was never alone. Throughout its history since 1707, it has always been part of a larger multinational entity: empire first, then Europe.

Yet a fantasy of glorious and provocative loneliness is at the heart of making Brexit wishes come true. It’s a great warning to be careful what you want. What we are seeing right now is a taste of England alone. It’s no surprise that this is a preview of a horror show. Cause when you’re really alone, what are you alone with? You are alone with your demons.


A special survey on Brexit and the border
Read more

read more
Self government

The Indigenous Autonomy Perspective

November 14, 2018

Kanaky youth vote for independence in New Caledonia (Nic Maclellan)

On November 4, the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia held a self-determination referendum, the culmination of a twenty-year transition period introduced by the Noumea OK.

After a peaceful polling day, 56.4% of registered voters decided to stay in the French Republic, while 43.6% voted yes for independence.

These raw figures suggest a setback for the independence coalition of New Caledonia, the Before Release national Kanak and socialist (FLNKS), who has been campaigning for independence and sovereignty since 1980s.

In reality, the size of the yes gives the independence movement enough mandate to continue towards a new referendum in 2020. The FLNKS is encouraged by their increased support in working-class suburbs, rural areas and an unprecedented youth vote.

Opinion polls had predicted a massive defeat for the independence movement. However, as the votes were counted, viewers could see the worry on the faces of overconfident anti-independence politicians.

Early in the night, with the independence vote hovering between 25 and 30 percent, there was an air of triumphalism. As the night wore on and the vote for self-government increased to 30%, then 40% and beyond, the faces of anti-independence leaders deteriorated further.

Prime Minister of France Edward Philippe made a lightning visit to New Caledonia the next day. While welcoming the decision of the islanders to stay within the French Republic, he also recognized massive support for independence among the natives Kanak people.

20 years in the making

New Caledonia is one of the three French dependencies of the Pacific, alongside French Polynesia and Wallis and Futuna. The indigenous Melanesian population, known as the Kanak, are a minority of 39 percent in their own country, after generations of colonization and continuous migration.

Annexed by France in 1853, the islands – located off the east coast of Australia – served first as a prison, then as a land of free colonization. The main island’s central mountain range is rich in minerals, and the country holds 25 percent of the world’s nickel reserves. The nickel boom of late 1960s, driven by the Vietnam War and the space race, saw new waves of migration from France and Wallis and Futuna.

There were historical Kanak revolts against French colonialism, led by the chief Atai in 1878 and Chef Noël in 1917. But the modern independence movement was born from the 1970s, based on radicalized students returning from France, one Kanak cultural renaissance and the Union Caledonian change of course of the party from the demand for autonomy to independence, under the leadership of Jean-Marie Tjibaou (a charismatic leader assassinated by a comrade Kanak in 1989).

The establishment of the FLNKS in 1984, armed clashes between separatists, the French state and Right wing settlers. This period of conflict ended with the signing of the 1988 Accord. Matignon agreements and a subsequent agreement in May 1998, known as the Noumea OK.

The 20-year transition under the agreement saw the transfer of many powers from Paris to Noumea and the creation of new political institutions, including a multi-party government, Kanak customary senate and three provincial administrations.

There has also been a significant economic “rebalancing” between the wealthy southern province and the rural north and outlying Loyalty Islands, where the population is predominantly. Kanak. However, New Caledonia is still sharply divided between poor and rich, with poverty marked by ethnicity and geography – rural and indigenous communities lose out on all development indicators.

This chasm is most obvious in the capital Noumea, a city of yachts and squats. The anti-independence vote was strongest in Noumeathe southern suburbs of, where the rich own luxury apartments, boats and 4x4s, drawing massive wages subsidized by French taxpayers. On the outskirts of the capital, more than 8,000 people live in slums.

Two worlds apart

The independence vote of November 4 was drawn mainly from the Kanak the electorate, with a majority of non-Kanaks – European, wallisian, Tahitian or Asian heritage – vote to stay with France.

The more populous south and the capital remain strongholds of anti-independence sentiment, while the regions where the majority of the population is Kanak showed massive support for autonomy: the North Province (75.8% Yes) and the Loyalty Islands Province (82.1%).

On the other hand, the Southern Province, mainly no kanak the electorate, voted strongly 73.71 percent to stay with France, with just 26.29 percent of voters in the south opting for independence.

For many months, a slow wave of popular campaigning led by the FLNKS and other separatist groups led to a mobilization on ‘D-Day’. With non-compulsory voting, thousands of Kanaks turned out, many of whom had never voted before.

The final victory is not very comforting for the anti-independence right. Successive opinion polls had suggested that the yes would be between 27 and 35 percent. Conservative politicians had publicly threatened that a massive yes vote would pave the way for a rollback of many of the achievements made by the Kanak people since Noumea Agreement, including restrictions on the voters list for local political institutions, funding of rural provinces and land reform. The right-wing hoped that the victory would allow Paris to push for the removal of New Caledonia from the United Nations list of non-self-governing territories.

But the result of the referendum is only one step in a longer process. The Noumea Accord provides for a second referendum in 2020 in the event of a non-vote, which can be called by a third of the members of Congress. The separatist parties currently holding 25 seats out of the 54 members of Congress, they have the figures to proceed to another referendum after the provincial elections next May.

The day after the vote, most realized that the Kanak independence movement has a new wind in its sails. The quest for independence lives in the hearts of a new generation.

Help us produce more like this

Editor's portrait
Patreon is a platform that allows us to offer more to our readership. With a new podcast, eBooks, tote bags and magazine subscriptions on offer, plus early access to videos and articles, we’re very excited about our Patreon! If you’re not yet on board, check it out here.

Support us »

read more
Self government

If you don’t believe in self-government, you’re not an American patriot

Would you die for America? Think about it. Really think about it. It’s one thing to pound your chest and loudly proclaim your love of country, but would you really die for it? I’m talking about a noose around your neck, standing on the gallows, and you have to make the choice: leave America behind or tell them to drop you like a sack of potatoes.

Assuming you would like tell them to pull the lever, maybe you should think about the reason. Why bother to die for America? You only have one life to live. Before you pretend you’d give it up for America, you better know what America is and what it isn’t.

America is about self-government and limited government. It’s as simple as that. That’s why these brave men risked (and gave) their lives 242 years ago. They were tired of a powerful centralized government. They were tired of seeing their work taxed and confiscated.

They wanted to create a new country, a country where the federal government would be small, limited and non-invasive. In fact, the founders were so concerned with federal power that they added a bill of rights to the Constitution. Some argued that the Bill of Rights was unnecessary and redundant because the Constitution already spelled out precisely what the federal government could and could not do. But the Founders were so fond of self-government and limited government that they decided it was better to err on the side of it. This is America.

America is not what you want it to be. America is not without worries. This is not free taxpayer stuff. It is not a guarantee that you will succeed in life. It’s not even the flag or the troops or the fireworks. America does not “pay taxes”. It’s not “never having to worry about your medical bills”. In short, America is not customizable to your fleeting whims or whatever you “feel” every time the fireworks flash in your eyes.

“Patriotism” is not hard to define, as much as the left would have you believe. It’s not a fluid thing. Burning the flag and shitting on the anthem is not patriotism. It may be the reflection of freedom that makes America great, but it is not patriotism.

Patriotism in America means loving limited government. It’s as simple as that. You like America to have constitutionally limited government, or you don’t like America. Saying you love America and don’t want limited government is like saying you love your car but hate the engine, seats and interior.

Look around you. Look at the life of comfort and luxury you have: running water, indoor plumbing, and a grocery store with well-stocked shelves. Worst of all on your commute to work tomorrow will be a traffic jam that forces you to sit in an air-conditioned capsule with your music on the radio.

You drink freely from the water that comes out of the tap. You will go to church this Sunday without fear of the government or of a mob slaughtering you for it. You wear what you want. You say what you want about politicians without fear of reprisal. Your children have several changes of clothes. Your roads are paved. You can eat whatever you want for your next meal, and you can do it a short drive from home.

You live the life of a king. To be born in America is the greatest life lottery win in human history. The things I listed above are not reserved for royalty. Our poorer people have these things. Despite all the endless moans and screams, all Americans are good. They have lives that 99% of people in history would kill for.

And why do you have this life? You have it because the US government is limited. This life you are living is not an accident. It did not fall from the sky. It was intentional, and others don’t have the privilege of experiencing it.

You get to live it because the sages had long had a vision of what would happen in a society where men were free to govern themselves. This vision germinated in the richest nation in the history of the world, a nation that grows again and again. It is a nation of free people pursuing their own interests, but without government interference. This That’s why you live the life of a king.

So, back to the beginning: would you die for America? Not for the America you want it to be, for what it is: freedom. Do you really want to die for freedom? The freedom to live your life the way you want. The certainty that your children will live as they please and succeed or fail on their merits.

If you wish, wave your flag high on Independence Day. You earned it. No matter your age, race, or religion, if you believe in freedom, you are truly an American.

Jesse Kelly is the host of “The Jesse Kelly Show” on KPRC 950 in Houston. Jesse is a Marine Corps veteran and former congressional candidate from Arizona. He resides in the Houston area with his wife and two sons.

read more
Self government

Brexit is about political autonomy, not economic globalism | American Institute of Enterprise

Since the Brexit vote, critics of the outcome have leveled multiple criticisms at the Leave campaign, including the idea that the argument being sold to the British people is not what the British people are going to get, and on two fronts: first, the question of immigration; and second, the economic question.

I will leave the issue of immigration aside for now as there seems to be suspicion and division within the Leave camp as to what it wants to achieve in negotiations with the EU regarding the opening or closing of the UK border. Suffice it to say, this is a complex issue and the current Schengen crisis is not limited to EU members.

Vote Leave supporters wave Union flags outside Downing Street in London, Britain June 24, 2016. REUTERS/Neil Hall.

The heart of the Brexit argument, even among Leave campaign leaders, has never been purely economic.

On the economic issue, my ever-incisive AEI colleague James Pethokoukis argues in The Week that the Leave campaign’s portrayal of post-Brexit Britain as a global trading power – a “Texas on the North Sea” in the beautiful expression of Pethokoukis – is “a magical thought.” The deregulation that results from Brexit is not a spell that will magically produce growth, rather Brexit will cause economic hardship or, at the very least, will not provide the added value that makes Brexit worthwhile. Pethokoukis notes that Britain’s economy is already extraordinarily healthy by many measures, and finally speculates that the “pro-growth” policies the Leave campaign is promoting will be less appealing to Britons who voted for Brexit.

I am happy and grateful that Pethokoukis pushed Brexiters to clarify and define their economic plan. There is no doubt that a lot of work will have to be done on this in the months to come. But Pethokoukis’ conclusion – “Never before have we risked so much for potentially so little” – is, in my opinion, out of step with his economic consideration.

The heart of the Brexit argument, even among Leave campaign leaders, has never been purely economic. Nor is the price to pay for staying in the EU. Indeed, Brexit is about the EU’s attempt to transform an economic partnership into a political union. It is precisely the hijacking of a strictly economic partnership that has driven men like Daniel Hannan, whom Pethokoukis cites as a supporter of the “pro-growth” argument, to plead for Britain to leave the EU.

In an op-ed by Hannan of The Evening Standard quoted by Pethokoukis, the Conservative MEP notes that non-EU countries that have trade deals with the EU “thrive while having relations with the EU based on the market access rather than political integration”. It is this, and not pro-growth policies, that is at the center of the argument. Assuming political integration with the EU means acknowledging lawmakers who are not accountable to the votes of ordinary Britons. That means voters can’t hire and fire their lawmakers. In other words, it is a surrender of self-government.
The Founders believed that political independence was worth “our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor”.
As Hannan pointed out in a debate that preceded the June 23 vote, the British “wage a civil war…to establish the principle that laws should not be passed nor taxes raised except by our own elected representatives”. Hannan went further: “It is a natural and healthy thing for a democracy to live according to its own laws while trading and cooperating with all the other countries of the world”. That Hannan has to explain this to a country that invented parliamentary democracy and twice saved the free world from destruction at the hands of a continent empire It’s incredible.

We, too, fought a war to establish the principle of self-government. At the start of this war, our Founders wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence, which we will celebrate this weekend. There, the Founders present themselves as English people deprived of their political rights by their British brothers. The Founders believed that political independence was worth “our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor”.

If the free self-government, which the British people are also gaining, and which was central to the Leave argument, is worth what the American founders promised themselves, it is worth the economic risks.

read more
Self government

The End of Self-Government on Norfolk Island – Rear Vision

For several decades, the small population of Norfolk Island was self-sufficient and self-sufficient. But the final steps in making them ordinary Australian citizens will take place on July 1 and, as Keri phillips reports, not everyone is happy.

Since the descendants of the Bounty mutineers took up residence on Norfolk Island, there has been a debate over the independence of the island.

While the people there have long viewed their home as an independent nation, the story of whether they were granted full ownership is murky.

I thought it was direct democracy that worked the best I have ever seen.

Captain Cook was the first European to visit Norfolk Island in 1774, and when Governor Phillip arrived in Sydney with the First Fleet in 1788 he almost immediately sent Lieutenant Philip Gidley King to establish a penal colony there.

At the start of the 19th century, the penal colony was closed, but there were problems on another small island, Pitcairn, where the descendants of the Bounty mutineers were struggling.

They petitioned Queen Victoria, who agreed to move them to Norfolk.

Peter Maywald, who was the Norfolk Island government secretary from 2003 to 2010, said the Pitcairners all moved by 1856.

“This is where the story gets murky, as Norfolk Islanders or Pitcairn descendants claim that Queen Victoria gave them the island in perpetuity on the condition that there are no punitive taxes.” , he said.

“The Australian government is disputing this, and the paperwork is ambiguous, I would say.

“But they still believe they were given Norfolk Island, it’s theirs, it’s not part of Australia, and Australia claims it’s outside territory.”

A successful democracy

Over the years, Norfolk’s administration fell to New South Wales and the federal government, until in the 1970s a royal commission recommended it be completely absorbed into Australia.

But, says Maywald, the locals weren’t happy with this. They communicated their feelings in no uncertain terms to then Home Secretary Bob Ellicott, who surprisingly enough agreed to empower them.

The Norfolk Island Act was passed in 1979, granting the island limited autonomy.

After the passage of the Norfolk Island Act, a legislative assembly, similar to that which governs the ACT, was established. As an advisor to this government, Maywald said he was surprised to see how well the system worked.

“I thought it was direct democracy that worked the best I have ever seen,” he says.

“They had citizen-initiated referendums, they didn’t have political parties, so all members were elected on their own political platform and expected them to deliver when they arrived. Cabinet ministers became the four or five who got the most votes, so the public really elected ministers.

“And parliamentarians were totally accessible to the people. It’s inevitable in a small community … If they were at the Foodland supermarket on a Saturday morning, people would come and ask about roads, retreats or whatever. And the other thing was that all of their parliamentary decisions were totally public and they were all broadcast live.

“It was a functioning parliament on the model on which I thought democratic parliaments should function.”

How the GST and GFC broke Norfolk

Norfolk Island was largely self-financing – it funded the hospital, school, infrastructure and power plant, says Jon Stanhope, who was Norfolk Island’s deputy administrator in the 1990s.

“The Norfolk Island Legislature has developed its own pension scheme, its own social safety net and its own medical benefit scheme, but of course nowhere near as generous as the schemes on the mainland.” , did he declare.

“But unlike that, of course, they don’t pay income tax and contribute to the continent’s tax base.

“I lived there for two years in the early 90s and it was a very, very happy, vibrant and proud community that, if asked, would almost unanimously respond that they had the best lifestyle. in the world.”

But Norfolk Island’s revenues were hit hard by two events in the early 2000s, first the introduction of the GST and then in 2008 the global financial crisis.

Maywald says Norfolk effectively lost its duty-free status when the GST went into effect.

“The things that were taxed at a very high rate on the mainland, the so-called luxury sales taxes on things like perfumes and alcohol and some household appliances and jewelry, they were extremely cheap on the island. from Norfolk because they didn’t have that sales tax, ”he says.

“Tourists would come there for a week and pay for their tickets with all the savings they made on their purchases.

Norfolk Islanders have not been compensated and tax changes have hurt their tourism.

“From that point on, most tourists were retirees or people on fixed incomes,” says Maywald.

Then in 2008, tourism plunged again as GFC made it difficult for the elderly to travel, while the high Australian dollar made vacationing abroad more attractive.

The roadmap to be part of Australia

These increasingly difficult economic circumstances ultimately ended self-government on Norfolk Island.

In 2010, in a decision that apparently surprised many Norfolk Islanders, Chief Minister David Buffett told the Legislature that the island would relinquish its autonomy in exchange for a Commonwealth bailout.

That year, Neil Pope, a former Victorian Labor MP and conflict resolution expert, went there as an administrator to negotiate what was known as the Norfolk Island Roadmap, in order that the island can be part of both the Australian tax system and the social safety net.

“We would back up their budget, but only on the basis that they were able to respond to various aspects included in the roadmap,” Pope said.

“They needed to increase their income, so it was things like trying to introduce property tax, which they never had. They might be props, but basically their only real source of income was a 12 percent GST that applied to everything.

He says the vast majority of the islanders were in favor of joining Australia’s tax system, but the loss of self-government was a sticking point.

“The way it’s portrayed is as if self-government has always existed on Norfolk Island. Well, self-government has only existed on Norfolk Island for 36 years, ”he says.

In 2014, the Standing Joint Committee on the National Capital and Outside Territories conducted a survey of the economic development of Norfolk Island, with particular emphasis on tourism. Jon Stanhope says their mandate was to inquire about the economic future and capacity of Norfolk Island and the main recommendation was to end self-government.

“They didn’t invite submissions on governance. They did not collect evidence on governance. Basically, they deceived the whole community, ”he says.

Integrating Norfolk into our democracy

One of the members of the Joint Standing Committee who recommended getting rid of self-government is Gai Brodtmann, the Labor MP for the Canberra seat, the ACT electorate where the people of Norfolk Island will now be registered to vote.

She says the current governance arrangements are holding back the island’s economic growth.

“Every time I have been up there I have seen a further deterioration in the economic situation: more shops closed, more industries failing and more people leaving the island, and that is very concerning.” , she says.

“All of these reviews highlighted the fact that the existing governance arrangements were not serving the island to the best of their ability. The current arrangements were simply not viable.

From July 1, what is called a regional council will take charge of what is traditionally the competences of local councils: roads, taxes and garbage. At the federal level, it will become compulsory to vote in the Canberra electorate in the ACT.

Where state laws would apply, it will be the laws of New South Wales, although residents of Norfolk Island cannot vote in New South Wales state elections. South.

“Just imagine any other community in Australia on the continent where you’re going to be holus-bolus in an electorate and you aren’t even asked for your opinion on this proposal,” Stanhope says.

“Especially when you live a few thousand miles in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and they’ve decided to tie you into a landlocked electorate that is part of the nation’s capital.

“There is no responsibility, there is no political responsibility for the day to day decisions that affect your life.”

read more
Self government

Syria’s under-the-radar self-government revolution

On June 15, Syrians fleeing the war head for the border crossings of Akcakale, in the province of Sanliurfa. (Bulent Kilic/Agence France-Presse via Getty Images)

Frederic C. Hof, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, served as special adviser for the Syria transition at the State Department in 2012.

OWith Iran circling the wagons around a shrinking Syrian state nominally led by Bashar al-Assad, a key question looms large: who could ultimately replace the ruling clan if Tehran cannot not keep its customers afloat? The answer is both complex and hopeful: local-level self-reliance is taking root in Syria and laying the foundation for what is to follow.

One of the few uplifting experiences to have in any Syrian context these days is meeting young Syrian activists, as I did recently in Gaziantep, Turkey. A young lawyer said something striking: “It’s not just a revolution against Bashar al-Assad. It is a revolution for self-government. Replacing Bashar with someone else issuing decrees from Damascus – even someone much better than Bashar – is not acceptable.

Since the beginning of the Syrian uprising, unarmed militants have formed, in the worst imaginable security conditions, local councils to provide government services to their neighbors. It’s revolutionary. For 40 years, the Assad family had concentrated in their hands, in Damascus, the direct government of all Syrians. The civil servants assigned to the Syrian hinterland were, at best, command clerks. At worst, they were active members of a clan-dominated police state and terrorist network. Unless Iran helps its client to resubjugate Syria, the days of Damascus-dominated governance are over.

There are now hundreds of local councils in all parts of Syria that are not Assad. Some operate clandestinely in areas overrun by the so-called Islamic State. Some operate in areas where the Assad regime – with the full support of Iran – is unloading helicopter-borne “barrel bombs” on schools, hospitals and mosques. Some operate in neighborhoods under starvation sieges facilitated by Iran. These local councils are supported by a vast network of civil society organizations – the kinds of voluntary professional associations that underpin Western democracies. All this is new in Syria. This is the essence of the Syrian revolution.

This combination of local councils and civil society organizations is a cocktail of grassroots and bottom-up efforts. The women and men who risk everything for their neighbors are heroes. Yet these heroes are literally misunderstood. Everyone in Syria knows Assad and his rapacious family. Many in Syria know the names of exiled opposition figures and leaders of armed groups inside the country. Yet those who represent Syria’s future political elite are largely unknown. It is essential to integrate these battle-tested leaders into the Syrian national political mainstream.

The challenge is to forge links between a Syrian opposition in exile recognized by the United States and others such as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people and those in the field who are gaining legitimacy the old-fashioned way. Young activists tell sad stories of their attempts and failures to attract the interest of the opposition ‘Syrian interim government’ in Gaziantep. They offer compelling stories of vocational training for women while Assad’s bombs fell, of promoting an independent judiciary in the face of Assad’s despotism and sectarian alternatives, and of helping local councils to educate children so that young Syrians can be kept out of the clutches of the armed forces. extremists. They also recount meetings with acting government “ministers” who spend 20 minutes feigning interest before pulling out their cellphones and moving on to other matters.

After acknowledging outside opposition in 2012, the United States and its partners should prepare it for prime time – prepare it to govern in case an opportunity, perhaps in the form of a safe haven, arises. would suddenly present. Yet the links between Syria’s future political masters and actual governance on the ground in territory other than that of Assad and the Islamic State are tenuous. Activists complain that visits to Syria by Turkey-based opposition officials are few, far between and often invisible.

Western support to local councils and civil society organizations has often been excellent. America’s direct love for exiles – often left in the clutches of embattled Saudis, Qataris and Turks – has been abysmal. If the Syrian interim government moved inside the country now, it wouldn’t push any buttons connected to anything. It would be insane. That would be instantly irrelevant.

The alternative to Assad comes from the Syrian base. This alternative must be nurtured and protected by the United States and its partners. And it must be connected to external structures recognized by the West as legitimate. The failure to do so to date partly explains the bizarre worries voiced by Obama administration officials that Assad – the mass murderer – might fall too quickly. He can’t fall fast enough. Yet those in government who worry about the apparent lack of alternatives have done far too little to promote one. They have failed to bridge the gap between potential leaders in exile and those inside Syria who are leading a self-government revolution.

read more
Self government

The spirit of 1773 and the right to local autonomy

After much debate among townspeople, Colonel John Ashley, Moderator of the Sheffield, Massachusetts, Municipal Assembly decided it was time to call a vote. He then watched everyone in the room raise their hand. The Sheffield Declaration – declaring England’s control over the people of Sheffield null and void – was adopted unanimously.

To the south, Richard Barry saw a similar scene unfold in Charlotte, North Carolina, as his neighbors proceeded to pass the Charlotte Town Resolves (also known as Mecklenburg Resolves for the county in which Charlotte sits ) by unanimous vote. The resolutions stated that all laws derived from the authority of the King or Parliament are nullified and nullified.

And so it is that the inhabitants of cities, towns and counties – more than 90 as a whole – collectively realized that the system of government they lived under (which protected the rights of the few) needed to be replaced with a system of government that served a much different purpose.

It wasn’t yet 1776.

Town by town, town by town, the people of the colonies began to declare their independence from England more than three years before the lofty words of the United States’ Declaration of Independence were penned by the fledgling Continental Congress. . They had decided they couldn’t wait.

These local statements had two things in common.

First, they set out what they believed to be the basic purpose of the government and declared that English rule of the colonies was not up to par.

The Sheffield Declarationfor example, said that the great end of political society is to guarantee…those rights and privileges with which God and nature have made us free. These rights included the right to the peaceful enjoyment of our life, liberty and property”. Finding that the system of English rule violated – rather than protected – these rights, the people of Sheffield recognized that only their own democratically elected local governments could constitutionally create laws or regulations”.

The second, perhaps most surprising, commonality shared by the Declarations was that they were not written by those named Adams, Warren or Hancock, but rather by the Bernards, Roots, Fellows, Austin, Alexander, Harrison and Smith.

In other words, it was not the Boston-based patriots who put them forward – to whom historians tend to attribute the movement of revolutionary heaven and earth – but rather they were put forward by ordinary people. responding to a crisis by taking matters into their own hands. hands. This collective local legislation then forced an emerging nation to choose between the old and the new.

No more waiting for nothing to happen

Today, political, environmental, and labor activists work primarily at the state, national, and international levels to try to address the many crises we face.

Unfortunately, institutions at these levels have not taken any concrete action to resolve major crises, as this would reduce the power these institutions hold and prevent major economic actors from advancing their own interests using these institutions.

And so we expect the international community to stop global warming. We are waiting for our state legislatures to stop fracturing communities for oil and gas. We expect Congress to protect employee rights in the workplace and ban assault weapons. We are waiting for the president to shut down Keystone XL. We are waiting for the United States Department of Agriculture to stop legalizing genetically modified foods.

We are waiting for someone else to protect nature from an economic engine that demands (in fact demands) the endless production and consumption of more things. We romp through endless editorials, while appealing endless permits and testifying in front of microphones that aren’t even on.

We are waiting. Because that’s what we’ve been carefully trained to do. This is what the major environmental and political labor organizations have trained us to do. This is what companies and our culture have taught us to do. Wait for others to achieve accomplishments we have already achieved, and wait even longer for solutions in the face of a system that cares very little for the rest of us.

Isn’t it time to stop waiting for something that will never happen? In the lyrics of Derrick Jensen-author of End of Game and The culture of make-believe:

When we stop hoping for outside help, when we stop hoping that the terrible situation we find ourselves in will somehow be resolved, when we stop hoping that the situation will not get worse one way or another, then we are finally free – really free – to honestly start working on solving it. I would say that when hope dies, action begins.

Some are now tired of waiting for nothing to happen. And what they started to do bears a remarkable similarity to the colonial townspeople who eventually gave up hope that England would leave them alone.

Like settlers, residents of communities across the country do not expect permission from anyone. higher authority. And, perhaps unsurprisingly, their work shares these two other commonalities that have united the more than ninety towns and cities that adopted these early declarations.

First, communities are calling the current government system for what it is – a system that only protects the rights of a few – and are organizing to establish a new system, starting at the local level, that works differently. Second, those running this new system are people you’ve probably never heard of — they’re not the Clintons, the Feinsteins, or the Reids — but rather names like Olivas, Norton, and Martin.

Establish a Community Bill of Rights

In 2013residents of Mora County, New Mexico became the first county residents in the United States to ban oil and gas extraction thanks to the passage of a new law – a community charter of rights” – which protects their right to clean air, clean water and a sustainable energy future.

By enacting their ban, the people of Mora have joined nearly 200 other communities across the country who are using their cities, towns, counties, and villages to create a new system of government – ​​a system that protects everyone’s rights to an economically and environmentally sustainable community. It is a community where the people of a community have more rights than businesses and their managers, where ecosystems have their own rights, and where local governments have the power to protect health and safety even in the face of legislatures. States whose interests lie in other orientations.

And just like their colonial ancestors – who did not seek independence through special English courts, such as the Chambers of Commerce – today’s communities, while hoping that courts and judges will side with their side when challenges to these local laws arise, do not count there.

In fact, in January 19, instead of siding with Mora residents against oil and gas interests, U.S. District Court Judge James Browning for the District of New Mexico sided with Royal Dutch Shell PLC and overturned the Mora County hydraulic fracturing ban. In his ruling, Judge Browning reaffirmed that the state government has the final say on whether communities are fractured and that companies have more rights than the people of the communities in which they do business.

In doing so, the court affirmed what many communities already know: that the existing legal structure denies our power to decide the fate of our communities. In doing so, it denies our communities the power to protect our water and our nature. So the problem is not just corporate power, it’s a system of government that supports it.

In places where a critical mass of these laws have been passed, people are now coming together on different issues to start state organizations focused on creating a new system of law through state constitutions and eventually , through the federal constitution. A system of law that elevates the rights of communities and nature above those of corporations and the state.

Some have described it as the next great social movement – one that occupy the law” by making municipal legislation a vehicle for social change. A movement committed to nonviolent civil disobedience against a system of government that is increasingly indistinguishable from our economic system – a system in which most of us lose, and only very few win.

But those who do the work see it more simply. Mik Robertson is chairman of the Licking Township, Clarion County, Pennsylvania Board of Township Supervisors. Early in this movement, Licking passed an ordinance—also the first of its kind—directly challenging corporate powers by banning the dumping by companies of sewage sludge in the township. Robertson puts it this way: People have rights and businesses do not. What we seek is individual freedom and local control.

It may be the The spirit of 73we hear resounding through the centuries. It’s time we listened. It’s time to act.

read more
Self government

Eastern Libya declares autonomy | News

Provincial leaders announce a regional government to challenge the weak central authority that has failed to unite the country.

Eastern Libya declared an autonomous regional government in an official ceremony, challenging the country’s weak central government which has failed to assume unifying power over rebels and various tribes since the 2011 war broke out. ousted Muammar Gaddafi.

Leaders of an autonomy movement gathered in the small town of Ajdabiya on Sunday to launch the government under the name of Barqa, or Cyrenaica as it is also known, supporters said.

A pro-federalist television channel showed more than 20 ministers being sworn in on a podium decorated with a Cyrenaica flag.

They were joined by tribal leader Ibrahim Jathran, the former head of Libya’s Petroleum Protection Force responsible for guarding oil installations, who defected this summer and seized the biggest ports Ras Lanuf and Es-Sider with his troops.

Jathran stood next to self-proclaimed Prime Minister Abd-Rabbo al-Barassi, a defected air force commander.

symbolic blow

The announcement is a symbolic blow to the Tripoli government’s efforts to reopen eastern ports and oil fields blocked since the summer by rebels and tribesmen demanding a greater share of power and oil wealth.

This has no practical meaning, but is sure to worsen ties between the east and Tripoli, which has rejected the notion of autonomy.

Officials were not immediately available for comment.

Lawlessness has ravaged large areas of the OPEC producer since Gaddafi’s ousting in 2011. The government has been unable to rein in rebel groups and armed tribes.

Prime Minister Ali Zeidan has been seeking contacts with the East in recent days as he tries to reopen blocked oil ports in an area housing 60% of the country’s oil production.

Protesters and strikes at ports and oilfields have caused crude production to fall to around 10% of Libya’s capacity of 1.25 million barrels per day.

The North African country was pumping 1.4 million bpd until the strikes began.

read more
Self government

Federalists of Cyrenaica declare autonomy on the occasion of the 64th anniversary of the independence of the Emirate of Cyrenaica – LibyaHerald

By Ahmed Ruhayam.

[/subscribelocker][subscribelocker][/subscribelocker] The crowd at the Marj rally commemorating the 64th anniversary of the proclamation of independence by the Emirate of Cyrenaica

Benghazi, June 1, 2013:

Several thousand Cyrenaic supporters of federalism today attended a large rally in Marj at which Sheikh . . .[restrict]Ahmed Zubair Senussi, head of the Cyrenaica Transitional Council, declared self-government for Cyrenaica. “Cyrenaica is a federal territory within the framework of the Libyan State and from this day, June 01, 2013, will begin to manage its own affairs,” he said at the event, intended to commemorate the 64th anniversary of the 1949 declaration of independence by the Emirate of Cyrenaica.

“Cyrenaica will activate the 1951 Libyan constitution, establish a Senate and a Congress to form the Parliament of Cyrenaica, as well as a regional government,” Zubair announced. He also called for the formation of a defense force to protect Cyrenaica.

Furthermore, he demanded that the General National Congress transfer funding for Cyrenaica to the Benghazi branch of the Central Bank and allocate budgets for the development and employment of young Cyrenaica.

There were no bombings or assassinations in the east of the country and no forest fires in the Green Mountains while the NTC was based in Benghazi, he said. These only started after the move to Tripoli. He accused unnamed political forces based in the capital of targeting Cyrenaica because they were not following their agendas.

According to Moammar Al-Arafi, head of the media committee for today’s rally, at least 6,700 people attended. There is no independent confirmation of the figure.

They did, Arafi told the Herald of Libyain response to recent developments in western Libya – in particular the manner in which the Political Isolation Law was passed and the current uncertain political outlook for the country.

Support for federalism has grown steadily in eastern Libya over the past year as the government has struggled to cope with security and the public has grown increasingly impatient. lack of political and economic progress.

Last month, a senior Cyrenaian official with close ties to Zubair told the Herald of Libya that due to the growing chaos in the country and the government’s inability to take decisive action, Cyrenaica would declare its autonomy and continue to govern itself, while waiting for the rest of the country to pull itself together.

Two weeks ago, 3,000 Cyrenaic leaders and community representatives came together and decided to proclaim regional autonomy on June 1, 2013.

In his speech today, Zubair referred to security concerns in Tripoli and elsewhere. “The people of Cyrenaica will not wait for the end of hostilities in Tripoli and Fezzan,” he said. In a reference to the Political Isolation Act, he also rejected any law passed at gunpoint.

He also attacked Congress for rejecting demands for federalism. “We have officially asked the General National Congress to organize a referendum on federalism; they ignored our requests.

Sheikh Ahmed Zubair Al-Senussi welcomed by participants in today’s rally

Today’s rally started at 10.30am this morning when people started gathering in Marj. Around noon, Zubair arrived to open the event which began with a recitation of the Holy Quran and the national anthem. This was followed by remarks from Yousef Ali, head of Marj’s council of elders.

Zubair’s proclamation of self-government as head of the Cyrenaica Council formed in March last year included messages to the international community. The council respected the rights of women and children, he said, praising the important role of women in Libya’s history and saying they would continue to play a major role in the country. Cyrenaica would also focus on collecting weapons and fighting corruption and terrorism.

“Federalism was furiously attacked by the media and some respected political leaders when Cyrenaica first expressed its desire for a federal state,” said Faraj el-Kezza, Secretary General of the Democratic Union Party, who attended the ceremony. But opinions were changing, he said.

A recent national survey conducted by the University of Benghazi

The research and advisory center, sponsored by the GNC and the government, showed conflicting views, he said.

“Although the survey shows that only 8% of Libyans want a federal state, the survey also shows that 47% favor limited local legislative and executive powers. In addition, 36% are in favor of extended local legislative powers and 48% in favor of extended local executive powers. By any definition, this means that the Libyan people are looking for a federal state.

El-Kezza added: “The Libyan people want to manage their lives, which means managing their future, planning and developing their regions and economies.”

Whether today’s event is just one more statement or a bigger departure remains to be seen.

Cyrenaica’s declaration of independence on June 1, 1949 followed negotiations between the Emir, Idris Al-Senussi, future King Idris, and the British military forces that had ruled the province after expelling the Italian colonial authorities in 1943 In fact, Cyrenaica was not fully “independent” and the British continued to control some aspects of its government. The emirate then joined with British-administered Tripolitania and French-administered Fezzan to form the fully independent Kingdom of Libya in 1951.

1950 Cyrenaica stamp


read more