Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Canadian Aboriginal voice : retooling Hirschman’s concepts of voice and exit Freeman, Stacey 2014

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


24-ubc_2014_spring_freeman_stacey.pdf [ 409.1kB ]
JSON: 24-1.0166912.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0166912-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0166912-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0166912-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0166912-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0166912-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0166912-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

     CANADIAN ABORIGINAL VOICE:  RETOOLING HIRSCHMAN’S CONCEPTS OF VOICE AND EXIT   by  STACEY FREEMAN  B.A., Carleton University, 2010     A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF   MASTERS OF ARTS  in  THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES  (Political Science)  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA  (Vancouver)   April 2014     © Stacey Freeman, 2014    ii ABSTRACT  The purpose of this study is to identify barriers faced by Aboriginals when employing voice channels for political and civic participation. This article begins with an overview of literature addressing participation paradigms. It critiques previous literature and offers a mathematical model to address the cost-benefit analysis Aboriginals face when employing various voice channels within Canada. This study is divided into two parts. Part I examines the costs to employing voice channels typically ascribed to Aboriginal participation. Part II, employs a case study of an Environmental Assessment currently underway between BC Hydro and the West Moberly First Nations. The case study applies ideas developed in Part I, highlighting barriers to Aboriginal participation. Throughout, this research examines the colonial relationship found within Canadian institutions and offers a new approach to restructure the relationship between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples.                       iii PREFACE   This dissertation is the original, unpublished, independent work by the author, S. Freeman.  ivTABLE OF CONTENTS   ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………………. ii PREFACE ……………………………………………………………………………. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS   ………………………………………………………………. iv LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………………….. vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………….. 1 1.1 Background   …….……………………………………………………………………. 3 1.2 Purpose and Objectives ……………………………………………………………. 4 1.3 Methods and Case Selection    ….……………………………………………………. 5 1.4 Research Limitations ……………………………………………………………. 8 1.5 Thesis Organization ……………………………………………………………. 9 CHAPTER 2: ABORIGINAL VOICE   …………………………………………………. 11 2.1 Abstinence from Voice: The Literature ……………………………………………. 13  2.1.1 Nationalist Explanation ……………………………………………………. 14  2.1.2 Social Exclusion Explanation ……………………………………………. 15  2.1.3 Socio-Economic Explanations ……………………………………………. 17  2.1.4 Political Mobilization ……………………………………………………. 17 CHAPTER 3: VOTING   …..……………………………………………………………. 19 3.1 Voting as Voice ……………………………………………………………………. 19 3.2 Voting Calculus ……………………………………………………………………. 21  3.2.1 Homogeneity ……………………………………………………………. 22 3.3 Barriers to Voting ……………………………………………………………………. 25   v 3.3.1 Mobilization and Political Efficacy  ….……………………………………. 25 3.3.2 Social Determinant of Age   ….……………………………………………. 26 3.3.3 Economic Development   …..………………………………………………. 30 3.3.4 Educational Attainment   ….………………………………………………… 32 3.3.5 Health …………………………………………………………………….. 33 CHAPTER 4: CIVIC ENGAGEMENT   …..…………………………………………….. 39 4.1 Protests …………………………………………………………………………….. 41 4.2 Grass-root Organizations …………………………………………………………….. 43 4.3 Barriers to Civic Engagement  ….…………………………………………………….. 45 CHAPTER 5: CASE STUDY    ………………………………………………………….. 51 5.1 Case Study Background …………………………………………………………….. 52 5.1.1 The Environmental Assessment Process  …………………………………... 53  5.1.2 Contemporary History of Site C  …………………………………………… 54 5.2 Results from Study …………………………………………………………………… 55  5.2.1 Results Pertaining to Aboriginal Voice   …………………………………… 57  5.2.2 The Power of WMFN’s Voice  …………………………………………….. 59 5.3 Barriers to Aboriginal Voice  ………………………………………………………… 60 CHAPTER 6: ABORIGINAL EXIT  ……………………………………………………. 62 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND  FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS  …………………………………………………. 65 7.1 Recommendations  …………………………………………………………………… 65 BIBLIOGRAPHY ………………………………………………………………………... 71 APPENDICES …………………………………………………………………………… 93   vi Appendix A: Aboriginal Leaders Involved in Canadian Politics ……………….. 93  Appendix B: Databases …………………………………………………………. 96  Appendix C ……………………………………………………………………… 97  Appendix D ……………………………………………………………………… 98                                     viiLIST OF TABLES   Table 1  Impacts on West Moberly First Nations ………………………………… 53 Table 2 Ministers of the Crown  ………………………………………………….. 90 Table 3 Members of Parliament  ………………………………………………….. 90 Table 4: Senators  ………………………………………………………………….. 91 Table 5 Databases  ………………………………………………………………… 93 Table 6 Aboriginal Candidates Elected in Canadian General Elections ………….. 94 Table 7 Superintendents-General of Indian Affairs (1868-1936) ………………… 95 Table 8 Ministers responsible for Indian Affairs (1936-1950) …………………… 96 Table 9 Ministers responsible for Indian Affairs- Minister of Citizenship………... 96 Table 10 Ministers of Indian Affairs and Northern Development  ………………… 96  1CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Under most systems, be it an economic, social or political system, organizations are subject to lapses in functional, efficient or even moral behaviour (Hirschman, 1970:1). As Hirschman rightfully argues, regardless of a societal institutions’ raison d’être, some actors will fail to live up to the expected behaviour of them (Hirschman 1970: 1). This same principle applies to political organizations, which have often been kept in check by societal actors.  In a pluralistic democratic society, such as Canada’s, individual actors may choose to use their “voice” in order to signal to elected officials and firms of their displeasure with services provided to them, or a particular policy about to come into effect. These actors, or citizens, of a nation-state exert pressure onto governmental agencies in order to reach the best possible policy outcome. Organizations (or leaders), however, have an interest in suppressing voice in order to reduce the possibility of needing to bargain with citizens. This has the effect of maximizing benefits of policy x by reducing the costs. Voice serves as one of two options for an individual facing a dissatisfying situation. Using Hirschman’s concept of exit, voice and loyalty, individuals can also exert an “exit” option when they choose to stop engaging with an organization or even when they choose to leave the organization. Economically, exit is straightforward. When the revenues sink, management feels compelled to reassess what led to the exit in the first place (Hirschman, 1970: 4). To address the fault, the organization undertakes corrective measures, ensuring a future increase in revenues as customers purchase the firm’s products once more. In other words, exit can manifest itself as a form of leave from the system. Leaving is relayed to a firm statistically, affecting the firm’s future behaviours. In the context of citizenship, or nationality, exit from a nation-state can be restricted by economic, political and societal factors. The static and dynamic effects of exit can   2increase or reduce exit’s effectiveness by changing the bargaining power of citizens. A lack of financial and structural resources, for example, hinders a citizen’s ability to exit a nation-state. Cultural and ancestral attachment to land also serves as an inhibitor to exit. In this fashion, the employment of voice serves as a feasible alternative. The “firm’s customers or the organization’s members [can] express their dissatisfaction directly to management or to some other authority to which management is subordinate or through general protest addressed to anyone who cares to listen” (Hirschman, 1970: 4). Voice provides an assertive option for individuals and allows citizens to articulate their critical opinions (Hirschman, 1970: 16).   Voice, in the context of Aboriginal participation in Canada, provides an interesting area of study due its implications towards contemporary democratic practices. In Canada, 3.8% of the population now identify themselves as Aboriginal (Bishop & Preiner, 2005:1). This means that more than one million people identify themselves as Aboriginals. Out of these numbers, approximately half are under the age of 24 (McCaslin & Boyer, 2009: 64), suggesting a rapid expansion in Aboriginal births (Statistics Canada, 2007a-h). With a growing population, the inability1 to express a strong Aboriginal voice (see Baker & McLelland, 2003; Blais et al., 2004; Booth & Skelton, 2011) has incredible implications for a country that considers itself a pluralistic democracy (CRIC, 2001).2 A reduction in participatory practices by Aboriginal groups as compared to non-Aboriginal groups3 (Bedford & Pobihushchy, 1995), coupled with strong                                                             1 This inability stems from structural and historical barriers as will be discussed later in this paper. Please refer to Chapter 3 and Chapter 5. 2 Demos, which stands at the very heart of democracy, centres around the notion that the people create the political unit. 3 Aboriginal participation in education, labour markets, and the electoral system continues to lag behind non-Aboriginal participation. Of those Aboriginals between 25-64 years of age, only 10% had obtained a university degree in 2011. This compares to their non-Aboriginal counterparts where 26% held a university degree in 2011 (AANDC, 2013). Moreover, 29% of Aboriginals had not completed high school compared to only 12% of non-Aboriginals in the same age category (AANDC, 2013). With respect to the labour market, the unemployment rate for Aboriginals (25-64 years old) remained at 13% compared to that of non-Aboriginals, resting at 6% (Ibid). Lastly, Aboriginal participation in the electoral system continues to be much lower than that of non-Aboriginals (See   3population growth (Statistics Canada, 2007a-h) could have economic and democratic implications for Canada in the future.  This research seeks to identify barriers faced by Aboriginals when they employ voice channels for political and civic participation. In so doing, it examines whether there are additional costs for Aboriginals over non-Aboriginals in the employment of various voice channels. The research begins with an overview of literature addressing participation paradigms. It critiques previous literature and offers a mathematical model to address the cost-benefit analysis Aboriginals face when employing various voice channels within Canada. Part I of this study examines the costs to utilizing voice channels typically ascribed to Aboriginal participation. Part II continues with a case study of an Environmental Assessment currently underway between BC Hydro and the West Moberly First Nations. Site C Clean Energy Project’s Environmental Assessment (EA) presents the opportunity to apply ideas developed in Part I of this research, highlighting barriers to Aboriginal participation. The case study is insightful by the way in which the West Moberly First Nations utilize multiple avenues for voice during the consultation process of  Site C Clean Energy Project’s EA. Lastly, this research examines the colonial relationship found within Canadian institutions and offers a new approach to restructure the relationship between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples. 1.1 Background The Canadian political process continues to marginalize Aboriginal people4 today. Governments, multinational companies and business groups systematically remove Aboriginal land, encroach upon Aboriginal territories, and remove resources for economic gain (Obomsawin, 1993). To further compound their misfortune, many Aboriginal groups have little                                                                                                                                                                                                Appendix C). “Since Confederation, only 17 self-identified Aboriginal people have been elected to the House of Commons” (Hunter, 2003). 4 The process of marginalization is not a new process, occurring historically (Coulthard, January 7 2013).    4or reduced access to public services such as healthcare or education. Their impoverishment becomes evanescent and their economic situation difficult to change. The condition suffered by Aboriginal groups in Canada is a reflection of years of colonization and structural barriers they continue to face. With little to no control over their land and resources, their situation worsens. This dispossession from their land and resources weakens any meaningful participation they might posit “in any political exercise and structure” (Carling, 2001: 278). As a minority, the government has ignored their democratic space by marginalizing them from any social, economic and political life. It has further failed to recognize the independent status of Aboriginal groups.5 As Carling has suggested, democratic space within nation-states is essential for an equal playing field of Aboriginal voice; and in order to create that democratic space, there is a need for recognition and respect of Aboriginal peoples and their systems for decision-making and self-governance (Carling, 2001: 278).  1.2 Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this research was to further develop the body of knowledge related to Aboriginal voice within the Canadian context. While it converges with previous research focusing on Aboriginal participation, it also offers a new perspective on Aboriginal participatory practices by employing Hirschman’s framework of voice and exit. The objective of the study is twofold: a) to uncover possible barriers to voice and b) to examine if other options (such as exit) reasonably exist for Aboriginal groups within Canada. Of particular interest was whether the expression of voice incurred a high cost to Aboriginal groups and if so, if they could apply pressure to the government through exit.                                                             5 The denial of self-determination (RCAP, 1996), a recognized international right entrenched in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations, 2008), is an injustice to all Aboriginal peoples in Canada. 5 Aboriginals have historically been represented and governed by Ministers of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (See Appendix D), curtailing the independence of Aboriginal nations.   5The research begins by analyzing existing data on Aboriginal groups within Canada and what potential costs to participation are incurred by Aboriginal peoples. Using a cost-benefit analysis, this research employs a framework that begins by assuming rational behaviour by societal groups and the government. While this is not universally true in reality, for the purposes of this thesis, it was necessary in order to consider the cost calculus for voice and exit. 1.3 Methods and Case Selection Data employed for this research was located entirely within the public domain. Sources included working papers from Statistics Canada, data from the 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative, media releases, verbatim transcripts, court cases, letters and reports. As a result, the research undertaken was qualitative and exploratory in its nature as it relied on existing documentation. 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: Data from the 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative was based off of a 2006 series of questionnaires. Approximately 80% received the short census questionnaire, and the remaining 20% received the long questionnaire. Some reserves did not participate as enumeration was not permitted or was interrupted prior to completion. The census gathered data on socio-economic characteristics of the population and highlighted key population information in its final report. All community profiles are accessible online at  BC Hydro: For the case study selection this research accessed BC Hydro’s Site C Clean Energy Project online webpage. Through this online directory, agreements, reports, current information and news articles regarding the project were accessible. In certain sources from BC Hydro, power differentials6 observed led to distorted communication between parties. The research, as such, decoded data based off of any potential hegemonic structures. The social context, language employed and structure of consultations were heavily examined. For more information from BC Hydro, visit: Vancouver Sun: The Vancouver Sun provided necessary local media releases pertaining to the Site C Clean Energy Project. The data collected focused on print or electronic publications. Often coverage focused on contextual issues such as the political or economic dimensions of the project (See Appendix B). Moreover, coverage largely                                                             6 Power differentials between both parties replicated Gramsci’s definition of hegemony. Or, the process of domination whereby one set of ideas subverts or co-opts another (Gramsci, 1971).   6favoured the Site C Project from the timeframe of January 2012 to August 2013. Criticisms emerged mostly in context to perceived costs of the dam over its implications to Aboriginal communities. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC): The CBC provided a database of national media pertaining to BC Hydro’s Clean Energy Project. Data collected largely focused on electronic publications from 2011 to August 2013. However, this research also accessed one radio interview pertaining to the EIS report (See Appendix B). Coverage largely constructed the hydroelectric dam as an economic and political problem, focusing on the overall cost of the dam: environmental issues were constructed as subsidiary concerns.   Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry (CEAR): Overall, the CEAR site offered numerous venues to elicit information on the environmental assessment of the Site C Project.  The data collected, therefore, focused primarily on electronic publications. With over 1508 documents for the Site C Project, data was pulled from publications pertaining specifically to the West Moberly First Nations (WMFN). Of particular interest were responses by the WMFN to BC Hydro as well as timeframes set for public consultations. All information can be accessed online at  The analysis of the data collected involved classification and coding into research categories. The first set of categories emerged after an initial reading of all the data collected. The initial reading identified key words, examined their historical and social roots, and attempted to replace them with similar words. Replacing them with alternatives helped uncover the normative flavour of certain texts. For example, the terms ‘political’ and ‘civic’ were far from neutral, influencing the meaning of news articles, radio broadcasts and reports. ‘Civic’ held less pejorative prescriptions than the term ‘political’ which rooted itself in conflict. The association of the term ‘civic’ or ‘political’ to activities led by Aboriginals could often determine the portrayal of such activities as either adversarial or virtuous.  Data examined by the research presented a myriad of these terms, including the juxtaposition of ‘Indian,’ ‘non-Aboriginal,’ ‘Aboriginal’ and ‘Canadian.’ Indian served as an out-dated and derogatory word for which to label Canada's aboriginal peoples. This term was found in older texts where a bias existed towards ‘normalizing’ Aboriginal patterns of behaviour to fit non-Aboriginal standards. In some research ‘Canadian’ was used to describe individuals not belonging to the Aboriginal   7community: the subtle suggestion that an individual born Aboriginal could not also belong to Canada. A less restrictive alternative was therefore employed by this research: the use of the term Aboriginal to connote those who identify as First Nations, Métis and Inuit. ‘Non-Aboriginal’ therefore included anyone who did not self-identify in these categories.  Due to the historical and multidimensional nature of the data, the research employs a textual analysis. This is because text, as a multidimensional structure (Kaplan, 1990), must be understood beyond its grammar, syntax, phonology and semantics. Understanding grammar does not constitute an understanding of the text (Ibid). As Kaplan (1990) suggests, “coherence and the world view that author and receptor bring to the text are essential.” In order to comprehend the meaning of a text, it is imperative to examine the author’s intent with their ability to encode that intent. This should be examined in concert with the receptor’s intent and their ability to decode the author’s intent (Kaplan, 1990). In any transaction there is a process of negotiation and compromise which occurs between actors (Gramsci, 1971). A researcher must call upon themselves to challenge any assumptions and norms. Moreover, the ability to decode is further grounded in how language is connected with reality: “Our idea of what belongs to the realm of reality is given for us in the language that we use” (Winch, 1958: 11 & 14). Language and meaning are therefore, in some ways, social constructs (Winch, 1958). Therefore, this research proceeds by examining both the structure and social contexts of the data in order to expose ideologies and power differentials as they appear.  After the initial data was examined and categorized, several barriers to Aboriginal voice within Canada were identified. They included: lack of resources, cynicism towards non-Aboriginal institutions coupled sometimes with a sense of not being “Canadian,” accessibility problems, language barriers, dismissal or misuse of traditional knowledge, and a lack of power.   8Other barriers were also identified but eliminated from the findings of this research because they exerted minimal influence on whether or not Aboriginal groups could express their voice. One example was the determinant of age which many scholars (Howe & Bedford, 2009) have previously identified as a predominant barrier to Aboriginal voice. However, while this study viewed the determinant of age as a potential cost towards participatory practices, it did not conclude that age acted as a primary inhibitor to Aboriginal voice. The framework employed was primarily based off Hirschman, Foucault and Gramsci. This was particularly important when examining the top-down nature of government and Aboriginal interactions. For example, whenever government agencies were involved in Environmental Assessments, the research took note whether or not their involvement reflected a power relationship.  As Beaulieu (2005) suggests, “l’intervention dans la relation d’aide est toujours une relation de pouvoir”(159).7 Knowledge and resources, maintained by government agents enabled hegemonic and power-based interactions. From a Foucault perspective, this is known as ‘pouvoir-savoir’ (Foucault); the idea that knowledge is enmeshed with power (Merquior, 1985:108; Beaulieu, 2005).The framework was also particularly useful when understanding that power differentials in the guise of help can dispossess individuals of their autonomy (Beaulieu, 2005: 160). Organizations, which act through the guise of helping, can have the effect of removing the autonomy of Aboriginal groups. They further reconstruct the meaning of any consultation process undertaken between both parties. 1.4 Research Limitations  The research initially encountered problems pertaining to data collection. While the research was qualitative in nature, very little data on Aboriginal participation in Canada exists to date. For example, data from Statistics Canada (2008), from their 2006 Census, was incomplete:                                                             7 Translation: Aid intervention is always a power relationship.   9twenty-two reserves and settlements remained unaccounted for. Finding statistics on voting behaviour was also challenging. Little data exists with respect to Aboriginal voting patterns. Therefore, this research relied on previous research conducted by scholars. As a result, it was subject to biased findings. Research bias was evidenced based on when the findings were reported and who conducted the research. This is indicative in sources referring to Aboriginals as “Indians.” The language employed suggests power dynamics between the researcher and participant. Any discussion of missing metadata did not occur in older sources consulted.  Acknowledgment of possible researcher bias must occur at this point. Having begun with the research question of whether Aboriginal groups wish to employ voice to an equal degree as non-Aboriginals, the research implied a strong possibility that they would not. In order to offset this bias, it was necessary to think of strengths that different voice channels could offer Aboriginal citizens. It was also important to revisit the language employed by this research and analyze what possible power dynamics, bias or opinions could be found. While some instances of bias were located and corrected, it is unimaginable that all personal bias was found and removed. In particular, the propensity to view Aboriginal groups favourably and employ a language matching this cosmology occurred at various stages in this research. 1.5 Thesis Organization  This thesis is organized in chapters. The first chapter is introductory in nature. The second chapter explores literature pertaining to Aboriginal voice. It introduces Aboriginal voice broadly and possible reasons why First Nations might abstain from employing voice. The third chapter examines Aboriginal voice through the electoral system. It employs a voting calculus based on a mathematical model in order to examine the discord between literature and data. By doing so, voting as a voice channel can be more accurately analyzed. Chapter 4 continues by   10reviewing other channels for voice more broadly in order to explore whether one outlet is more effective for Aboriginal groups. It is important to do so before examining exit, in order to broadly discuss what options are available to these societal actors. Chapter 5 proceeds by employing a case study of the West Moberly First Nations based on various sources collected (see BC Hydro, 2011; BC Hydro, 2012a; BC Hydro, 2012b; Logan, 2013; Tannahill, 2012; CEAA, 2013) and their voice in the BC Hydro consultations for Site C. Weaknesses and strengths of the process are identified and an analysis provided. This section helps set up Chapter 6, which examines Hirschman’s concept of exit. Finally, this thesis concludes with Chapter 7, where recommendations and future research directions are discussed.                 11CHAPTER 2: ABORIGINAL VOICE The expression of voice through participatory practices is imperative to the foundations of democracy. Citizens need access to voice channels in order to express their opinions on public matters that concern them. The ability to express voice is central to affirming the dignity of individuals within a democratic system (Carling, 2001) and can be accomplished directly by communicating to policy makers or indirectly by influencing electoral outcomes. Individuals can also organize, form political parties or participate in social movements. All are possible forms of voice that can be used by citizens to keep organizations in check. Historically, Aboriginal people faced exclusion from these Canadian participatory practices (Silver et al., 2005; Guerin, 2003; Hill & Alport, 2010; Whittles, 2005). Perceived as “constitutional wards in need of custodial supervision” (Whittles, 2005: 9), attempts to use Aboriginal voice were stigmatised and undermined by the state (Silver et al., 2005:11; Whittles, 2005). In 1876, the Indian Act replaced Aboriginal forms of self-government with “non-democratic and hierarchical government institutions” (Monture-Angus, 1995: 182), thus controlling the political and social life of those residing on reserves (Wherrett, 1999).8 Until the 1950s, government policies only allowed for limited, federally delegated power, to Indian band councils. The primary decision-making power, therefore, largely rested with the Superintendent-General of Indian Affairs9 (Wherrett, 1999). In the legal context, Aboriginal people were refused                                                             8 The Indian Act provided the right to vote, subject to franchise regulations set by the federal government. Status Indians could vote if they forfeit their status as Indians. It was only in 1960, whereupon the franchise was extended to all Aboriginals without qualification (Ladner: 1971:11).  9  In 2013, present year, the legal title of the Minister of the Crown responsible for overseeing Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada is "Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development."   His powers of administration are derived from subsection 91(24) of the Constitution Act 1867. This position has been delegated to various departments over the course of history. The first department (The Indian Department), created in 1755, was a branch of the British military established to oversee the activities of Aboriginals in Canada. Superintendents working for this Department, were given the responsibility of maintaining good relations with Aboriginals (AANDC, 2010). In 1796, responsibility for Indian Affairs for Upper Canada was delegated to the Lieutenant Governor. In 1800, responsibility for Indian Affairs in Lower Canada was delegated to the Governor General. In   12“the power to interpret their relationship with the colonizer” (Vermette, 2008: 227), leading to the adoption of language and techniques of outsiders in order to express voice. This historic treatment of Aboriginals,10 coupled with the betrayal from figureheads promising legal and social equality and the inability for Aboriginals to hire legal counsel11, continue to cause suspicion for many Aboriginals (Deloria, 1974: 23). Today, the expression of Aboriginal voice suffers from these historical injustices, but also remains largely ‘unheard’ or ignored by Canadian institutions (see Chapter 3, subsection 3).  Colonialism continues to undermine Aboriginal voice by creating a problem of “legitimacy,” whereby the narrative and history of the colonizer takes precedence over Aboriginal narrative and history. David Mackay, of the Nishga nation, alluded to this problem in his statement given to the Royal Commission in 1888:  What we don't like about the Government is their saying this: "We will give you this much land." How can they give it when it is our      own? We cannot understand it. They have never bought it from us or      our forefathers. They have never fought and conquered our people     and taken the land in that way, and yet they say now that they will      give us so much land--our own land. These chiefs do not talk      foolishly, they know the land is their own; our forefathers for                                                                                                                                                                                                1816, responsibility for Indian Affairs for both Upper and Lower Canada was transferred to the Commander of the Armed Forces. Only in 1828 were the offices of the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs and of the Inspector General of the Department of Indian Affairs abolished, to be replaced by the new post of Chief Superintendent of Indian Affairs. In 1830, the Indian Department split into two offices. In Upper Canada, the Lieutenant-Governor assumed responsibility for Indian Affairs, assisted by a Chief Superintendent. In Lower Canada, the Military Secretary assumed control of responsibilities (Ibid). In 1841, Upper and Lower Canada reunited, amalgamating the two offices and placing authority under the Governor General. In 1860, the Crown Lands Department assumed responsibility for Indian matters with the Commissioner appointed as Chief Superintendent. Only after Confederation was control of Aboriginal matters assumed by the federal government, whereupon responsibility was delegated to the Department of Secretary of State Canada. A Superintendent-General of Indian Affairs remained in the Canadian cabinet from 1867 until 1936. Then in 1936, the office of the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs was abolished. Until 1950, power was transferred to the Minister of Mines and Resources (Ibid).  At which time, the Indian Affairs branch was transferred to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration until 1965. In 1966, the position of Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development was established by the power of the Government Organization Act (Ibid). For a list of all individuals responsible for Aboriginal Affairs, see Appendix D. 10 Including, but not limited to, Aboriginal experiences in residential schools. 11 The Indian Act made it illegal to hire legal counsel as well as to mobilize politically. These elements of the Indian Act were only repealed in 1951 (Hanson, 2009).   13     generations and generations past had their land here all around us;      chiefs have had their own hunting grounds, their salmon streams,      and places where they got their berries; it has always been so.   (Calder v. British Columbia (A.G.) [1973] S.C.R. 313).  Despite narratives such as the one David Mackay presented, some Canadian institutions still largely ignore the legitimacy of Aboriginal communities as polities and their role in the management of their rights (Chartrand, 2001: 30; Albert, 2005). The Nisga'a Final Agreement serves to illustrate this point. The agreement allowed the federal government to articulate its beliefs and assumptions about Aboriginal self-government. Respectively, the agreement avoids issues of self-determination and ideas of indigenous nationhood12. However, Canada has also made many attempts to encourage self-government amongst Aboriginal people13. According to Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC), “Canada has signed 20 comprehensive self-government agreements recognizing a wide range of Aboriginal jurisdictions that involve 34 Aboriginal communities across Canada” (AANDC, 2013).  2.1 Abstinence from Voice: The Literature Evidence has suggested that Aboriginal people are less likely to participate in mainstream participatory processes, often abstaining from voting or from participating in development planning processes. Yet very little data has been collected to try to explain these behaviours. This is because determining the extent of participation in any setting has been “notoriously difficult” (Archer, 2003: 39-45). Rather, several theories have been put forward and tested by scholars. Popular explanations include the nationalist explanation, the social exclusion explanation, socio-economic and demographic explanations and political effort explanations. This research seeks to                                                             12 Please refer to the Nisga’a Final Agreement, sections 2.22-2.24 (AANDC, 2000). 13 In 1982, a Special Committee of the House of Commons was appointed to review the Indian status. The Penner Report, the result of this Special Committee, recommended First Nations recognition as a distinct order within the Canadian federation (Wherrett, 1999). Aboriginal and treaty rights were further recognized and affirmed in the 1982 Constitution Act as well as the subsequent report produced by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples in 1996.    14explore these explanations, but also examine their failings. In particular, this research aims to provide a more nuanced approach to literature discussing Aboriginal voice and participation. 2.1.1 Nationalist Explanation One popular explanation for low levels of Aboriginal participation in the Canadian political process has been the nationalist explanation. Under this explanation, Aboriginal groups do not participate because they see themselves as distinct nations (Cairns, 1993: 210).  By voting or engaging with Canadian institutions, Aboriginal groups would be participating in a system that has disenfranchised them, recognizing a body of government that supersedes their own (Hill & Alport, 2010: 245). Voting is often used as a benchmark to test this nationalist explanation whereby refusing to vote has been transformed as a form of political protest at white control of Aboriginal affairs.  As Ladner described in the journal Electoral Insight: “...a majority of Aboriginal people with strong ties to their communities and their history, traditions and language have explicitly decided not to participate in Canadian elections” (Ladner, 2003: 24). Rather, it would be preferable for Aboriginal groups to maintain nation-to-nation ties. Certainly Albert has emphasized the need for a unified Aboriginal voice in order to protect Aboriginals across Canada. Albert has recommended a strong and united Aboriginal nation in order to achieve self-determination and self-government within Canada in order to protect the future of Aboriginal peoples (Albert, 2005: 13). This notion of a unified voice has become more popularized in recent years as can be seen through the Idle No More movement within Canada which emphasizes Aboriginal Sovereignty and empowerment. However, Aboriginal sovereignty and distinctiveness are limited as indicators for a lack of Aboriginal participation in the Canadian political process. An inherent flaw of the nationalist argument can be witnessed through the involvement of Aboriginal leaders in Canadian politics and Parliament (See Appendix A). Certain Aboriginal   15figures continue to push for greater political representation in order to improve Aboriginal voice (Silver et al., 2005). Moreover, voting patterns diverge across Canada. Some Aboriginal communities continue to show elevated voting patterns (i.e. Inuit, Métis) (Ladner, 1971; Silver et al., 2005). 2.1.2 Social Exclusion Explanation A second explanation that has been used to explain Aboriginal voting abstinence focuses on the distrust Aboriginal communities’ harbour towards the Canadian political system. The theory posits that alienation from the Canadian constitutional order has resulted in less participatory action from Aboriginal groups. This is because the Canadian political system is largely seen as untrustworthy and non-representative of Aboriginals. Given their past treatment,14 it is no wonder they feel alienated from a political apparatus that appeared uncaring and unrepresentative. A history of Canadian theft, deception and betrayal has resulted in a profound distrust towards Canadian political systems (Boldt, 1993: 246). It is no wonder considering how traditional decision-making was usurped and replaced by an alien process that did not recognize Aboriginal needs. The process of colonization continues to play a role in how Aboriginal groups perceive the Canadian state: “ an instrument of their domination and oppression” (Ladner, 2003: 23).  Under this explanation, Aboriginal groups have a hard time developing a sense of civic duty. Feeling excluded from Canadian politics and Canadian society, Aboriginal people largely perceive themselves as outsiders (Silver et al., 2005: 14). Anna Hunter expresses that the lack of Aboriginal representation signifies a high degree of political alienation (2003: 27). Bedford and Pobihushchy echo her sentiments, claiming that Aboriginals maintain little confidence of finding                                                             14 Whereupon Superintendents of Indian Affairs treated Aboriginals like children in need of supervision (Whittles, 2005: 9).    16a comfortable domicile within the Canadian state (1995: 275). Borrowing from Cairns et al. (1999), this paper maintains that a comfortable domicile within a nation-state cannot occur without vertical and horizontal dimensions to citizenship. The vertical dimension “links individuals to the state by reinforcing the idea that it is ‘their’ state - that they are full members of an ongoing association...The horizontal relationship, by contrast, is the positive identification of citizens with each other as valued members of the same civic community” (Cairns et al., 1999: 4). Vertical citizenship, initiated from the top-down, involves engaging the state through activities such as voting and consultations. Horizontal citizenship, on the other hand, involves engagement with a community (Cairns et al., 1999). Community-building and the inclusion into informal networks (i.e. friends and neighbourhoods) reinforces citizenship15.  Here, citizenship should reinforce empathy and sustain solidarity. Aboriginals, however, are more likely to feel disenfranchised and distanced. Studies have shown that Aboriginals are subject to hostility directed by non-Aboriginal citizens (Silver et al., 2005; 15). Distrust in the political system, compounded by a sense of marginalization, offers a prominent explanation for reduced Aboriginal participation. This explanation, however, fails to completely explain Aboriginal abstinence from voice. One of its weaknesses stems from its methodology. Determining participatory practices by asking respondents ‘why’ they did not engage in certain activities creates “experiential or phenomenological” explanations (Howe & Bedford, 2009: 10). The social exclusion explanation de-emphasizes structural barriers by underreporting low levels of income, low education levels, overcrowded housing, et. cetera (Ibid).                                                              15 These dimensions of citizenship differ from the nationalist argument in that they discuss a member’s personhood in relation to formal and informal institutions. An Aboriginal person may feel undervalued and excluded from a community but still remain a Canadian nationalist. Nationalist sentiments will differ based on geographical location and social homogeneity (Campbell, 2006). On the other hand, disassociation with the state may serve to reinforce Aboriginal nationalism.    172.1.3 Socio-Economic Explanations  Many social and economic factors have been used to explain divergent voting behaviour amongst Aboriginal groups. Prominently, age, geographic location and lower incomes have been cited for lower voter turnout (Blais et al., 2003; Milner, 2002: 41). Individuals such as Blais, Gidengil, Nevitte and Nadeau (2004) have argued that a generation effect plays strongly into voter turnout. The general consensus has been that age and a lack of education positively correlate to Aboriginal voting behaviour.  Since most Aboriginal communities tend to have a lower median age, voting trends could be adversely affected due to the younger demographics witnessed both off and on reserves. Education has been seen to offset the generational effect, with higher levels of education correlating to stronger turnout (Burt, 2002: 237; Pammett & Leduc, 2003; Blais et al., 2003). Yet, these socio-economic factors are not compelling when isolated. They fail to explain how independent variables of cynicism and historic discrimination factor into participatory rates of Aboriginal groups. 2.1.4 Political Mobilization  The explanation centers on political effort and political opportunity structures. Political structures continue to favour those who have colonized Aboriginals, with very few opportunities for Aboriginal political participation. Politicians continue to make very little effort to include Aboriginals in political debates with even less appearing on reserves or within Aboriginal communities (Silver et al., 2005).16  With minimal motivation to include these communities into the larger political debate, communities may feel unmotivated to search out the information. Yet, this explanation underplays the role of resources vis à vis participatory rates. A lack of resources, for example, obstructs the ability of someone living in a remote community to acquire political                                                             16 Reduced political effort could be correlated to a cost-benefit analysis by politicians. That is, fewer constituents are located on reserves with a smaller voter turnout. Moreover, reserves tend to be found in remote locations, increasing the travel costs to those regions.    18and technical knowledge. In turn, this discourages a broader participation with Canadian institutions employing this knowledge.                        19CHAPTER 3: VOTING 3.1 VOTING AS VOICE Voting is one way to express political voice in most democracies. Citizens use this voice channel to communicate their preferences to elected officials. Votes can affirm or deny elected status to an official who makes decisions on behalf of the citizenry. Yet a higher percentage of Aboriginals continue to abstain from voting during elections than non-Aboriginals. Daniel Guerin observed from his research (2003) that data for the 2000 federal elections revealed a stark difference in voting patterns between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals. After tabulating voting data for all 296 polling stations in federal ridings, Guerin found that Aboriginals turnout was 47.8%. This was 16% lower than the turnout for the rest of the population at those same polls (12-13).  Guerin did note, however, that turnout varied substantially across regional boundaries. In PEI and Saskatchewan, for example, participation rates were 66.9% and 55% respectively. In Manitoba and Quebec, on the other hand, participation rates were 36.6% and 35% (Guerin, 2003, 12-13). Existing literature has attempted to explain this abstinence and has provided many competing theories. Blais, Massicotte and Dobrzynska (2003) have suggested that the duration of the election might be compounding voter turnout problems (12). Electors may lose focus with campaigns that are prolonged or not be aroused by campaigns that are too short. However, this theory fails to explain significant deviations between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal votes. Fowler and Kam (2007) have theorized that the time horizon of benefits affects voter turnout. Future benefits, for example, are less of a motivation to electors than immediate benefits. While this theory may offer one explanation for why citizens may vote, it still does not present a good model to explain significant differences in voting trends between Aboriginals and non-  20Aboriginals.  A better explanation can be extracted from Riker and Ordeshook’s equation determining why individuals vote. They discuss four factors which influence voting behaviour and can be expressed as: PB+D>C or R17 = pB − C + D. Through this equation it is possible to ascertain that voters are less likely to vote when their cost (C) increases. However, they will vote if their benefits (B) and sense of civic duty (D) combined with their probability of casting a decisive vote (P) outweigh their cost (Riker and Ordeshook, 1968). This mathematical model, which describes a necessary utility an individual must derive to vote, can help explain Aboriginal abstinence. Ergo, civic duty can at best only serve as a tautological explanation for political participation of Aboriginal peoples. Rather, it must be assumed that the cost of voting is much higher for Aboriginals than non-Aboriginals due to a combination of all of the factors mentioned above. In order to enter further into this calculus, it is important to gain a better knowledge of the model presented. David Campbell (2006) helps provide a better understanding of Riker and Ordeshook’s mathematical model from 1968. He explains that voting is not only Madisonian18, but also Tocquevillian19, whereby people vote based on a sense of duty and to protect their own preferences: “In the notation of the calculus of voting, in homogeneous communities people are more likely to vote out of a sense of duty...Conversely, heterogeneity, or electoral competition, spurs voters to the polls because they believe that their individual vote has a greater chance of affecting the election’s outcome” (35).  Voting is thus rational and demonstrates a curvilinear relationship. That is, in homogeneous communities, turnout is civically motivated, as opposed to heterogeneous places where people vote to protect their preferences (Ibid: 62, 64).  As places                                                             17 R is the reward of voting to an individual. It is the proxy for the probability that the voter will turn out to vote. 18 Madisonian, for the purpose of this paper, will be defined as an action taken by individuals to protect their interests (Campbell, 2006: 13). 19 Tocquevillian, for the purpose of this paper, will be defined as an action taken by individuals to fulfill a sense of duty (Campbell, 2006: 13).   21become more homogeneous, preferences will align, norms20 will become shared and individuals will be more likely vote out of a sense of duty (Knack, 1992; Putman, 1993).  In other words, communities shape the civic and political engagement of the people within them. Moreover, Campbell maintains that the engagement of youth is affected by location, and that participatory action as an adult can be linked to adolescence (Campbell, 2006: 5).  Combining Campbell, Riker and Ordeshook, a more accurate calculus begins to emerge. In particular, voting costs can be broken down in categories. Two broader categories thus emerge. The first applies to those costs involved in making a decision about whether or not to vote. The second applies to those costs involved in the act of voting itself. For example, the political landscape can be confusing for many individuals. Differences in platforms and party politics are not always apparent.  For Aboriginals, who have typically had less access to information related to the electoral process, the psychological costs of choosing between parties can be particularly high (Fournier & Loewen, 2011: 14). Without the adequate resources needed to make a political decision, Aboriginals will be less inclined to vote (Verba & Schlozman, 1995). These two broad categories of cost will be further broken down in the following section. That is, it will become more apparent what determinants raise the cost of this method of voice for Aboriginals. 3.2. VOTING CALCULUS  The following sections review and analyze data from the 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative using a theoretical calculus combining Campbell’s basic theory with Riker and Ordeshook’s mathematical model. It begins by examining whether Aboriginal communities are                                                             20 It is important to note that norms are enforced within a community through the use of social sanctions in everyday and even subtle interactions (Knack, 1992). These sanctions only have force and effect when an individual recognizes the legitimacy of other members within their community and has social relationships with them (Campbell, 2006: 26). In this sense, a social sanction may create a sense of duty in someone who does not wish to displease a friend or relative (Knack, 1992: 137-138).   22individually homogeneous, and then proceeds to examine social and economic determinants that could elevate or reduce the cost calculus for voters. By examining this cost calculus, this research helps situate the cost of employing this voice channel.  3.2.1 Homogeneity  Homogeneity has often been defined through national and ethnic makeup. However, homogeneity can be constructed in a less narrow fashion. A homogeneous community can be identified as a community that shares a similar culture, race, educational attainment, income or values. For the purpose of this research, a community is homogeneous if it shares norms based on education, income, culture (i.e. language, race, religion) and age. As previously discussed, homogeneity within a community can facilitate conditions for lower or higher voter turnout. Individuals with similar belief systems are increasingly likely to arrive at a consensus over normative behaviour. This falls within social impact theory whereby the strength of the initial source of impact, the number of sources compounding that impact and the population size can determine whether or not an individual will be affected (Latané, 1996). Secondly, homogeneity within a community enhances the legitimacy through which members view each other’s opinions (Campbell, 2006: 26). Norms become internalized and largely anticipatory reactions (Putman, 1993). The presence of others who share norms similar to their community can stimulate electoral participation. In particular, the presence or absence of other adults in the household can motivate or dissuade electoral participation based on discussions or prompts they may put forward (Gray 2003: 27).  Based on this knowledge, an important research question is whether or not Aboriginal communities within Canada are considered homogeneous. And if so, is it affecting their propensity to vote? Moreover, could housing conditions contribute to electoral participation as Gray asserts? For a reasonable sample size, data from the 2006   23Aboriginal Community Data Initiative was analyzed. In particular, this research reviewed determinants from bands located in British Columbia.  Overall, this research found that a majority of reserves within British Columbia tended to exhibit homogeneous norms, with a majority of citizens self-identifying as Aboriginal (Statistics Canada, 2007a-h). In 2006, 95.6% of Aboriginals located on reserves identified as “Registered Indians” (Stats Canada, 2007h: 20). Moreover, many communities had similar levels of educational attainment and labour force participation.   In the Canoe Creek Indian Band situated north of Kamloops, 96% self-identified as First Nations (North American Indian), while 98% self-reported as a “Treaty Indian” (Stats Canada, 2007f: 8). The community identified itself as homogeneous in its ethnic makeup. Moreover, its population was younger. The median age, in 2006, for the Aboriginal population on Canoe Creek Indian Band was 25.1 years, with a majority of the population falling below 30 years of age (Stats Canada, 2007f: 9). Educational attainment was also similar. In 2006, over half of those aged 15-64 had attained less than a high school education. Only a small percentage from the reserves had attended university (less than 10%)  (Ibid:14)21. Small differences, however, emerged in the preservation of language and culture amongst the younger members of the community. While 31% of its population had some knowledge of an Aboriginal language, 64% of this minority comprised of individuals aged 45 or older. Only 14% under the age of 15 years knew or spoke an Aboriginal language (Ibid 12).  A second Aboriginal community called Blueberry River First Nation, situated north of Fort St. John, also exhibited signs of homogeneity but to a lesser degree. Unlike the Canoe Creek Indian Band, the Blueberry River First Nation mostly exhibited similarity in its educational                                                             21 This can be compared to non-Aboriginals in 2006, where approximately 24% of non-Aboriginals had completed a university degree (The Conference Board of Canada, 2013).   24attainment and income levels. Here, approximately 81% of those aged 25-64 years had achieved less than a high school education (Stats Canada, 2007b: 13) With 43% of the population aged under 15 years and more than 80% under 40 years, the community would probably have a large generational effect on its shared norms. It also helps explain why only 22% of its population had knowledge of an Aboriginal language, using it as a mother tongue. In fact, the overall language knowledge had decreased from 56% in 1996 to 22% in 2006 (Stats Canada, 2007b:12). As for whether homogeneity played a role in voter turnout, more data is needed for decisive conclusions. For the moment, the relationship remains uncertain and speculative. While both communities expressed lower voter turnout than non-Aboriginals in British Columbia (Blais, Dobrzynska & Loewen, 2007), they also demonstrated higher turnout than other communities with less homogeneity (Blais, Dobrzynska & Loewen, 2007; Stats Canada 2007a-h; Beford & Pobihushchy, 1995). Therefore, the discussion pertaining to homogeneity must remain purely academic. Without any statistically significant data, it is only safe to conclude that a) homogeneity has the ability to act as an inhibitor to voice when a majority of members from a particular community express the desire to abstain from voting22, and b) it can similarly increase a member’s propensity to vote.23 The Inuit, for example, continue to demonstrate very high levels of electoral participation and are, by definition, homogeneous.24 In particular, they demonstrate strong community ties and excellent social relationships (Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada, 2006). Yet, the Inuit are more of an exception and conclusions cannot be drawn from                                                             22 Homogeneity alone cannot determine whether a member of a community will express voice.  23 In order for norms to be enforced, the individual must "recognize the legitimacy of other members within their community to enforce the norm, and they must have social relationships with those people for sanctions to be applied […] Homogeneity within a community facilitates all three of these conditions. First, people with common backgrounds and beliefs are more likely to arrive at consensus over normative behavior. Second, commonality among members of a community enhances the legitimacy with which they view one another's opinions. Third, people generally associate with others who are 'like them” (Campbell, 2006: 26). 24 In 2008, 70% percent of individuals were under the age of 35, over 50% held less than a high school education (only 5% had attained a university education), and the median income was $ 13,699. Moreover, the Inuit identified friends and family as top priorities (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, 2008).   25their case alone. Homogeneity on its own cannot determine the propensity for Aboriginal groups to use voice. This paper merely argues that, when combined with certain costs (economic, social, historical), homogeneity can serve as a multiplier for whether or not communities engage in participatory practices. Revisiting the earlier equation, it might look closer to PB+D>(C)H where H is given a value based on how homogenous a community is. 3.3 BARRIERS TO VOTING 3.3.1. Mobilization and Political Efficacy Party mobilization has increasingly weighed in on the cost benefit analysis performed by Aboriginal groups in their calculus to vote. While political professionals usually tend to mobilize voters where the electoral margin is narrow (Campbell, 2006: 21) (convincing voters that it is a close contest, making their vote appear more decisive), often these same professionals do not attempt to mobilize Aboriginal communities (Silver et al., 2005). Political elites concentrate their resources in electorally competitive places (Key 1949; Cox and Munger 1989), often undervaluing the Aboriginal vote. According to Silver, Keeper and MacKenzie, this can be attributed to the fact that governments are much less likely to respond positively to the demands of those who do not vote (2005: 9). Yet, the less attention that is paid to these communities, the more resistant they become towards the electoral system.  Silver et al.’s study demonstrated that Aboriginal people tended to vote less when they felt outside of the system; or excluded (2005: 22), supporting the exclusion explanation. The fact that political officials do not visit reserves has played a role in poor political participation (Silver et al., 2005) and has caused lower voter turnout.25                                                               25 Political officials continue to concentrate their resources in electorally competitive places. Political effort is therefore directed towards urban areas and larger voter bases. Profiling voters versus non-voters from 2004-2011, Fournier and Loewen (2011) found that a majority of Aboriginal non-voters could be found on reserves (32). In other words, those Aboriginals off reserves who felt a greater impact by political officials were more likely to vote.   26More importantly, political efficacy has changed the cost-benefit analysis for most Aboriginal persons. Political efficacy can be defined as a “person’s belief that political and social change can be effected or retarded and that his efforts, alone or in concert with others can produce desired behaviour on the part of political authorities” (Prewitt, 1968: 225). Aboriginals, realizing their relatively small numbers and geographical dispersal, understand they cannot effectuate change through voting alone. As an individualistic activity, low numbers weaken any chance of affecting political outcomes (Gibbins, 1991: 155). On the other hand, lobbying and other practices have increased political salience. The cost calculus of voting is augmented because of its lack of saliency for Aboriginal peoples.  3.3.2 Social Determinant of Age In voting scholarship, academics such as Blais et al., (2004) have suggested that a key determinant in voting behaviour is age. A positive correlation is often noted between youth and abstinence from voting: with the propensity to vote increasing as a citizen ages. Blais et al., have hypothesized that the participation rate of youth will always be lower than that of previous generations (2004: 221). They present research supporting their theory of what they deem to be generational effects, whereby voting turnout will continue to be substantially lower among generation X than amongst baby-boomers. According to their scale, the propensity to vote drops 20 points from the oldest to most recent cohort (Ibid: 225). This pattern emerged in their research amongst all generations and diasporas in Canada. Gina Bishop and Sally Preiner have echoed certain sentiments found in Blais, Gidengil, Nevitte and Nadeau’s research, offering social data explaining potential generational effects witnessed. They observed that those disinclined to vote felt “that voting offered no possibility of change or that regardless of what government was                                                                                                                                                                                                This research, therefore assumes a positive correlation between voting and political mobilization. In particular, it hypothesizes that increased political efforts to include Aboriginals in voting campaigns, alongside increased political resources, would increase the likelihood of Aboriginals to vote.    27elected, their own interests would not be seriously affected” (Bishop & Preiner, 2005:4). In other words, younger generations are beginning to view the act of voting differently. For one, young citizens are beginning to divorce themselves from the notion that voting is a right and civic duty (Blais, 2000). Moreover, they have the tendency to be less deferential (Blais et al., 2002) and feel less obliged to vote in a given election if it does not address their interests (Blais et al., 2002). Lastly, younger generations are paying less attention to politics potentially due to how they perceive the extrinsic and intrinsic value of that field of activity compared to other activities (Ibid). Note, that despite the other possible avenues for voice to be expressed by young citizens, the generational effects on voting are still present. Yet, while young Aboriginal participants may neglect this political voice channel, there remains no evidence suggesting that these youth are withdrawing from community participation (Bishop & Preiner, 2005: 2), or at least if they are withdrawing that it is less quickly than from formal political participation. Assuming that Aboriginal Canadians are systematically disengaging from expressing voice is a misnomer. They are often interested in current affairs and follow political issues on their reserve26. Moreover, as Martin Whittles offers, First Nations youth are not completely disengaging from the electoral system either. Take the instance of Baker Lake (situated in Nunavut) where turnout rates have been 85.77%, 90.08% and 103.0% (Whittles, 2005: 11).  Aboriginal youth are presented with a unique chance to express their political voice through voting. Yet, these young citizens are more often than not turning away from the polls in greater numbers than elders in their communities27. One potential theory to explain this                                                             26 First Nations youth exhibit the tendency to be involved in First Nations politics and in campaigns supporting their communities. An example is CAMH’s (2012) Provincial System Support Programs Opiate Awareness, Treatment and Education project. First Nations youth are actively creating public education tools for this campaign.  27 The determinant of age is one amongst several possible determinants, or costs, for Aboriginal people. As previously stated, small population size and political mobility also factor into the choice of whether or not to use voting as an avenue of voice.   28generational trend stems from the cynicism that young Aboriginals have acquired towards the electoral system. Feeling disenfranchised, young First Nations feel to be “outsiders” to government and politics (Bishop & Preiner, 2005: 7).  When information is poorly disseminated to reserves and Aboriginal groups, knowledge of current affairs may be at best unclear. As Bishop and Preiner (2005) argue, youth (in particular Aboriginal youth) may feel “out of their depth when they don’t understand the news that they hear” (7). Of course this supports the exclusion explanation presented earlier. Yet, if compared to the CRIC’s survey data, similar levels of cynicism are shown towards elected officials by the general population (CRIC, 2001). Throughout the CRIC’s research, young Canadians (including young Aboriginals) were cynical towards the political system but were not construed as apathetic. Rather, they simply felt divorced from the government with a sense that elected officials would not take their views seriously even if they were involved (CRIC, 2001). So then, if young Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals view the government with equal levels of cynicism, what could cause the reported differences in voting behaviours? It is important to consider why young Aboriginals choose to divorce themselves from the polls more frequently than their non-Aboriginal counterparts.  One possible suggestion could lie in the identity that some Aboriginals prescribe for themselves. Self-identifying as the “lost generation”28 they attempt to focus on the preservation of their culture. In so doing, they can see themselves “as too busy to assume leadership” (Bishop & Preiner, 2005: 7). Further, Aboriginals can harbour a different type of cynicism and detachment “towards local, regional, and national issues that they typically perceive as essentially non-Aboriginal in process, focus, and result” (Whittles, 2005: 9). They may feel excluded from the democratic representation process in Canada (Ladner, 2003; Dalton, 2007),                                                             28 The title of “lost generation” has been in use prior to the re-popularization between the years of 2010-2013. “Lost generation,” initially coined by Ernest Hemingway in 1926, has recently been retooled by the media (Yen, 2011; CBSNews, 2011) to refer to young adults unable to find work.   29perceiving existing institutions as defending the interests of non-Aboriginal people and as the instruments of Aboriginal oppression (Fournier & Loewen, 2011: 16). Nearly half, 46.8%, of Aboriginals surveyed by Howe and Bedford indicated lower levels of confidence towards Canadian agencies compared to 32.1% of other respondents (Howe & Bedford, 2009: 23). Attachment to Canada by First Nations was weaker, with 7.4% describing themselves as not very attached compared to non-Aboriginals with 3.6% describing their relationship with Canada as “very weak” (Ibid: 23). Moreover, data from the General Social Survey of 2003 suggests that Aboriginal participants continue to exhibit a lower turnout (20 percent lower than non-Aboriginals) with an overall lower confidence in Canadian institutions than other participants (Schellenberg, 2004). The problem with measuring levels of cynicism of both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal groups in a social survey stems from where their cynicism is rooted. That is, non-Aboriginal youth may exhibit cynicism towards the political system for frustration that it does not adequately represent their desires and needs. Young non-Aboriginal people may also exhibit cynicism towards the process when they do not believe their vote is decisive in the political battle between elected officials. And while young Aboriginals may have similar concerns to those of non-Aboriginals, their cynicism is compounded by historical conflict (Monture-Angus, 1995; Boldt, 1993: 169). The political franchise continues to represent a form of oppression and remains entirely unrepresentative. As Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak (Manitoba’s Chiefs’ organization) has said, “we need members of Parliament who do not have to be taught who we are, what we want, and why we are important to this country...To be effective, we have to have the capacity to elect our own representatives to the House of Commons” (Milen, 1991: 40).    303.3.3 Economic Development Voice is constrained or affected by a community’s access to resources. Political resources (i.e. political knowledge and information) can create a greater sense of civic duty by providing the means for participation. However, political resources are constrained by poor economic development. Mobilization of resources by those living under the poverty line is severely curtailed. The National Council of Welfare (2008), prior to its dismantlement, stated that people living on social assistance are so impoverished that adequate housing, jobs and recreational activities are beyond their reach (National Council of Welfare, 2008). With a higher percentage of Aboriginals to non-Aboriginals living under the poverty line (Statistics Canada, 2007a-h), it is possible to imagine the difficulties they face expressing political voice.  Economic development impacts the political involvement of citizens (Powell, 1982). Socio-economic indicators act as important determinants to the expression of political voice (Howe & Bedford, 2009: 16). This is because economic development promotes the creation and dissemination of socio-economic resources (i.e. access to higher education and income) (Powell, 1982). Economic development transforms societal relations, leaving certain groups behind. Without resources voice is often ineffective or marginal. Aboriginals, like non-Aboriginals, are more likely to vote when they have more political resources (Fournier & Loewen, 2011). Voice is often attached to, or dependent on, the economic development of a community. Moreover, political participation requires certain civic skills (Verba & Schlozman, 1995; Blais et al., 2003) and a certain quality of life (Moon, 1991).  Following Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, the argument is theoretically sound. That is, if a community cannot attain its basic physiological needs, it cannot participate in higher levels of civic engagement (Maslow, 1943). Even literacy rates and life expectancy at birth are important factors in political involvement (Verba &   31Schlozman, 1995). Citizens in the greatest need are less likely to avail themselves of democratic and political opportunities for influencing society (Fournier & Loewen, 2011: 9). According to Fournier and Loewen, if Aboriginals possessed more political resources, were older and had better socio-economic footing, they would exhibit similar voting rates as non-Aboriginals (2011: 7). And while Fournier and Loewen’s argument is compelling, it is hard to say whether improving these variables alone would increase voting rates. By arguing that the colonial relationship does not matter, the authors perpetuate the perspective of the colonizer29, missing the key constraint of colonization and its affects on Aboriginal peoples today. In the cost calculus, separating economic variables from historical injustices is the equivalent of conducting a logical fallacy. Historical injustices and “systemic structures of colonization” continue to constrain many Aboriginal communities (McCaslin & Boyer, 2009: 62), working against traditional knowledge and ways of life. Structures modelled by the colonizer work against Aboriginal communities by favouring a utilitarian purpose for the land. Resource and land development by governmental entities often works against the desired economic outcomes of Aboriginal communities.30 Benefits accrued through the exploitation of land and resources do not find their way back to Aboriginal communities. Rather, it removes what few resources Aboriginal groups possess.  Economic determinants play a large role as to whether a citizen may use political voice. Mobility, health status and resources are central to the picture and are attached to economic development. Without adequate access to information and knowledge, the cost of participation increases. Moreover, poor economic development leads to impoverished communities. This                                                             29 Whether or not it is their intent to operate from the perspective of the colonizer is debatable. However, their research fails to acknowledge any potential research bias, offering demographics as the explanation for divergent voting behaviour without acknowledging the potential role of colonization in these demographics.  30 Refer to the Kanehsatake struggle in the Oka Valley (Obomsawin, 1993), BC Hydro Site C (BC Hydro 2011; BC Hydro 2012a; BC Hydro, 2012b), Enbridge Pipeline (APTN, 2013).   32impoverishment works against the use of voice and once again raises the cost calculus to participation. Lastly, governmental exploitation of Aboriginal land and resources is unbeneficial to communities31, working against their desired outcomes. Indigenous peoples often recognize themselves as caretakers of Mother Earth: “First Nations peoples’ have a special relationship with the earth and all living things in it. This relationship is based on a profound spiritual connection to Mother Earth that guided indigenous peoples to practice reverence, humility and reciprocity” (AFN, 2013). When corporations or governmental agencies encroach upon Aboriginal lands, they often develop lands in a fashion that does not respect the Aboriginal way of life. 3.3.4 Educational Attainment  Education has been considered a powerful determinant behind whether or not a citizen votes (Fournier & Loewen, 2011: 7). Overall, those with a higher educational attainment tend to vote more frequently and regularly than their counterparts. Access to information helps citizens make an informed decision when it comes to expressing their political voice. Information channels, and learning how to access and employ them, are paramount to effective political voice. Fournier and Loewen conducted research surveying the 2004, 2006 and 2008 elections. They found that income and education served as central socio-demographic predictors to voting turnout. Those Aboriginals who earned less than $20,000 per annum, for example, were 11% less likely to vote than those earning over $100,000. Moreover, those individuals with a university                                                             31 Harry and Bombay (1993)’s statement in the spring issue of Resource and Sanctuary provides an excellent summary as to why land and resource development on Aboriginal territory has been unbeneficial to Aboriginals:  "For many of Canada's aboriginal peoples, the forests are our home, our hunting grounds, our ceremonial lands. Forests have sustained and engaged us for centuries, but they are falling with unprecedented speed - at the hands of industry and due to short-sighted government policy. It is in this milieu of diminishing resources and increasingly entrenched interests that aboriginal forestry is unfolding." The traditional relationship held by Aboriginal peoples is often undermined and poorly considered during consultative processes. Moreover, local populations of aquatic species, flora and fauna have become endangered or placed at significant risk due to these developments (BC Hydro, 2010).   33education were 7% more likely to vote than those who did not graduate from high school (Ibid: 29).  Findings reported that the typical Aboriginal abstainer had not finished high school and earned less than their peers (Ibid: 31). Yet, while educational attainment has increased, voter turnout has still decreased. As explored in a previous section, one possible explanation could be that voting no longer holds the same value to current generations. Younger cohorts are voting less despite having attained a higher education than that of their parents. In this sense, education may have lost some of its leverage to newer generations (Blais et al., 2002). However, education does still seem to dampen generational effects, even if only marginally (Blais et al., 2002). 3.3.5 Health A practical factor that can cause challenges to the expression of political voice is poor health. As Prince has suggested, physical infirmity can be of concern to those who desire participating in the electoral system. For one, physical infirmity can cause mobility-related problems, thereby rendering access to a polling station very difficult (Prince, 2007: 7). Physical infirmity can also be problematic for those who can only access electoral information outside of their homes or community centres. In general poor health can hinder a citizen’s motivation to vote by elevating the cost at an individual level. It changes the salience of an election for those citizens affected by it. Health can, moreover, determine whether or not a citizen can access fundamental resources necessary for the expression of political voice. The General Social Survey of 2003 presents interesting data affirming this point. Those between the ages of 18-39 who had poor health were approximately 24% less likely to vote than their community members who reported “good” health. In a similar correlation, Aboriginals citizens over the age of 40 exhibited trends of abstinence when their health was categorized as “poor” (Howe & Bedford, 2009: 29).   34This of course begs the question of what health status most Aboriginals who participated in the survey reported, alongside any possible stigmas that may have caused unreliable data.  According to Bedford and Howe (2009), only 50% of Aboriginal participants in the General Social Survey of 2003 reported good or excellent health. Compared to their non-Aboriginal counterparts, they were 11 percentage points lower (that is, 61% of non-Aboriginal respondents reported excellent or good health) (29). However, the data is mildly misrepresentative of the Aboriginal population as the age composition differs from that of non-Aboriginals. Since younger people are typically healthier, it is more accurate to compare the relative health amongst those from similar age categories. If the data were to be re-examined, among those between 30-39 years, 49% of Aboriginals would indicate “good” or “excellent” health as compared to 71% of non-Aboriginals (Ibid: 29) (This marked difference of 12% is substantial enough to warrant further investigation into any conditions that would play a crucial role in determining the health status of an individual).  Despite being a younger population, the health and well-being of Aboriginals in Canada is lower than non-Aboriginals. Life expectancy for First Nations and Inuit continues to be lower across the country (Health Council, 2005: 5). While the disparity between First Nations and Canadians in HDI scores have appeared to have decreased, First Nations continue to have a shorter life expectancy (Cooke, Beavon & McHardy, 2004: 18). For example, in 2001, the life expectancy of citizens living in Inuit-inhabited regions was 12 years lower than that for the Canadian population as a whole (Garner et al., 2010: 1). Moreover, according to data collected by the 2006 Aboriginal Peoples Survey32, Aboriginals were more likely to report chronic conditions such as diabetes, arthritis or high blood pressure. In 2006-2007, Aboriginals who                                                             32 The APS was limited due to its design. Rather than a health survey, it was administered as an omnibus survey. As such, its scope pertaining to health-related matters was limited.   35identified as First Nations and Métis, aged 20 or older, demonstrated significantly higher levels of chronic conditions. Both groups showed higher incidences of arthritis (almost 10 % higher), asthma, stomach and intestinal ulcers (approximately 12% higher), diabetes, and heart problems (Statistics Canada, 2008). Diabetes rates were more prevalent amongst Aboriginals, with First Nations showing rates of 9.3% and Metis showing rates of 7.5% (Statistics Canada, 2008).  As Charlotte Loppie and Fred Wien (2009) have rightfully asserted, First Nations adults living on reserve have poorer health which can be attributed to their health care systems and long waits (15).33 Moreover, services and coverage for First Nations continue to be less than adequate: “The federal system of health care delivery for status First Nations people resembles a collage of public health programs with limited accountability, fragmented delivery and jurisdictional ambiguity” (Loppie & Wien, 2009: 15). In other words, First Nations cannot realize the benefits of the Canadian health care system due to a physical, political, and social lack of access to health services. This in turn creates problems for participation and the use of political voice. Despite different data collected on the health of Aboriginals in Canada, social scientists continue to debate whether Aboriginals maintain a lower standard of living than non-Aboriginals. There has been a reluctance to investigate the health status of Aboriginals other than through social surveys. In part this stems from the inability of facilities to gather accurate data, a lack of knowledge as to who in Canada can be identified as an Aboriginal, and the difficulty and breadth of data collection on all Aboriginals within Canada. The result has been a reliance on social surveys which has easily misrepresented health data from communities across Canada. To                                                             33 As will be explained in more detail in the proceeding paragraphs of this research, Aboriginal health care systems have been criticized for providing services that are not culturally appropriate, for their lack of traditional care services, for nurse or doctor unavailability, and for long waiting lists. These “intermediate determinants can be thought of as the origin of those proximal determinants” (Loppie & Wien, 2009:15), resulting in poorer health. Intermediate determinants may cause Aboriginals to abstain from using health care systems or may result in inadequate treatment within a reasonable time frame.   36take an example to illustrate this point, the First Nations and Inuit Regional Health Survey asked Aboriginal adults to rate their children’s health. From this survey, results indicated that 84% of children had good or excellent health (Smeja, 2000). However, what was not mentioned in this survey was the parental bias. With a long and negative history of community workers and social service workers removing children from their parents in Aboriginal communities, parents were much more likely to under-report any health conditions of their children. Cynicism towards the system and a fear of the loss of a child threw off the entire data set collected. From merely surveying the tuberculosis rates in Aboriginal communities, the 84% rate of “good” health does not accurately reflect other data collected. In 2000, out of 1274 children screened for tuberculosis, a prevalence of 15.3% among 12 year olds was found (Smeja, 2000: 925). In 2005, tuberculosis rates were 17 times higher in Inuit populations and 6 times higher in First Nation populations than those of non-Aboriginals (Health Council, 2005: 6). Considering all other infections, chronic conditions and illnesses, it is hard to imagine that there was not some margin of error in the First Nations and Inuit Regional Health Survey.  As previously mentioned, health status is an important determinant in the ability of a citizen to express political voice. Without adequate health, a member’s cost for voting increases. Yet to state that health status alone affects Aboriginal voice channels would be inaccurate. Rather, poor health can be attributed to determinants such as poor living conditions. According to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), First Nations living conditions rank 63rd amongst Third World conditions (INAC, 1998). For a country with a decent quality of life for non-Aboriginals, it is hard to fathom how such a marked contrast could occur. Yet another study published by Indian Affairs, which assessed the quality of life in 4,685 Canadian communities ranked 92 First Nations communities in the bottom 100 (McHardy, 2004:10; Statistics and   37Health Canada, 2002). In 2001, 50% of First Nations communities fell within the lower half of the CWB index (McHardy, 2004: 10).According to this same index, less than 3% of Canadian communities fell within the lower half of the index range34. Moreover, based on preliminary findings of First Nations regional longitudinal health survey in 2002-2003, 1 in 2 adults lived in crowded housing conditions (Health Canada, 2004: 53). Of these homes, almost half were contaminated with mould (Ibid). More importantly, many of those homes where Aboriginals live do not have access to safe drinking water. In May 2003, 12% of First Nations communities had to boil their drinking water due to a 25% rate of high risk contamination in water infrastructures (INAC, 1998). According to Health Canada, more than 100 First Nations communities are under a Boil Water Advisory for drinking water (Health Canada, 2005). Other access systemic and economic barriers to a decent health status for Aboriginals exist. Systemic barriers include waiting lists that are too long, a lack of health coverage by the Non-Insured Health Benefits (NIHB) program35 or inadequate transportation to health facilities. In 2002, 33.2% of adults on reserve experienced problems with long waiting lists, while another 36.1% experienced complications by NIHB (denying services to Aboriginal citizens) (Loppie & Wien, 2009: 16). Approximately 17% of those surveyed by Loppie and Wien felt that the health care provided to them was inadequate for their First Nations needs, while another 13.5 % felt that services rendered were not culturally appropriate. All the while individuals surveyed indicated that access to traditional care was more difficult than ever despite a lack of services by the health care system. 18.5 % of respondents indicated that doctors or nurses were unavailable, 14.7% of respondents indicated that services were unavailable and 10.8% indicated that no health facilities                                                             34 Only one First Nations community ranked within the top 100 Canadian communities (McHardy, 10). 35 The NIHB is a term that stands for Health Canada’s Non-Insured Health Benefits program. Typically there are a number of health-related goods and services that are not insured by provinces and territories. In order to support Aboriginal peoples, NIHB is designed with the purpose to cover a limited range of these goods and services (Health Canada, 2013).   38were available to them (Loppie & Wien, 2009: 16). To compound these systemic barriers, respondents indicated that economic barriers such as transportation costs and the cost of care prevented them from receiving adequate health services (Ibid). Lastly, impacts of colonization and intergenerational trauma add to gross differences in health between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people today (Mitchell & Maracle, 2005: 14; Boyer, 2006). Colonization as expressed through racism, assimilation and cultural genocide broke down the family unit (Boyer, 2006 and silenced voice by suppressing Aboriginal languages and culture (Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996). These acts of structural violence impacted Aboriginal physical and mental health. Today these colonial practices continue to adversely impact the health of many Aboriginal people, with many individuals avoiding or delaying the help of health services to avoid racist interactions (Dodgson & Struthers, 2005).              39CHAPTER 4: CIVIC ENGAGEMENT In a pluralistic and democratic country such as Canada, many opportunities can be afforded to individual citizens for civic engagement. While voting and electoral candidacy are but two expressions of political voice, Aboriginals, who are disadvantaged in these areas, have engaged in many alternative avenues to express their opinions. Contrary to the notion that young Aboriginals do not desire to express their voice, many have been interested in current affairs and politics that have an impact on First Nations communities. As Bishop and Preiner discovered through their study, many Aboriginal participants actively follow political issues on their reserve because of the direct impact these issues have on them (Bishop & Preiner, 2005: 4). Voice amongst younger Aboriginal generations has been mainly witnessed through contributions outside of traditional institutions. Feeling that voice is ineffective at the institutional level, young Aboriginals are withdrawn from political parties, the electoral system, public service and churches in large numbers (Ibid: 5)36. Yet young Aboriginal groups, and Aboriginals in general have employed alternative methods to express their voice.  Reuben and Whittle have offered alternative areas for which Aboriginal Canadians have been employing voice. The first has been the “confrontational model.” In this employment of voice, Aboriginal groups have attempted to raise public awareness. Methods used to achieve a greater public consciousness typically include blockades, redress through courts and protests (Reuben, 2003; Whittles, 2005: 11). A second method of employment for voice, named the “parallel track strategy” by Reuben, has been to demonstrate dissatisfaction with the education,                                                             36 Based on voting data drawn from several studies (Bishop & Preiner, 2005; Hunter, 2003; Reuben, 2003; Whittles, 2005) used for this research, Aboriginal withdrawal from political parties, the electoral system and public service is not a new phenomena. With the inability to “successfully translate political participation into the nomination and election of Aboriginal people to the House of Commons” (Hunter, 2003), it stands to reason that Aboriginals, more importantly young Aboriginals, would pursue alternative voice channels.  If political attitudes are indeed shaped by events and circumstances during a person’s formative years, young Aboriginals who have experienced a culture of distrust towards elected officials are likely to possess similar attitudes (Dalton, 2006). Young Aboriginals may translate their “rebellious” years or political distrust into adopted new styles of protest (Dalton, 2006: 71).   40healthcare, social welfare and policing systems by increased involvement in these areas (Reuben, 2003: 3). Grass-root organizations often led by Elders have emerged to try and build better communities where they perceive the government to have failed them. However, this method of voice has been difficult with a diminishing elderly population and with many younger individuals unable to pursue a higher education37 (Statistics Canada, 2007a-h). As a result, many nursing or doctoral aids tend to be from outside the community, traditional health care has become increasingly difficult to administer, education continues to have a non-Aboriginal focus, and the social welfare system continues to fall short of Aboriginal needs. Moreover, many grass-root voices have been met by formal resistance and general negativity from other communities and authoritative agencies.38 Protests such as the Idle No More movement largely increased negative coverage of Aboriginal issues (Pierro et al., 2013: 10). Protests and blockades, in Ontario newspapers in particular, were often portrayed “as sabotage of Federal government negotiations” (Ibid). As Cindy Blackstock avers, little media attention is given to the reasons behind Aboriginal protests (Pierro et al., 2013: 12). Rather the focus of the media rests on the actions of Aboriginal groups, with an 11% increase in negative Aboriginal coverage (Ibid). The negative portrayal of Aboriginal formal resistance raises the cost of voice.  A third method for voice has been through what Reuben calls “full endorsement.” Aboriginal communities and agencies will support programs or policies of non-Aboriginal government (Reuben, 2003:3). An example, offered by Whittle, would be the support lent by the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) and Inuit Tapirisat Kanatami for the ratification of the Kyoto Accord (Whittles, 2005: 12). The Assembly of First Nations has, moreover, commended the                                                             37 Education can be a difficult pursuit, at a higher level, for Aboriginals. Despite programs and scholarships aimed at ameliorating Aboriginal participation in educational institutions, other factors such as geographic location, social determinants (i.e. health and income), and infrastructural barriers play a role into whether or not they may take advantage of these opportunities. 38 See examples of Kanehsatake [Kanehsatà:ke] (Obomsawin, 1993), and fracking in New Brunswick (Howe, 2013).   41government on its signature to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) on June 11, 1992.  The treaty, which aims to “promote species and ecosystem conservation, sustainable use of its components, recognition of traditional knowledge and its holders, and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources” (AFN, 2013) has been applauded by the AFN and its potential to ensure First Nations voice. According to the AFN, supporting the CBD allows First Nations to have an active role in matters pertaining to wildlife preservation (AFN, 2013). Accords and signatures to agreements at the federal, provincial and municipal levels have been a key area for Aboriginal “voice” and participatory action within Canada. This method of “full-endorsement” allows Aboriginal peoples to formally record their voice, acting as witnesses for future generations. Acting as a separate party, “full endorsement” helps elevate the role of Aboriginal diplomacy. At the international level, this method for voice has enabled Aboriginal people to apply pressure onto the Canadian government where their voice has otherwise been silent. In December 2013, for example, during the International Forum on Conservation of Polar Bears, the Inuit affirmed their presence in the North. They ensured nation-states would not hinder the ability of Canadian Inuit to hunt and trade bears (Nunatsiaq News, 2013).   4.1 PROTESTS Protests act as an additional avenue for Aboriginal voice, whereby members can express their dissatisfaction with practices by Canadian institutions, multinationals or development projects affecting their territories. Protests can serve as a form of meta-narrative, contesting dominant discourses. For Chief Adams, protests help remind politicians of their promises to First Nations:   We believe that our politicians are out of touch and have  no idea what it is like to live day-to-day in a place that has  been made toxic […] It is important for them to experience  this place, to drink the water, breathe the air and hear from   42 the people who are quickly losing hope for a liveable future  for their children and grandchildren. (MarketWired, 2013).  Yet, as a voice channel there are a myriad of barriers for Aboriginal peoples; many of them structural in nature. As other scholars suggest, protests (or actions) alone will not accomplish a desired outcome. Rather, protests must act in concert with the opportunity for change (Jenkins and Perrow 1977; Burstein, Einwohner & Hollander, 1995). In other words, societal actors might largely ignore protests unless they reflect changes already occurring within the society itself. In this manner, effective protests do not always possess a strong causal relationship to political change. Rather, political changes mark the reflection of preference changes already occurring within society (Madestam et al., 2013: 2).  As Einwohner (1999) notes, protests directed against a dominant discourse or group face increased difficulties (180). In particular, “practices defined as central or necessary by powerless groups are more easily dismissed by the public at large, and therefore can be more susceptible to change” (Einwohner 1999:180). Idle No More39 illustrates this point effectively. The movement, which voices contemporary issues faced by Aboriginal groups, reflects past movements and issues left unaddressed.40 The movement, which ran against the dominant discourse in Ottawa, rapidly faced criticism by the media41 when the opportunity                                                             39 Idle No More grew out of  “hundreds of years of indigenous sovereignty and resistance on Turtle Island” (Idle No More, 2013a) with the purpose of reflecting sentiments from ongoing and residual environmental, cultural and social destruction (Idle No More, 2013, 2013a; Idle No More 2013b). One problem faced by Aboriginals correlates to the media’s portrayal of the movement. Social media conflated the movement with other civil rights movements rather than recognize its distinct character (Taguiam, 2013). Moreover, the demands set by Aboriginal peoples lost traction when the Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence ended her hunger strike after meeting with Liberal and NDP caucuses. The 13 commitments demanded by Chief Theresa Spence remain unaddressed despite promises by prominent politicians (Van Dusen & Thomas, 2013).  40 Glen Coulthard presents a timeline demonstrating how Idle No More acts as a continuation of past Aboriginal protests. The movement acts as a manifestation of past cycles of indigenous activism. Each cycle begins with government’s failure to manage indigenous anger and formally recognize rights as well as adequately increase dialogue with indigenous peoples (Coulthard, 2013). 41 Different media outlets began accusing Idle No More of presenting no coherent voice and acting without clear demands (Jackson, 2013; Bonokoski, 2013; Speller, 2013). Mark Bonokoski from the Toronto Sun even went as far as to portray the movement as a “mind-numbing kaleidoscope of rabble-rousers and anarchists” (Bonokoski, 2013). The media helped marginalize the movement’s voice, especially in the short timeframe following Chief Theresa Spence’s meeting with Harper, by framing the movement as inept and a waste of taxpayer’s dollars (Bonokoski, 2013).  Missing were any reflections on the diversity of Aboriginals across Canada and how this diversity transpired in Idle No More as a movement: “[…] the diversity of Indigenous   43presented itself. Moreover, when the Attawapiskat Chief met with Parliamentary caucuses, the media and Assembly of First Nations began to largely ignore Idle No More despite the unresolved nature of the dispute. At this time, Chief Theresa Spence’s concerns were not considered seriously and many protests were dispelled. Structural barriers thus emerge for Aboriginal groups exerting little, or relatively less, power on other societal actors. Local opportunity structures serve to discourage Aboriginal groups from engaging in protests when they exert less power over dominant societal actors (Einwohner 1999: 170).  Changing power relationships, therefore, serve as a necessary pre-condition for the effective employment of this voice channel. 4.2. GRASSROOT ORGANIZATIONS Lobbying has traditionally provided an alternative voice channel for those who wish to reach public officials.  Lobbying is a means to effectuate voice by imparting public officials with information related to the legislative process or a policy action that these officials would otherwise not consider (Nownes 2006: 62). Voice is expressed through the perspective that the lobbyists put forward, which in turn acts as a mechanism for organizations to prevent the exit of key actors within the Canadian state. Lobbyists use voice to disseminate information on the popularity of a given piece of legislation (Nownes 2006: 64-65), which in turn acts a signal to Canadian institutions which policies they need to remedy to retain the actors or members they desire. However, often times those who use lobbying as a method of voice are individuals with access to connections and wealth. Ergo, those who influence policies and public decision makers are those with more resources: “Well-heeled special interest groups generally have more access to decision makers, more influence in the policy-making process, and even the ability to set the                                                                                                                                                                                                nations in this country will amount to a diversity of perspectives on how to move forward. The diversity of situations that First Nations find themselves in will amount to different perspectives on what needs to be done” (Coulthard, 2013).    44rules of the political system in their favour” (Couto, 2010b: 298). Therefore, the voice of many Canadians and Aboriginal groups can be seriously underrepresented (Couto, 2010a).  The implications are also such where these same members who can employ their resources to lobby decision-makers are the ones that Canadian institutions wish to retain as they bring in capital and investment into Canada. Therefore, while a legal duty to consult42 Aboriginal people exists, decision makers are not legally required to accommodate all requests made in the consultation process (see Case Study). Interest groups, however, can form and try to arrest policy decisions that do not reflect the desires of the public. The key here is to convince enough of the public that the opinions and voice expressed by these interests groups are desirable to the mass. By organizing the broader public, they can increase their impact. However, Aboriginal groups have faced criticisms by the public and have encountered barriers to persuading a large public to support and follow their voice. Moreover, Aboriginal groups have faced difficulty in creating a universal or nation-wide narrative as can be witnessed through movements such as Idle No More. As a result, their voice has come across as partitioned and sometimes as conflicting where wealthier Aboriginal actors try and create a voice that does not accurately reflect communities (Alfred). As with the voting paradigm, in absolute terms, there are substantially fewer Aboriginals lobbying the government than non-Aboriginals. One possible explanation stems from the earlier discussion presented in this research: the idea that fewer minority groups can effectively lobby the government when it is so costly. These costs, perceived or actual, dissuade members of an organization from employing their voice through this channel. The uncertainty of benefits and the high costs limit lobbying as an effective voice channel. In particular, even if an Aboriginal                                                             42 Cases such as Sparrow, Haida and Delgamuukw, have established the legal duty to consult Aboriginal people. There must be evidence of an attempt to accommodate Aboriginal rights in question by the Crown.    45group were to lobby the government, competing narratives (voices) might emerge from other interest groups. This drives up the initial cost faced by Aboriginal groups or low-income groups who have been extensively documented as less participatory than middle or upper class groups (Eliasoph, 1998; Mansbridge, 1980). Another challenge faced by Aboriginal activists who wish to lobby decision-makers is the problem of organizing efforts in pursuit of jointly desired ends. The cost of the effort required would be higher in pluralistic (or heterogeneous) groups, whereas it may be lower in societies where norms are shared by many (homogeneous). 4.3 BARRIERS TO CIVIC ENGAGEMENT Civic engagement offers several avenues for voice to be expressed by interest groups and societal actors. However, Aboriginal groups still feel that their voice has not been adequately reflected in political discourse and in regulatory processes. In part, this is because many believe that in order to have a voice within Canada, an individual needs to be wealthy, a business leader or take part in a discourse that will be approved by these individuals who contribute to the policy-making and legislative processes (Bishop & Preiner, 2005: 5). Dialogue, in this sense, is heavily curtailed by power dynamics within Canada by its elites.  Barriers to participation then, are problematic as they limit effective results and the decision-making process related to Aboriginal topics of concern. Barriers such as a lack of resources, inadequate notice, translation-related problems (Paci et al. 2002; Baker & McLelland, 2003), and community isolation (Armitage, 2005) can inhibit Aboriginal voice in policy-making and planning. As a result, Aboriginal citizens have often been categorized as “non-participants” (Duerden et al., 1996; Diduck & Sinclair, 2002; Sinclair & Fitzpatrick, 2002). In particular, physical distance from conferences and important planning meetings can serve as an impediment to Aboriginal voice. With poor infrastructure such as limited and costly transportation and poor   46road conditions, it becomes difficult for Aboriginals to actively engage in regular discourses affecting their day to day lives (Armitage, 2005). Moreover, isolation can cause further difficulties for Aboriginals wishing to access information about the planning process or current political decisions (Ibid). Without adequate information and with limited communication, the likelihood of Aboriginal voice to be present in important decisions is drastically reduced.  The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) and CEAA have mandated increased consultation with Aboriginal groups in order to facilitate aboriginal voice in the decision-making process. Consultation is a policy directive for both provincial and municipal governments. However, in practice governments fail to properly consult with aboriginal groups concerning development projects and community projects affecting them. Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), [2004] 3 S.C.R. 511, 2004 SCC 73, serves to illustrate this point. In this case provincial authorities failed to engage a community regarding what was considered sacred land to the Haida Nation. While the SCC ruled in favour of the Haida Nation43, the point iterated by its proceedings was a general failure on the part of governments to consult with Aboriginal communities. Despite the legal duty created by this case to consult with Aboriginal people, the failure to adequately include Aboriginal groups in consultation processes is ongoing44, resulting in the marginalization of their voice in the regulatory process. As a result of exclusionary practices, many groups feel the best avenue for their voice is through litigation. The judicial system, in this sense, serves as an important voice channel for many Aboriginal groups. However, it is not always an effective one. As Natcher (2001) has pointed out, courts do not                                                             43 In Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), [2004] 3 S.C.R. 511, 2004 SCC 73, Chief Justice McLachlin wrote that the Crown has a “duty to consult with Aboriginal peoples and accommodate their interests” (Para. 16).   44 See observations from the Case Study section. Note: There are ongoing complaints by Aboriginal groups such as the WMFN that governmental agencies have not properly taken into account their voice, undermining the consultation process (BC Hydro, 2011).   47always favour First Nations groups. It is more of a gamble whether or not First Nations will win their litigation as courts sometime rule favourably to the Crown and sometimes to First Nations groups45. Part of the cost, therefore, incurred by Aboriginal groups, stems from the negative precedents set by courts. Negative precedents deter future participation in legal processes, creating serious long-term implications.  Another cost accrued by litigation stems from power relations found within its structure, often determining how effective Aboriginal voice is (Chartrand, 2001: 30). Historically, courts have not operated as objective third parties, primarily acting out of Canadian interests.46 Moreover, these judicial institutions continue to be staffed almost entirely by non-Aboriginals who then interpret and apply the laws of the dominant society (Russell, 1998: 248).  Aboriginals, as such, have historically faced a denial of direct participation in legal processes as evidenced in jurisprudence such as St. Catherines Milling and Lumber Co.v. R, 13 S.C.R. 577,47 and Re: Eskimos [1939] S.C.R. 104.  Dominant discourses continue to preside over decisions today. As a result, Aboriginal people continue to experience difficulty asserting their narratives within Canadian legal structures due to the misapplication of their voice (Freire, 1997). The colonizer still retains a monopoly on the interpretation of Aboriginal histories (Fortune, 1993; Freire, 1997; Miller,                                                             45 Peter Russell aptly points out that juridical wins serve as “a reminder of the subordinate place of native societies within the larger settler societies in which they are embedded, and of their dependence on the courts that pronounce upon their rights in that larger society” (Russell, 1998: 247). 46 See Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010 where the Court stated that Aboriginal title may be infringed upon by either provincial or federal governments. This infringement is legal if it satisfies a compelling legislative objective, including for example the "development of agriculture, forestry, mining, hydroelectric power, ... general economic development, ...the protection of the environment or endangered species, the building of infrastructure, and so on…” (Para. 78). 47 The Ojibbeway could not present their version of events in court. Rather, the Privy Council represented their interests denying the Ojibbeway any voice in the decision-making process (Catharines Milling and Lumber Co.v. R, 13 S.C.R. 577).   482011; Werther, 1992: xvii) 48. The judiciary remains ill-equipped to interpret oral histories and make fair judgements (Fortune, 1993: 88). Stories become mere discussions about the meaning of words (Monture-Angus, 1995), removing the individual from the story itself. The judiciary has made little effort to acquire knowledge of Aboriginals through their histories, rendering it difficult for them to acknowledge how Aboriginal history is embedded in different systems of knowledge (Fortune 1993:88). Courts further fail to credit oral histories as historically true (Cairns et al., 1999), giving precedence to fact-finding statements and methods. This is evidenced in Dickson J.’s statement that: " [t]he difficulty with these features of oral histories is that they are tangential to the ultimate purpose of the fact-finding process at trial—the determination of the historical truth” (Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010). Aboriginal history is recognized as secondary and tangential to the fact-finding process, diminishing Aboriginal authority. As Borrows suggests in Citizenship, Diversity and Pluralism: Canadian and Comparative Perspectives, Canadian case law fails to realize Aboriginal historical truth (Cairns et al., 1999), raising the cost of litigation and voice. This interpretation of voice, coupled with the language and structure of the courts, mean that Aboriginal peoples must accommodate the courts in order for their claims to move forward.  Litigation is not an optimal avenue for voice as it is often costly and adversarial49. It only serves to create further tensions between Aboriginal groups and Canadian institutions. Moreover, resources are imperative to effective voice exercised by societal actors (Sinclair & Diduck, 2001; Sinclair & Diduck, 2009). Litigation often exhausts what minimal resources Aboriginal groups possess in the first place. The cost for the exercise of this voice channel is so high that it renders                                                             48 This is evidenced in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010 and subsequent cases whereby the final interpretation of oral histories lay in the hands of the court. Moreover, it is important to note that the law has universally favoured the dominator (Werther, 1992: xvii). 49 Litigation involves risk to those who participate. The risk of loss elevates its cost, thereby setting a common law precedent.    49future employment of this voice channel difficult. In other words, the more resources employed for litigation, the higher the cost for Aboriginal groups. The higher the perceived cost, the less likely Aboriginal groups will be to employ this voice channel in the future. This is especially true when the outcome of litigation is uncertain, lowering the perceived benefits of these groups50. Resources are an important component in correcting power imbalances (Sinclair & Diduck, 2001; Fitzpatrick & Sinclair, 2003; Foucault, 1982; Sinclair & Diduck, 2009). Resources can permit “substantive dialogue” by allowing communities to prepare for public discourse by gathering the information they need (Sinclair & Diduck, 2009: 58). Knowledge-based resources are vital for civic engagement and can help communities create written submissions detailing their concerns towards proposals affecting them. Without access to public registries, legislation and translated documents, Aboriginal groups remain disadvantaged. In particular, members of Aboriginal communities have been noted to have experienced difficulties when reading documents that contain complex technical jargon51 (Wismer, 1996; Mulvihill & Baker, 2001; Baker & McLelland, 2003). This is rendered all the more difficult with those who express difficulties with the English language. Moreover, there is an inadequacy of information presented to Aboriginal groups. For example, executive summaries that are often presented to First Nations communities do not accurately convey all the necessary information needed (Wismer, 1996; Armitage, 2005). Another barrier experienced by Aboriginal groups stems from power dynamics within Canada. Power dynamics within society can affect the potential participation of individual actors.                                                             50 Note: While litigation may continue to be uncertain for Aboriginal people, the Charter era has improved the chance of juridical wins. It is also important to bear in mind that abandoning legal mechanisms is not an optimal route for Aboriginal people. Abandoning this method of voice allows only for the voice of the state to be heard (Werther, 1992), excluding Aboriginal people from an entire avenue of voice.  51 It must be noted that while complex technical jargon may be difficult for non-Aboriginals and Aboriginals alike to understand, this problem is even more pervasive amongst Aboriginal groups when compounded with difficulties understanding the English language and an overall lower educational attainment. Moreover, with less access to political and legal resources, a thorough understanding of proceedings may be a substantial difficulty.   50Actions and expressions of citizens are influenced by power relations. Some actors may possess the “power over” others or may engage in superior-subordinate relationships (Woehrle, 1992). This power over other actors can be accrued from knowledge, expertise, rewards, and enforceable rights. It can also be amassed through the accumulation of wealth and resources. In this way, power relations may imply the ability of one individual to get another individual to do something that they otherwise would not do (Cartwright, 1965; Dahl, 1957) because of their relation to certain means. Power, ergo, cannot be exercised by those individuals who are not free or who are controlled by others (Foucault, 1982). An individual in debt, an individual who requires the knowledge of another or any other item is therefore subordinate in the power relationship. Foucault touches upon this point in The Subject and Power: “power is exercised only over free subjects and only insofar as they are ‘free’” (342). Power by individuals can only be achieved if the subject is free; if the there is a field of possible actions available. In this sense, freedom acts as the conditions for the dynamics of power interplay. Re-examining the Indian Act, it is possible to see how a superior-subordinate relationship between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals was formally entrenched. The Indian Act sought to assimilate Aboriginal peoples. It, moreover, formally recorded all Aboriginal lands as land belonging to the Crown to be administered on behalf of First Nations peoples (Indian Act, 1876). Power dynamics are paramount when considering the exercise of civic voice by members of an organization. Decision-makers at the top change the dynamics in which others interact with them. For example, the power held by decision-makers to remove resources available to aboriginal groups, influences all levels of interactions. In the case of community planning and development projects, aboriginal peoples may feel intimidated or marginalized. As a result, their voice is substantially affected.   51CHAPTER 5: CASE STUDY A case study was selected for this research in order to examine possible barriers that might exist for Aboriginal voice in Canada. By identifying barriers, this study hoped to then discuss possible recommendations for Aboriginal groups in British Columbia and in Canada. While the findings are not exhaustive, they hold broader implications for future relationships between Aboriginals and Canadian organizations. In order to select a case study, multiple avenues for voice were considered. However, the consultation process typically ascribed to Environmental Assessments (EA) was chosen. The reasons behind this choice were multivariate. One reason related to the nature of EAs. As a planning process EAs must engage in “meaningful” consultations with Aboriginal groups using legal decisions as their procedural guideline. EAs, as such, should proceed with reconciliation between state and non-state actors in mind. A second reason for this choice stemmed from the volume of data and recordings publically accessible. These included written statements by different parties on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry.  In order to narrow the scope of the case study, research was limited to a geographical area (i.e. British Columbia), a timeframe (i.e. 2005-2013), a First Nations group (i.e. West Moberly First Nations) and EA type (i.e. panel reviews, verbatim transcripts and reports). The study took a qualitative approach, examining these publicly accessible documents.   The research selected the West Moberly First Nations (WMFN) due to their membership as part of The Treaty No. 8 Tribal Association52. In 2006, they consisted of 131 off-reserve members and 85 on-reserve members (Statistics Canada, 2007a-h). Over recent years they witnessed an increase in the relative size of their population. In 2012, they reported 258 members                                                             52 The Treaty No. 8 Tribal Association is primarily comprised of those affected by BC Hydro’s Site C dam. As a result, data was pulled from the Association to determine which First Nation’s group would best serve the case study employed.   52with 103 living on-reserve (AANDC, 2012). This group was chosen for the case study due to its social and economic determinants. Reflective of findings from the 2006 Aboriginal Data Initiative, the WMFN demonstrate certain structural and resource-related barriers that could act as inhibitors to the expression of their voice. For example, they exhibit medical and health conditions similar to other First Nations with no medical or dental services provided in their community. Moreover, they have no school in the area and must commute to a nearby First Nations community using gravel roads (Finavera Wind Energy Inc, 2011: 775). The limited infrastructure and resources reduces the total percentage of members with a formal education within the community. That is, out of 35 members who reported their level of education, 10 had finished high school and 25 reported no degree or certificate (Finavera Wind Energy Inc, 2011). Participation for the WMFN in the EA process is difficult, encountering many barriers similar to other Aboriginal groups within British Columbia,53 making them the perfect candidate for this research.  5.1 Case Study Background BC Hydro and Power Authority expressed a desire to construct a dam and 1,100 megawatt hydroelectric generating station on the Peace River in north-eastern British Columbia in order to meet growing energy demands (Shaw & Shaw, 2011: 2). This is the third dam in the region, constructed as part of a series of dams that commenced in the 1960s (Shaw & Shaw, 2011). According to BC Hydro, the project is necessary in order to provide service to new loads in a reasonable timeframe (BC Hydro, 2011; BC Hydro 2013a; Shaw & Shaw, 2011; Tannahill, 2012). The West Moberly First Nations, alongside other Treaty No. 8 First Nations, however, express concerns over Site C and its associated projects. The proposed site is controversial as it                                                             53 This research does not universalize its findings to all Aboriginal groups across Canada. It does note, however, that other Treaty No.8 First Nations groups, alongside many Aboriginal groups in British Columbia (as witnessed from the 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative), exhibit similar structural barriers.     53would adversely affect tributaries and lands of Treaty No. 8 First Nations. BC Hydro (2010) even notes that 5,340 hectares of land would be flooded in the process (BC Hydro, 2010). The WMFN wish to express their dissatisfaction with BC Hydro and the provincial government through the EA process as the dams continue to represent an ongoing source of conflict for them (Tannahill, 2012). A prominent issue for the WMFN resides in the way for which Aboriginal voice has been included in official documents regarding Site C. While environmental and Aboriginal concerns are accounted for in publications, facts continue to take precedence over oral histories. Problems are identified in documents with no direct and tenable commitment to Aboriginal communities. This study observed several difficulties encountered by the WMFN in the EA process due to certain barriers such as a general lack of resources, cynicism towards Canadian institutions, accessibility problems, language barriers, dismissal or misuse of traditional knowledge and a lack of power.  This case study is particularly salient due to its ongoing nature and the visible narratives that have emerged between BC Hydro and the WMFN. In examining verbatim transcripts, reports and statements issued by both parties, this case study’s aim was to ascertain the extent to which Aboriginal voice was integrated into or impacted BC Hydro’s decisions. 5.1.1 The Environmental Assessment Process The EA Process, supervised by the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO), is intended as a mechanism for reviewing major projects in order to assess their potential impacts. The objective of the EA process is to ensure environmental, economic and social sustainability and to reduce potential conflicts with communities that could be adversely affected.  The EAO’s management of major development projects is required by the Environmental Assessment Act and the office is required to provide:   54● Opportunities for the involvement of all interested parties; ● Consultations with First Nations where needed; ● Technical studies to identify and examine potential significant adverse effects; ● Strategies to prevent, or reduce, any adverse effects; and ● Development of comprehensive reports summarizing input and findings.      (CEAA, 2012).  Meaningful consultations are supposed to occur, according to the EAO, when actions by the government allow a company or group to proceed with a development project that could potentially limit the exercise of Aboriginal rights. And while Treaty No. 8 has stipulated that lands can be used for economic, conservational or developmental purposes, decisions must still be accompanied by meaningful consultations and potential alternatives (CEAA, 2012, West Moberly First Nations v. British Columbia, 2010 BCSC 359). In this manner the EA process is grounded in the social context that frames the issue it is meant to address. 5.1.2 Contemporary History of Site C Site C’s proposed dam is based off of a design submitted in the 1980s. It is only in recent years that BC Hydro has commenced its evaluation and planning process in order to start possible construction of the dam. As of 2005, meetings between WMFN and BC Hydro have proceeded in order to advance the Site C proposal. However, what can be pulled from records of meetings and transcripts since 2005 is general opposition by Treaty No. 8 First Nations to the Site C proposal (see BC Hydro, 2010; BC Hydro 2012; Logan, June 2013; Logan, September 2013).  Moreover, findings from transcripts for this case study indicate that those First Nations groups involved in the consultation process feel as if their concerns have not been addressed. Yet, in August 2013, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and the BC EAO determined that BC Hydro’s amended Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was satisfactory. The EIS has now been submitted to the Joint Review Panel before proceeding to the decision stage whereby the Minister decides if the project is viable (CEAA, 2013).   555.2 Results from Study The research identified many concerns from the WMFN towards the Site C project. These concerns ranged from BC Hydro’s “rights-based” approach for its new loads, to incomplete information, to cultural concerns, to environmental concerns (Tannahill, 2012). Overall, the WMFN felt that the Integrated Resource Plan produced by BC Hydro was not comprehensible, robust or flexible enough. The research indicates that participants felt it was unclear whether or not their concerns were ever addressed in the Draft and then finalized Integrated Resource Plan (BC Hydro, 2012b; BC Hydro, 2012a).  Moreover, they noted that initial project assessments failed to address any possible impacts on Treaty No. 8 First Nations (Tannahill, 2012). Some participants in public hearings took issue with BC Hydro’s characterization of the project as having low or no environmental impact (BC Hydro, 2012b).  Findings indicated that WMFN provided information to BC Hydro with respect to environmental, cultural and monetary impacts to the community. Key cultural activities and environmental sectors they felt would be harmed can be summarized in the chart below: Table 1: Impacts on West Moberly First Nations Environmental Sectors Impacted Type of Impact Sources Water Table Concerns about an increase of the water table were brought forward and how it might lead to increased erosion, flooding, and pollution of groundwater. Overall, a concern over the change in water quality was presented. (BC Hydro, 2005; BC Hydro, 2012b; BC Hydro, 2012a; BC Hydro, 2011; Proverbs, 2013) River Habitats There were general concerns that by flooding a certain percentile of river banks in the Peace River Valley, that key nesting grounds and habitats of wildlife would be destroyed or adversely affected. Animals such as warblers, moose, elk, deer, caribou, bison, bears, muskrats, and other birds were identified as at risk by the WMFN.  (BC Hydro, 2005; BC Hydro, 2012b; BC Hydro, 2012a; BC Hydro, 2011; Booth, 2011; Proverbs, 2013) Thermal Changes in Water Elders presented historical knowledge pertaining to the effects of BC Hydro’s other two dams. They indicated that thermal changes in the water occurred and were frightened the same would happen with the new dam. This changes winter migratory patterns and ice flows. (BC Hydro, 2005; BC Hydro, 2012b; BC Hydro, 2011; Proverbs, 2013) :     56Cultural Sites Impacted Type of Impact Sources Peace Moberly Tract Concerned how increased access to the South Bank would affect this key cultural tract of land. (BC Hydro, 2012a) Burial and Heritage Sites With the flooding of several banks, the WMFN noted its concerns over burial sites being ruined and potential undiscovered heritage sites being destroyed. (BC Hydro; Booth, 2011; Proverbs, 2013)   Traditional Activities  Impacted Type of Impact Sources Fishing Concerns about sedimentation build up and its impacts on aquatic life. Also concerned about the impact on fish spawning, migration and passage. Lastly, a major concern was potential mercury introduced into the fish from soil runoffs resulting from bank flooding. (BC Hydro, 2005; BC Hydro, 2012b; BC Hydro, 2012a; BC Hydro, 2011; Booth, 2011; Proverbs, 2013) Hunting, Trapping Concerns for hunting and trapping activities were noted. With certain furbearer habitats at risk (wolverine, rabbits, muskrats and beavers), the WMFN determined that their economic activities would be impacted. (BC Hydro, 2011; Proverbs, 2013)  Findings from the research suggest that many past grievances and concerns pertaining to BC Hydro’s dam have not been addressed (BC Hydro, 2012a; BC Hydro, 2012b; Proverbs, 2013; Logan, August 9 2013; Logan, June 17 2013). The WMFN, as a result, display cynicism in their interactions between government agencies, BC Hydro and consultants.54 One grievance with Site C that recurred in several documents was WMFN’s concern that Site C was being treated as a “done deal” (BC Hydro, 2012a; BC Hydro, 2012b; Tannahill, 2012; BC Hydro, 2011; Proverb, 2013). One participant even accused BC Hydro as being a government agent acting with a prejudice towards the government policy of maximizing hydroelectric potential of the Peace and Columbia (BC Hydro, 2012a). Overall, a desire for the recognition of Aboriginal voice in the planning process was expressed. Moreover, participants also expressed a desire for alternatives to the dam to be more proactively discussed. They felt alternatives were not actively pursued by BC Hydro. One suggestion was to create a series of small cascading dams in order to                                                             54 Cynicism is particularly apparent in the First Nations consultations between WMFN and BC Hydro where members accuse BC Hydro of not listening or accounting for past demands. One participant, who has been involved in water use planning for three communities on the Peace River, accused BC Hydro of not involving those people downstream who are affected by the project despite past demands to do so (BC Hydro, 2012a).   57reduce the environmental impacts of the dam (BC Hydro, 2011). However, it only acted as a suggestion as it was not investigated further by BC Hydro.  Based on the findings, this case study finds that there is a general lack of capacity for Aboriginal participation (Baker & McLelland, 2003; CARC, 1996; Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, 2007) with the consultation process. However it is important to note that BC Hydro did include a report of First Nations concerns in its final report. It noted that it would continue to consult with Aboriginal people about a fish habitat compensation project for the adverse impacts the dam would have on the fish. It also promised to name key cultural sites and attempt to adjust its activities in order to not destroy them (BC Hydro, 2011). BC Hydro further noted that it assessed the potential of Site C to hurt the hunting, trapping industry. It concluded that no substantive evidence demonstrates that these traditional activities would change due to the dam’s presence (BC Hydro, 2011). 5.2.1 Results Pertaining to Aboriginal Voice  In general, the community meetings and consultations employed multiple techniques to allow an integrative process for public participation. Meetings served to introduce the project, review potential alternatives and present potential environmental impact statements. This supports Stewart and Sinclair (2007) who have concluded that multiple techniques offer an integrative process for public discussions by creating opportunities to receive information, comment on projects and ask questions (161-162). However, the WMFN did encounter language barriers and power barriers when they attempted to exercise their voice. Adequate translation services were not provided in order for meaning to be properly conveyed. According to Gallagher and Jacobson (1993), translators are necessary for the process itself in order not to impede potential dialogue. The language barrier sometimes encountered by the WMFN could   58have changed potential communicative contexts. Moreover, it could have added to power dynamics already existent. For example, this case study found that some participants were less likely to participate due to the technical language employed (BC Hydro, 2012a; BC Hydro, 2012b). The technical language reflects a dominant discourse over the First Nations55, especially over those who have not completed a formal education and may be at a loss of comprehending terms used in hearings or consultations. Voice, as a result, is not as “vocal” as it could be. According to Cvetkovich and Earle (1992), technical discourse is problematic because of its tendency to miss public concerns. Fiorino echoes this concern by noting that technical jargon hampers the public’s ability to participate in the decision process (Fiorino, 1990).   After analyzing hearings and reports, this case study found that there was a lack of understanding by the public of how to participate in the EA process. That is, while chiefs and important members were invited, others were left out of the dialogue56. This has the effect of diminishing the voice of the Aboriginal public. Moreover, it changed the balance of the power dynamics between BC Hydro and those who participated. The intimidating nature of the EA process could be counteracted with increased numbers from the Aboriginal public.   This case study also found that attendance by the Aboriginal public at these meetings was minimal. According to some scholars (Duncan, 1999; Rowe & Frewer, 2000), this can be attributed to the remoteness of Aboriginal communities. Opportunities to participate are inconvenient to those working on or near reserves due to the times and locations of the hearings. A potential recommendation, therefore, would be to first consult with Aboriginal groups a few months before a hearing in order to determine a location and time that suits them. Not only would this demonstrate a greater respect and desire for Aboriginal participation, but it would                                                             55 Please refer to earlier footnote, #51. 56 Community members from the WMFN and surrounding First Nations groups were not present during the consultative process.   59allow Aboriginal groups to prepare any materials they might need in relation to the project. With greater confidence, time and preparation, participation of Aboriginal groups could increase.  5.2.2 The Power of the WMFN’s Voice  In order to increase impartiality, this research examined documents produced by BC Hydro. The purpose: to examine BC Hydro’s voice with respect to deliberations between themselves and the WMFN. The research found that while the initial planning process was not inclusive of the WMFN, BC Hydro did allow the WMFN to present their traditional knowledge at hearings. This knowledge was later included in the Integrated Resource Plan by BC Hydro. It is important to note, however, that only certain elements of the traditional knowledge were included in the final document. This raised concerns with the WMFN who accused BC Hydro of not respecting and misinterpreting their traditional knowledge (BC Hydro, 2012a; BC Hydro, 2012b). Moreover, while concerns from the Treaty No. 8 First Nations were addressed in BC Hydro’s final report (BC Hydro, 2011), the way in which the concerns were addressed did not satiate the WMFN. That is, BC Hydro confirmed that Site C would damage certain key wildlife habitats, but mentioned that it would strive to create an alternative habitat for those species (BC Hydro, 2011). At the end of the day, no substantial remedy was provided to the WMFN aside from the promise of future consultations.  The delineation of events, language employed by BC Hydro and the WMFN, and actions were all analyzed in order to determine the effectiveness of the WMFN’s voice. This research found that while voice was employed, it had marginal effects on BC Hydro’s decision-making. The WMFN members left more agitated and upset by the process than before (BC Hydro, 2011). This runs counter to the idea of the consultation process which should aim include First Nations and restructure their relationship with the government and organizations run by the government.   60The Honourable Mr. Justice Williamson has noted as much in the West Moberly court decision (West Moberly First Nations v. British Columbia, 2010 BCSC 359) where it was stated that consultation should aim to reasonably accommodate the petitioners (Ibid). As Booth has mentioned, part of the problem for Aboriginal voice stems from the vague definitions attributed to “meaningful” (Booth, 2011: 52) and “reasonable.” BC Hydro has taken a liberal approach to their understanding of both terms as well as their understanding of Section 16.2 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act: where “community knowledge and Aboriginal traditional knowledge may be considered in conducting an environmental assessment” (CEAA, 2012). BC Hydro may be required to consult with Aboriginal groups, but it only needs to accommodate these groups in a manner that it interprets as reasonable. Moreover, traditional knowledge is not considered a key component for EA and therefore BC Hydro’s duty does not necessarily extend to any inclusion.  5.3  Barriers to Aboriginal Voice This case study conducted identifies several barriers to Aboriginal voice. These barriers include language barriers, dismissal of traditional knowledge, a lack of resources, community isolation, and a lack of institutions to support research (Paci et al., 2002; Baker & McLelland, 2003; Armitage, 2005).  As Booth has suggested, “First Nations lack capacity. Capacity issues take many different forms. A lack of financial resources, staff resources and data are key issues, as are demands for data from critical (and overwhelmed) peoples such as the Elders” (Booth, 2011: 55). The result has been a decrease in meaningful participation by First Nations groups. In particular, this research noted that traditional knowledge (i.e. stories, legends, myths, etc.) was often undermined by the EA process where proponents of the knowledge presented could be dismissed. Paci et al. (2002), alongside other academics, has raised similar concerns arguing that   61there is a tendency to misuse traditional knowledge (Paci et al., 2002; Ellis, 2005). Traditional knowledge is not given equal weight, negatively impacting Aboriginal voice. This is especially true when precedence is given to technical knowledge and language over traditional Aboriginal knowledge. The EA process in this light can be culturally incompatible to Aboriginal groups (Baker & McLelland, 2003; Armitage, 2005). Moreover, the WMFN lack the institutional capacity for research (Diduck & Sinclair, 2002) with only one community centre and very few other buildings.  Their poor institutional capacity, when combined with lack of financial resources (Baker & McLelland, 2003) and poor timeframe, hampers their ability to collect traditional knowledge. This case study found that power imbalance further limited procedural aspects of the EA process. With little to no control over the process, mechanisms to receive information were primarily determined by BC Hydro. As Sinclair (2002) has suggested, participatory processes should be created with the idea of reducing power imbalances. Funding for participants or additional resources to help disseminate information could equalize power imbalances (Diduck, 2004; Sinclair et al., 2002).            62CHAPTER 6:  ABORIGINAL EXIT The research conducted explored the possibility of Aboriginal voice in Canada. It determined that many social and economic barriers prevent Aboriginal voice from bearing weight in Canadian institutions to a similar effect as non-Aboriginal voice. Moreover, it examined how power dynamics within Canadian institutions serve to diminish or even silence Aboriginal voice, often favouring multinationals or development projects. The result is little recourse towards restructuration, and a growing sense of futility and cynicism amongst Aboriginal groups. And while the results are not uniform across Canada,57 they point to an inability for Aboriginals to express effective voice.58 Results also point to institutions preferring technical knowledge over traditional knowledge in the implementation and evaluation phases of their policies (see BC Hydro, May 2013a; BC Hydro, May 2013b; BC Hydro, 2012; BC Hydro 2010).   Devaluating (or ignoring) traditional knowledge points to a continuation of “colonialism” within Canadian institutions (Alfred). As Taiaiake Alfred avers, “Colonialism is the disconnection of Native people from the land, their history, their identity and their rights so that others can benefit. It is a basic form of injustice in the world […]” (Alfred). By listening but not “hearing” what Aboriginal groups continue to ask for, living conditions worsen for Aboriginal people; policies do not reflect Aboriginal voice and traditional customs; Aboriginal law remains silent to Canadian legal jurisdiction. The colonizer continues to make decisions for Aboriginal groups, undermining the entire idea of self-determination. As Robert Yazzie iterates, Aboriginal voice cannot occur until Aboriginals can make their own decisions. In this sense, “[c]olonialism remains when national legislatures and policy makers make decisions for                                                             57 Results vary due to the diversity of Aboriginals groups across Canada. 58 The expression of voice is twofold: a) the ability to vocalize concerns and b) for those vocalizations to be seriously in the planning process and policy objectives.     63Indigenous peoples, tell them what they can and cannot do, refuse to support them, or effectively shut them out of the process” (Yazzie, 2000: 49).   If voice is continuously obstructed, the alternative option, according to Hirschman’s theory, is the option of exit. In the application of citizens to a nation-state, this implies an exit from the country or the possibility of forming a separate nation. In the former, monetary resources or sponsorship would be required to immigrate to another country. However, following the discourse by First Nations, this is not an optimal or even a viable solution. It would preclude their ability to access ancient burial sites, heritage sites, to hunt and fish on their ancestral grounds and engage in other activities which pertain to their land ownership. Based on their spiritual connection to the land,59 exit does not present a possible choice. Exit would further prevent any future bargaining power Aboriginal groups might have with the government. The latter option, of creating a separate nation, is achievable only through independence from Canadian institutions. It would require legal battles with the government, the creation of sustainable infrastructure on Aboriginal reserves, and peace treaties amongst provinces and other Aboriginal groups. Aboriginal groups exiting Canada to form their own nation would trigger protests from many societal actors. If simple forms of protest (i.e. Aboriginal demonstrations and road blockades) triggered riots from non-Aboriginals,60 then the possibility of their exit may induce new forms of violence by non-Aboriginals. Moreover, the option of exit, whereby Aboriginals retain their land, would be a difficult task. For one, societal actors may mobilize to re-possess Aboriginal lands. Secondly, democratic systems fail to recognize secessionist                                                             59 AFN has openly stated their spiritual connection with the land: “From the realms of the human world, the sky dwellers, the water beings, forest creatures and all other forms of life, the beautiful Mother Earth gives birth to, nurtures and sustains all life. Mother Earth provides us with our food and clean water sources. She bestows us with materials for our homes, clothes and tools. She provides all life with raw materials for our industry, ingenuity and progress” (AFN, 2013). 60 One excellent example stems from Kanehsatake’s protest in the 1990s. Please refer to Alanis Obomsawin’s documentary Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance (Obomsawim, 1993).   64movements, potentially affecting Aboriginal exit. As Brilmayer (1991) expresses, democratic systems work against secessionist movements because democracy assumes a unit of political decision-making. Therefore, “[g]overnment by the consent of the governed does not necessarily encompass a right to opt out” (Brilmayer, 1991). Ultimately, the cost of exit is too high of a price to be paid for Aboriginal voice.  Colonialism further adds to the dilemma for Aboriginal groups wishing to “exit” Canada or its institutions. When the portrayal of Aboriginals adheres to colonial images of violent mental sickness, angry youth, drug abuse, drunkenness and suicide, then a false identity assumes control of their lives. This imagery serves the purpose to help suppress Aboriginal groups in order for governments and corporations to maintain control of their homelands (Alfred).  This narrative of the colonizer only serves to remove Aboriginal independence. Subsequently these same narratives harbour racism and misunderstandings amongst non-Aboriginals, making the policy alternative of “exit” very difficult61.                                                                      61 While increased negative narratives of Aboriginals have emerged in the past three years (Pierro et al., 2013), there have also been, simultaneously, alternative characterizations of Aboriginal peoples. In particular, efforts have been made by the Vancouver Board of Education to create an image of dignity for Aboriginal youth (AEEA, 2009; AEEA, 2013).   65CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS This research serves as a discussion of Aboriginal participation through Hirschman’s framework of voice and exit. It begins by examining existing literature and then offers an alternative to previous explanations by combining Hirschman’s concepts of voice and exit with a mathematical model developed by Riker and Ordeshook. It moreover employs a critical framework based on readings by Foucault and Gramsci in order to discover power relations inherent in non-Aboriginal institutions and texts.  The methodology for this research was uniquely constructed to address Aboriginal voice and as a result, findings took a comprehensive approach to voice. This research, however, could be improved in the future by field work and participation by researchers in the EA process. Ultimately more field research and data need to be collected for substantive dialogue regarding future policy approaches. Moreover, it must be noted that at this time the research employs a model that cannot be universalized as Aboriginals across Canada are diverse in makeup with different approaches to voice and consultation processes. Some Aboriginal groups have demonstrated the ability to work alongside non-Aboriginals in order to effectuate voice. Other Aboriginal groups prefer to demonstrate solidarity with their neighbouring “brothers” and “sisters62.” As a result, the model of voice and exit cannot be perceived as rigid and formulaic. Rather, as this research has shown, Aboriginals can, and in some instances have chosen to engage in alternative methods of expression.  7.1 Recommendations  Aboriginals consist of a diverse group of peoples. To provide recommendations for the purpose of ameliorating Aboriginal voice, as such, is nothing short of difficult. Academics,                                                             62 Brother and sister are terms applied to members of neighbouring Aboriginal groups, outside of an immediate band or kinship. These terms often are used when one group expresses solidarity with another’s protest or movement to protect their individual rights or treaty rights.    66international reports and internal commissions continue to propose recommendations largely ignored by Canadian institutions (Cairns et al., 1999; INAC 1998; RCAP 1995; Milen, 1991)63. Propositions from the 1960s, refashioned in the 1990s are yet again today being retooled (Cairns et al, 1990; Coulthard, 2013; Coulthard, January 7 2013). Some past and present recommendations argue for increased Aboriginal representation in Parliament and a greater range of land-based rights for this underrepresented group (Knight 2001; Henderson 1994; RCAP 1995). Other recommendations include increased political interaction with Aboriginal groups (Silver et al., 2005). However, these recommendations often fail to acknowledge that some Aboriginals do not accept the mythology “of the American64 past which interprets American history as a sanitized merging of diverse peoples to form a homogeneous union” (Deloria, 1974: 2). For many, the memory of abuse and past freedom remains too strong to buy into this dominant narrative. For example, in 1999, New Brunswick’s Aboriginal Chiefs refused two guaranteed seats in the Provincial Legislature from the Premier (Knight, 2001).   Moreover, Aboriginal self-perception differs from that of other minority groups. Their land, currently occupied by the white man, continues to belong to them: “It is a land where the white man […] might eventually leave” (Deloria, 1974: 3).  Therefore, recommendations set out by this research follow an approach that attempts to be respectful and mindful of Aboriginal culture. The first set of recommendations this research offers pertains to Aboriginal citizenship and respect. There is a general need for Canadian governments and institutions to show greater respect towards Aboriginal peoples. A vertical approach to citizenship does not satiate this need.                                                             63 These include international mechanisms recommended by the UN Special Rapporteur and the Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). Notably, in the most recent visit to Canada, UN Special Rapporteur James Anaya encouraged the Canadian government to take less adversarial approaches when consulting with its Aboriginal peoples. Anaya noted and discouraged the current approach to land claim settlements, which seeks a restrictive interpretation of aboriginal and treaty rights (Olson, 2013). To which Canadian Minister Bernard Valcourt and the Canadian government responded by saying that the well-being of Aboriginals “is at the center of Canada’s preoccupations” and has always been (Olson, 2013). 64 Although Vine Deloria Jr. speaks in an American context, his comments are relevant to Canada.   67For example, a relevant and important aspect of Aboriginal culture pertains to the nature in which storytelling and narratives are shared; horizontally. Many nations follow the Circle Model which focuses on bringing people together who come from different backgrounds and experiences (McCaslin & Boyer, 2009: 79). This model shifts the framework from one of power to one of inclusiveness (Ibid).  Therefore, it is not merely enough to record oral histories in a judicial setting or consultative processes where power relationships compromise both the setting and language of the recordings. A respectful approach includes meeting with Aboriginal communities on their respective territories and engaging in their cultural practices. A top-down approach eliminates this way of interacting and moreover undermines the horizontal nature of Aboriginal communities.  A willingness to support Aboriginal self-governance by Canada also denotes respect for the people (Fleras, 1985: 574). To date, Canadian governments have not seriously addressed the role of self-government and its ability to build trusting relationships (Boldt 1993; Abele & Prince 2003: 158). Self-government continues to be construed as a cost levied upon the Canadian government. Supporting self-government is instrumental in allowing Aboriginals to reclaim control over their lives (Alfred & Rollo, 2012) by permitting them to engage in meaningful relations with a wider community (RCAP, 1995: vol.1, part 3). The need for self-governance has emerged in many documents historically65. For policies to reflect a respect for self-governance, an alteration in the ideological framework of the state must emerge. This research, however, suggests that trust must also be integral to restructuring the relationship between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals. Trust and respect can be both conveyed when the Legislature begins reflecting the values and interests of Aboriginal people.                                                              65 Commencing with responses in 1969 to the Indian Act, and proceeding with the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples in the 1990s (Cairns, 1999; RCAP, 1995).   68Beyond self-governance and respect, a policy-oriented approach might begin by creating programs designed to encourage Aboriginal professionals to return to reserves and engage in community-building efforts. Governments could construct incentives premised on financial “bonuses” given to Aboriginals returning to educate and aid their respective communities. Having non-Aboriginals enter a community hardly inspires confidence amongst the youth, and often removes autonomy from communities (Gramsci, 1971). By focusing on local knowledge, lessons administered would be more culturally appropriate and supportive to the community.  John Burrows remarks that: […] it is time to talk also of Aboriginal control of Canadian  affairs. We need an Aboriginal prime minister, an Aboriginal  Supreme Court judge, and numerous Aboriginal chief executive  officers. We need people with steady employment, good health  and entrepreneurial skill. They should be joined by Aboriginal  scientists, doctors, lawyers, and educators, and coupled with  union leaders, social activists, and conservative thinkers”  (Cairns et al., 1999: 74).   This policy-oriented approach relies on acknowledging the international status of Aboriginal peoples. It requires acknowledging that the notion of constituting a separate nation is pre-American and not anti-American (Deloria, 1974:24).66 This approach would require the Canadian government to adopt measures above and beyond granting indigenous jurisdiction over their lands (Alfred & Rollo, 2012). It would also require governments to enter into negotiations with Aboriginal peoples on a nation to nation basis rather than set federal policies universally applicable to communities. Some communities already acknowledge their willingness to work with the Canadian government as independent nations (AFN, 2013). Other nations, however, may not desire leaving Canada to form a separate nation. The diversity of Aboriginals within                                                             66 While Deloria is speaking in the context of the United States, the same principle applies to Canada.    69Canada requires individual bargaining and diplomatic consultations. As such this approach requires increased prevalence of Aboriginal peoples in policy-making. In particular, it requires more Aboriginal peoples to facilitate the generation of and contribution to knowledge. As needs vary across the country, programs need to be redesigned without the sole purpose of satiating the non-Aboriginal constituents. Rather local communities and their needs must be targeted.  As previously mentioned, Aboriginals are a distinct group of people within Canada that face historical, social and economic barriers to participation. In order to move forward, this research argues that it is imperative to first recognize colonial discourses. Without recognizing these narratives, it is impossible to remove them from quotidian interactions. As McCaslin and Boyer (2009) argue, it is important to remove colonization. However, “Peeling away the layers of colonization in the system and in ourselves is no easy task. Colonization is like the air we breathe or the water we swim in; it is so pervasive and normalized that, for many, it has become functionally invisible” (66). Colonization helps create and reinforce the barriers identified by this research. Therefore, prior to creating new legislation or policy directives, it would be useful if an evaluative process by independent bodies (outside of federal, provincial and municipal governments and the SCC) for different sectors (i.e. education, litigation, et cetera) could evaluate which processes in Canada reinforce colonization. While this idea is controversial and hard to effectuate, it would help both parties move forward towards restructuring their relationship. Another approach would be to see an increase in educational programming encouraging youth to visit reserves and become thoroughly acquainted with different Aboriginal peoples. Knowledge of Aboriginal cultures can only help dispel negative frameworks instilled by the media or institutions working against Aboriginal interests. Removing the framework of colonization can occur by including Aboriginal language and history classes, instructed by   70community members. In order to do so, one suggestion would be the creation of an Education Board comprised of Aboriginals from across Canada. Their focus would be to construct a new body of knowledge previously re-written or marginalized by non-Aboriginal text books. Their body of knowledge could include the use of wampum belts and oral histories. Moreover, the Education Board comprised of Aboriginal members should hold distinct powers not limited by provincial education boards. Aboriginal organizations need Aboriginal control. Otherwise, their knowledge and voice would once again be restricted by the colonizer. Other policy directives to eliminate colonization must focus on the Crown and its acknowledgement of Aboriginal peoples as its equal. This could be reflected in the Crown’s legal duty to consult whereby equal weight might be given to both traditional and scientific knowledge. Regardless of what policy directives are chosen, there remains much more work to be done before Aboriginal voice finds equal footing to non-Aboriginal voice in Canada.                       71BIBLIOGRAPHY   Abele, F. & M.J. Prince.  (2003). “Aboriginal Governance and Canadian Federalism: A To-Do List for Canada,” in New Trends in Canadian Federalism, 2nd edition, F. Rocher & M. Smith (Eds.), pp. 135-165. Peterborough: Broadview Press.   Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). (2000). “Nisga’a Final  Agreement.”   Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). (2010). “Individuals  Responsible for Indian and Northern Affairs in Canada, 1755 to 2006.”   Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). (2012). “First Nation Detail,   West Moberly First Nation.”   =545&lang=e   Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). (2013). “Fact Sheet:  Aboriginal Self-Government.” http://www/aadnc-   Aboriginal Education Enhancement Agreement (AEEA). (2009). BC Board of Education, School  District # 39.   Aboriginal Education Enhancement Agreement (AEEA). (2013). BC Board of Education, School  District # 36.   Aboriginal Peoples Television Network (APTN). (October 11, 2013). Kahnawake council has  it’s say about Enbridge gas pipeline proposal in Montreal. gas-pipeline-proposal-in-montreal/     72Albert, Kuni. (2005). "Aboriginal Peoples Must Work Together,” in Finding Their Voice: Civic   Engagement Among Aboriginal and New Canadians. Centre for Research and     Information on Canada.   Alfred, Taiaiaike. “Canadian Colonialism.” National Film Board of Canada.   Alfred, Taiaiaike & Tobold Rollo. (2012). “Resetting and Restoring the Relationship between  Indigenous Peoples and Canada.” Victoria, BC.   Archer, K. (2003). “Representing Aboriginal Interests: Experiences of New Zealand and    Australia.” Electoral Insight 5(3): 39-45.   Armitage, D. R. (2005). “Collaborative Environmental Assessment in the Northwest Territories,   Canada.” Environmental Impact Assessment Review 25:239-258.   Assembly of First Nations (AFN). (2008). “Fact Sheet: First Nations Population.”   Assembly of First Nations (AFN). (2013). “Honouring Earth.”   Baker, D. C., and J. M. McLelland. (2003). “Evaluating the effectiveness of British Columbia’s   Environmental Assessment Process for First Nations Participation in Mining     Development.” Environmental Impact Assessment Review 23:581-603.   Ball, P. David. (January 22, 2013). “Dismantling two centuries of privilege and power': Glen  Coulthard on #IdleNoMore.” Rabble. ball/2013/01/dismantling-two-centuries-privilege-and-power-glen-coulthard-idl   BC Hydro. (April 5, 2005). “BC Hydro 2005 Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) & BCTC’s   73 Capital Plan: Fort St. John First Nations Workshop.” Quality Inn Northern Grand,  Fort St. John.    BC Hydro. (2011). “Project Description: Site C Clean Energy Project.” Vancouver.   BC Hydro. (July 5, 2012a). “BC Hydro Integrated Resource Plan: First Nation Consultation.”  Fort St. John.   BC Hydro. (July 9, 2012b). “BC Hydro Integrated Resource Plan: First Nation Consultation.  Kamloops Convention Centre, Kamloops.” Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.   BC Hydro. (May 8, 2013a). “Re: Site C Clean Energy Project.” Canadian Environmental  Assessment Agency.   BC Hydro. (May 8, 2013b). “Response to Working Group and Public Comments on the Site C  Clean Energy Project Environmental Impact Statement: Consideration of Historical   Context in Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Exercise of Asserted or Established  Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.” Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.   Bedford, David & Sidney Pobihushchy. (1995). “On-Reserve Status Indian Voter Participation in  the Maritimes.” Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 15 (2): 255 – 278.   Beaulieu, Alain. (2005). Michel Foucault et le contrôle social. Québec, Canada: Les Presses de  l’Université de Laval.   Bishop, Gina & Sally Preiner. (2005). "The Civic Engagement of Young New and Aboriginal   Canadians,” in Finding Their Voice: Civic Engagement Among Aboriginal and New   Canadians. Centre for Research and Information on Canada.   Blais, Andre. (2000). To Vote or Not to Vote? The Merits and Limits of Rational Choice Theory.    74 Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.   Blais, Andre, Agnieszka Dobrzynska & Peter Loewen. (2007). “Potential Impact of Extended   Advance Voting on Voter Turnout.” Elections Canada.   Blais, Andre, Elisabeth Gidengil, Neil Nevitte & Richard Nadeau. (2002). Anatomy of a Liberal   Victory: Making Sense of the Vote in the 2000 Canadian Election. Peterborough:    Broadview Press.   Blais, Andre, Elisabeth Gidengil, Neil Nevitte & Richard Nadeau. (2004). “Where does turnout   decline come from?” European Journal of Political Science Research, 43: 231-236.   Blais Andre, Louis Massicotte & Agnieszka Dobrzynska. (2003). “Why is Turnout Higher in   Some Countries than in Others?” Elections Canada.   Boldt, Menno. (1993). Surviving as Indians: The Challenge of Self-Government. Toronto:   University of Toronto Press.   Booth, L. Annie & Norman Skelton. (2011). “Improving First Nations’ participation in    environmental assessment processes: recommendations from the field.” Impact    Assessment and Project Appraisal 29(1): pages 49–58.   Boyer, Y. (2006). “First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Women’s health,” discussion paper series in  Aboriginal health: Legal issues. Ottawa, ON: National Aboriginal Health Organization.   Brilmayer, Lea. (1991). “Secession and Self-determination: A Territorial Interpretation.” Yale  Journal of Law 16: 177-202.   Burstein, Paul, Rachel L. Einwohner, and Jocelyn A. Hollander. (1995). “The Success of    Political Movements: A Bargaining Perspective,” in The Politics of Social     Protest:Comparative Studies of States and Social Movements, J. Craig Jenkins & Bert    75 Klandermans (Ed.),  pp. 275–295. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.   Burt, Sandra. (2002). “The Concept of Political Participation,” in Citizen Politics: Research and   Theory in Canadian Political Behaviour, Everitt, Joanna and Brenda O`Neill (eds).   Ontario: Oxford University Press.   Cairns, C. Alan. (1993). “The Fragmentation of Canadian Citizenship,” in Belonging: The   Meaning and Future of Canadian Citizenship, Kaplan William (ed). Montreal and   Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.   Cairns, C. Alan, John C. Courtney, Peter MacKinnon, Hans J. Michelmann & David E. Smith   (eds). (1999). Citizenship, Diversity and Pluralism: Canadian and Comparative    Perspectives. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.   Calder et al. v. Attorney-General of British Columbia (A.G.), [1973] SCR 313. Lexum.   Campbell, E. David. (2006). Why we Vote: How Schools and Communities Shape our Civic Life.   New Jersey:  Princeton University Press.   Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (S.C. 2012, c. 19, s. 52). Retrieved from:   Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). (2013). “Site C Clean Energy Project:  Joint Review Panel.”   CARC, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee 1996. (1996). “Critique of the BHP    Environmental Assessment: purpose, structure, and process, 21 June 1996.” Northern   Perspectives 24(1–4): 7.   Carling, Joan. 2001. “Indigenous Peoples’ Involvement in National Politics,” in Kathrin    Wessendorf, ed., Challenging Politics: Indigenous People’s Experiences with Political   Parties and Elections. Copenhagen: International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs.   76  Carrier Sekani Tribal Council. (2007). First Nations Perspectives on the BC Environmental   Assessment Process. Prince George: Carrier Sekani Tribal Council.   Cartwright, D. (1965). “Influence, leadership, control,” in Handbook of organizations, J. G.   March (Ed.), pp. 1–47. Chicago: Rand McNally.   CBSNews. (2011). “Young becoming ‘lost generation’ amid recession.” Washington.   Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH). (2012). “CAMH Supports First Nations  Youth.” /pages/CAMH-supports-first-nations-youth.aspx   Centre for Research and Information on Canada (CRIC). (2001). “Voter Participation in Canada:  Is Canadian Democracy in Crisis?” pdf_files/cric-paper_3-nov2001.pdf   Chartrand, N. Larry. (2001). “The Political Dimension of Aboriginal Rights.” (LL.M. Thesis, Queen's University Faculty of Law) [unpublished].    Conway, Dave. (October 8, 2013). “Site C dam’s advantages will outweigh costs in long run.”  The Vancouver Sun. ry.html    Cooke, Martin, Daniel Beavon & Mindy McHardy. (2004). “Measuring the Well-Being of   Aboriginal People: An Application of the United Nations’ Human Development Index to   Registered Indians in Canada, 1981–2001.” Strategic Research and Analysis Directorate   Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.   77  Coulthard, Glen. (2013). “Glen Coulthard: Idle? Know More! Idle No More.” (presentation,  Vancouver, Unceded Coast Salish Territories). Rabble. coulthard-recent-history-indigenous-resi    Coulthard, Glen. (January 7, 2013). “Idle No More in context: A history of resistance.” Rabble.   Couto, Richard. (2010a). “Advocacy,” in Political and Civic Leadership: A Reference  Handbook. London: SAGE Publications. 307-319   Couto, Richard. (2010b). “Lobbying,” in Political and Civic Leadership: A Reference Handbook.  London: SAGE Publications. 297-307   Cox, W. Gary & Michael C. Munger. (1989). “Closeness, Expenditures, and Turnout in the 1982  House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 83 (1): 217-231.   Cvetkovich, G., and T. C. Earle. (1992). “Environmental Hazards and the Public.” Journal of   Social Issues 48:1-20.   Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2: 201–218.   Dalton, Jennifer. (2007). Alienation and Nationalism: Is it Possible to Increase First Nations   Voter Turnout in Ontario? Toronto: Osgoode Hall Law School.   Dalton, Russell J. (2006). Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced  Industrial Democracies. Washington, DC: CQ Press.   Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010. Lexum. scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1569/     78Deloria, Vine JR. (1974). Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties: An Indian Declaration of  Independence. New York: Dell Publishing Co., Inc.   Diduck, A. (1999). “Critical education in resource and environmental management: Learning and  empowerment for a sustainable future.” Journal of Environmental Management 57:85- 97.   Diduck. (2004). Incorporating Participatory Approaches and Social Learning. Pages 497-527 in   ed. B. Mitchell,  Resource and Environmental Management in Canada: Addressing   Conflict and Uncertainty. Oxford University Press, Toronto.   Diduck, A. P., and A. J. Sinclair. (2002). “Public Involvement in Environmental Assessment:  The Case of the Non-Participant.” Environmental Management 29:578-588.   Dodgson, J. E., & Struthers, R. (2005). “Indigenous women’s voices: Marginalization and  health.” Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 16 (4), 339–346)   Duerden, F., R. G. Kuhn, and S. Black. (1996). “An Evaluation of the effectiveness of First   Nations Participation in the Development of Land-Use Plans in the Yukon.” The    Canadian Journal of Native Studies 16 (1):105-124.   Duncan, J. C. J. (1999). “Multicultural Participation In Public Hearing Processes: Some    Theoretical, Pragmatical, and Analeptical Considerations.” Columbia Journal of    Environmental Law 24:169-284.   Einwohner, L. Rachel. (1999). Practices, Opportunity, and Protest Effectiveness: Illustrations   from Four Animal Rights. Social Problems 46 (2): 169-186.   Eliasoph, N. (1998). Avoiding politics: How Americans produce apathy in everyday life.    Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Press.   Ellis, S. C. (2005). “Meaningful Consideration? A Review of Traditional Knowledge in    Environmental Decision Making.” Arctic 58:66-78.   79  Finavera Wind Energy Inc. (2011). “Application for an EA Certificate: Wildmare Wind Energy   Project.” pp 766-820.   Fiorino, D. J. (1990). “Citizen Participation in Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional   Mechanisms.” Science, Technology & Human Values 15:226-243.   First Nations Regional Longitudinal Health Survey (RHS). (2004). “The Peoples Report.”   Assembly of First Nations. Ottawa. the_peoples_report_afn.pdf   Fitzpatrick, P., and A. J. Sinclair. (2003). “Learning through public involvement in    environmental assessment hearings.” Journal of Environmental Management 67:161-174.   Fleras, Augie. (1985). “From Social Control to Political Self-Determination? Maori Seats and the  Politics of Separate Maori Representation in New Zealand.” Canadian Journal of  Political Science 18, (3): 551–76.    Fortune, Joel. (1993). "Construing Delgamuukw: Legal Arguments, Historical Argumentation,  and the Philosophy of History." University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 51(1):80- 117.   Foucault, Michel. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977. Brighton, Sussex: The Harvester Press.   Foucault, Michel. (1982). “The Subject and Power.” Critical Inquiry 8 (4): 777-795.   Fournier, Patrick, & Peter J. Loewen. (2011). “Aboriginal Electoral Participation in Canada.”   Elections Canada.   Fowler, H. James & Cindy D. Kam (2007). “Beyond the Self: Social Identity, Altruism, and    80 Political Participation.” The Journal of Politics 69 (3): pp. 813-827.   Freire, Paulo. (1997). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum   Gallagher, T. J., and W. S. Jacobson. (1993). “The Typography of Environmental Impact    Statements: Criteria, evaluation, and Public Participation.” Environmental Management   17:99-109.   Garner, Rochelle, Gisele Carriere, Claudia Sanmartin & the Longitudinal Health and    Administrative Data Research Team. (2010). “The Health of First Nations Living    Off-Reserve, Inuit, and Metis Adults in Canada: The Impact of Socio-economic Status   Inequalities in Health.” Catalogue No. 82-622-X - No. 004. Statistics Canada.   Gibbins, Roger. (1991). “Electoral Reform and Canada’s Aboriginal Population: An Assessment   of Aboriginal Electoral Districts, Aboriginal Peoples and Electoral Reform in Canada,” in  Research Studies of the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing,   Robert A. Milen (ed), pp. 153-84. Toronto: Dundurn.   Gramsci, Antonio. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks, trans. Q. Hoare & G. Nowell Smith. New York: International.   Gray, Mark Michael. 2003. “In the Midst of Fellows: The Social Context of the American   Turnout Decision.” PhD diss., University of California, Irvine.   Guerin, Daniel. (2003). “Aboriginal Participation in Canadian Federal Elections: Trends and   Implications.” Electoral Insight 5(3): 10-15.         http://www/  Pagesize=&textonly=false.   Haida Nation v British Columbia (Minister of Forests), 2004 SCC 73, [2004] 3 SCR 511.   Reasons for Judgment.     81Hamilton, Gordon. (January 28, 2013). “BC Hydro powers up Site C megaproject: Crown  corporation says project that would floor farmland is necessary to meet growing demand  for electricity.” The Vancouver Sun. .html   Hanson, Erin. (2009). “Aboriginal Rights.” First Nations Studies Program, University of British  Columbia.   Harry & Bombay. (1993). “Many Things to Many People: Aboriginal forestry in Canada is  looking toward balanced solutions.” Cultural Survival Quarterly, 17 (1). things-many-people-aboriginal-forestry-canada-l   Health Canada. (2013). “Non-Insured Health Benefits for First Nations and Inuit.” www.hc-   Health Council of Canada. (2005). “The Health Status of Canada’s First Nations, Metis and Inuit   Peoples: A background paper to accompany ‘Health Care Renewal in Canada:    Accelerating Change.’”   Henderson, J. H.  (1994). “Empowering Treaty Federalism.” Saskatchewan Law Review 58: 241-329.   Hill, Lisa & Kate Alport. (2010). “Voting Attitudes and Behaviour Among Aboriginal Peoples:   Reports from Anangu Women.” Australian Journal of Politics and History 56 (2):   242-258.   Hirschman, O. Albert. (1970). Exit, Voice and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms,    Organizations, and States. Massachusetts and London: Harvard University of Press.   Howe, Miles. (June 10, 2013). “Indigenous Resistance, arrests continue against fracking in New   82 Brunswick.” The Intercontinental Cry. resistance-arrests-continue-against-fracking-in-new-brunswick/   Howe, Paul, & David Bedford. (2009). “Electoral Participation of Aboriginals in Canada.”   Elections Canada.   Hunter, Anna. (2003). “Exploring the Issues of Aboriginal Representation in Federal Elections.”   Electoral Insight 5 (3): 27–33.   Idle No More. (June, 2013a). “Hundreds of Years of Resistance.”   Idle No More. (June, 2013b). “Sovereignty Summer: Idle No More/Defenders of the Land  Education and Social Justice Campaign.” ducation_and_social_justice_campaign   Indian Act. (1876). “An Act to amend and consolidate the laws respecting Indians, S.C. 1876, c.  18.” Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada. http://www.aadnc-   Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), 1998. The Human Development Index   Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. (2008). “Inuit in Canada: A Statistical Profile.”   Irvin, Lisa. (2006). "Challenges and Strategies for Democratic Participation," in Beyond    Intractability, eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium,   University of Colorado, Boulder.          <>.   Jenkins, J. Craig, & Charles Perrow. (1977). “Commitment to personal relationships,” in    Advances in Personal Relationships 3, eds. Warren H. Jones and Daniel Perlman,    117-143. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.   83  Kaplan, Robert. (1990). "Concluding Essay: On Applied Linguistics and Discourse Analysis."  Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 2.   Key, V.O. (1949). Southern Politics in State and Nation. New York: Random House.   Knack, Stephen. (1992). “Civic Norms, Social Sanctions, and Voter Turnout.” Rationality and   Society 4 (2): 133-156.   Knight, T.  2001, “Electoral Justice for Aboriginal Peoples in Canada.”,McGill Law Journal, 46 (4): 1036-1116.   Koechl, Rick & Mike Kroecher. (2013). “Site C dam is not the efficient or economical way to  proceed.” The Vancouver Sun. 55/story.html   Ladner, Kiera L. 2003. “The Alienation of Nation: Understanding Aboriginal Electoral    Participation.” Electoral Insight 5 (3): 21–26.   Ladner, L. Kiera & Michael McCrossan. (2007). “The Electoral Participation of Aboriginal   People.” Elections Canada.    Latané, Bibb. (1996). “Dynamic Social Impact: The Creation of Culture by Communication.”  Journal of Communication 46(4): 13-25.   Lekstrom, Blair & Dan Miller. (2013). “Site C in B.C.'s long-term interest: Project would  provide clean, inexpensive and renewable energy for more than a century.” The  Vancouver Sun.     84 Library of Parliament. (2011). “Firsts in Canadian Parliamentary History: Aboriginals.” age=E&Role=Senators   Logan, Liz. (June 17, 2013). “Re: BC Hydro’s Cite C EIS Aboriginal Group Amendment Report  and Related Materials- Advice and Supplemental Information Requests of the Treaty 8  First Nations.” Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. http://www.ceaa-   Logan, Liz. (September 13, 2013). “Joint Review Panel Draft Hearing Procedures- Request for  Comments. British Columbia, Treaty 8 Tribal Association.” Canadian Environmental  Assessment Agency.   Loppie, Charlotte & Fred Wien. (2009). “Health Inequalities and Social Determinants of    Aboriginal People’s Health.” National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health.   Madestam, Andreas, Daniel Shoag, Stan Veuger & David Yanagizawa-Drott. (2013). “Do   Political Protests Matter? Evidence from the tea party movement.” Harvard University.   Mansbridge, J. (1980). Beyond adversary democracy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.   MarketWired. (June 18, 2013). “First Nations Leader Calls on Politicians to Experience Tar  Sands Firsthand at 2013 Healing Walk.” ands_firsthand_at_2013_healing_walk    Maslow, A.H. (1943). “A Theory of Motivation.” Psychological Review 50: 370-396   McCaslin, D. Wanda & Yvonne Boyer. (2009). “First Nations Communities at Risk and in  Crisis.” Justice and Security Journal of Aboriginal Health 15(12): 61-87.     85McHardy, Mindy & Erin O’Sullivan. (2004). “First Nations Community Well-Being in Canada:   The Community Well-Being Index (CWB).” Strategic Research and Analysis Directorate  Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.   Merquior, J.G. (1985). Fontana Modern Masters: Foucault. Hammersmith, London: Fontana Press.   Milen, Robert A. (1991). “Aboriginal Peoples and Electoral Reform in Canada.” Research   Studies of the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing. Vol. 9.   Toronto: Dundurn Press.   Miller, Bruce Granville. (2011). Oral History on Trial: Recognizing Aboriginal Narratives in  Courts. Vancouver: UBC Press.   Milner, Henry. (2002). Civic Literacy: How Informed Citizens Make Democracy Work. Hanover   and London: University Press of New England.   Mitchell, T. L., & Maracle, D. T. (2005). “Healing the generations: Post-traumatic stress and the  health status of Aboriginal populations in Canada.” Journal of Aboriginal Health, 2(1):  14–23.   Monture-Angus, Patricia. (1995). Thunder in my Soul: A Mohawk Woman Speaks. Halifax:   Fernwood Publishing.   Moon, E. Bruce. (1991). The Political Economy of Basic Human Needs. Ithaca, New York:   Cornell University Press.   Mulvihill, P. R., and D. C. Baker. (2001). “Ambitious and Restrictive Scoping: Case Studies   from Northern Canada.” Environmental Impact Assessment Review 21:363-384.   Natcher, D. C. (2001). “Land use research and the duty to consult: a misrepresentation of the    86 aboriginal landscape.” Land Use Policy 18:113-122.   National Council of Welfare. (2008c). “Welfare Incomes, 2006 and 2007.” Volume 128.  Archived in 2012, Retrievable from:    Nownes, A. J. (2006). Total lobbying: What lobbyists want (and how they try to get it) . New   York: Cambridge University Press.   Nunatsiaq News. (December 2013). “International polar bear conservation must include Inuit  perspective: ITK.” n_must_include_inuit_perspective_i/   Obomsawin, Alanis. (1993). “Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance.” National Film Board of  Canada.   Olson, Alexandra. (2013). “Canada faces ‘crisis’ over aboriginal issues, Anaya tells the UN.”  The Associated Press. aboriginal-issues-anaya-tells-the-un-1.1507495   Paci, C., A. Tobin, and P. Robb. (2002). “Reconsidering the Canadian Environmental Impact   assessment Act: A Place for Traditional Knowledge.” Environmental Impact Assessment   Review 22:111-127.   Pammett, H. Jon, & Lawrence LeDuc. (2003). “Explaining the Turnout Decline in Canadian   Federal Elections: A New Survey of Non-voters.” Ottawa: Elections Canada.    Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada. (2006). The Inuit Way: A Guide to Inuit Culture. Kuujjuaq.   Pierro, et al. (2013). “Buried Voices: Media Coverage of Aboriginal Issues in Ontario.”  Journalists for Human Rights.   87   Powell, G. Bingham. (1982). Contemporary Democracies: Participation, Stability, and Violence.  Cambridge: Harvard University Press.   Prewitt, K. (1968). “Political Efficacy.” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 12.   London: MacMillan   Prince, J. Michael. (2007). “The Electoral Participation of Persons with Special Needs.”    Elections Canada. Ottawa.    Putman, D. Robert. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy.    Princeton: Princeton University Press.   Re: Eskimos (sub nom. Re Term "Indians"), [1939] 2 DLR 27, [1939] SCR 104.   Reuben, William. (2003). “The Role of Civic Engagement and Accountability in the Governance  Equation.” World Bank. Washington. DC.   Riker, William & Peter C. Ordeshook. (1968). “A Theory of the Calculus of Voting.” American   Political Science Review 62: 25-42.   Rowe, G., and L. J. Frewer. (2000). “Public Participation Methods: A Framework for    Evaluation.” Science, Technology & Human Values 25.   Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP).  (1995). Treaty Making in the Spirit of Co-existence: An Alternative to Extinguishment. Ottawa: Canada Communication Group.   Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP). (1996). Report of the Royal Commission on  Aboriginal Peoples: Volume 1. Looking forward, looking back. Ottawa: Minister of   88 Supply and Services Canada.   Russell, Peter H. (1998). “High Courts and the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples: The Limits of  Judicial Independence.” Saskatchewan Law Review 61: 247-276.   Schellenberg, Grant. (2004). “2003 General Social Survey on Social Engagement, cycle 17: an  overview of findings.” Statistics Canada. Catalogue no. 89-598-XIE.   Shaw, Calyn & Alison Shaw. (2011). “BC’s energy future: Ensuring a comprehensive  assessment of Site C Dam. Briefing Note 2011 – 27,”  Tansey, J., Zerriffi, H., Watson, I.  & R. Meyer (Eds.).  British Columbia: Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions. %20ensuring%20a%20comprehensive%20assessment%20of%20Site%20C%20dam.pdf   Silver, Jim, Cyril Keeper & Michael MacKenzie. (2005). “A Very Hostile System in Which to   Live: Aboriginal Electoral Participation in Winnipeg’s Inner City.” Ottawa: Canadian   Centre for Policy Alternatives.   Simpson, S. (April 9, 2010). “Site C dam no green power project, critics say.” The Vancouver  Sun. 47d5-babb-1a20e58664ab&k=49198   Sinclair, A. J., and A. P. Diduck. (2001). “Public Involvement in EA in Canada: A    Transformative Learning Perspective.” Environmental Impact Assessment Review   21:113-136.   Sinclair, A. J., and A. P. Diduck. (2009). “Public Participation in Canadian Environmental   Assessment: enduring challenges and future directions” in K. S. Hanna, ed.,    Environmental Impact Assessment Process and Practices in Canada. Oxford University   Press, Toronto.   Sinclair, A. J., A. P. Diduck, and P. Fitzpatrick. (2002). “Public hearings in environmental   assessment: towards a civics approach.” Environments 30:17-36.     89Sinclair, A. J., and P. Fitzpatrick. (2002). “Provisions for more meaningful Public Participation   still elusive in proposed EA Bill.” Assessment and Project Appraisal 20:161-176.   Smeja, C., & P. Brassard. (2000). “Tuberculosis infection in an Aboriginal (First Nations)   population of Canada.” International J Tuberc Lung Dis 4(10): 925-930.   St. Catharines Milling and Lumber Co.v. R, [1887] 13 SCR 577. Lexum. scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/3769/    Statistics Canada. (2007a). 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: Akisqnuk First Nation.    June 3, 2013, AboriginalReports.aspx   Statistics Canada. (2007b). 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: Blueberry River First   Nation. June 3, 2013, AboriginalReports.aspx   Statistics Canada. (2007c). 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: Bonaparte Indian Band.    June 3, 2013, AboriginalReports.aspx   Statistics Canada. (2007d). 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: Bridge River Indian   Band.  June 3, 2013, AboriginalReports.aspx   Statistics Canada. (2007e). 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: Canim Lake Band.  June  3, 2013, AboriginalReports.aspx    90 Statistics Canada. (2007f). 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: Canoe Creek Indian   Band.  June 3, 2013, AboriginalReports.aspx   Statistics Canada. (2007g). 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: Scia`new First Nation.    June, 3, 2013, AboriginalReports.aspx   Statistics Canada. (2007h). 2006 Aboriginal Community Data Initiative: We Wai Kum Nation.    June 3, 2013, AboriginalReports.aspx   Statistics Canada. (2008). “Aboriginal Peoples in Canada in 2006: Inuit, Metis and First Nations,  2006 Census.” (Catalogue 97-558-XIE). Ottawa.   Statistics Canada; Health Canada (2002). “Healthy Canadians: A Federal Report on Comparable   Health Indicators.”    indicat/index-eng.php   Stevenson, M. G. (1996). “Indigenous Knowledge in Environmental Assessment.” Arctic   49:278-291.   Stewart, J., M.P., and A. J. Sinclair. (2007). “Meaningful Public Participation in Environmental   Assessment: Perspectives from Canadian Participants, Proponents and Government.”   Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 9:161-183.   Taguiam, Sarah. (2013). “Truth and Reconciliation walk turnout amazes organizers, as an estimated 70,000 brave downpour in Vancouver.” The Province.   91  Tait H. (2008). “Aboriginal peoples survey, 2006: Inuit health and social conditions.” Ottawa:   Statistics Canada.   Tannahill, Julie. (August 8, 2012). “West Moberly First Nations Final Written Submissions.”   Calgary, Alberta: RanaLaw.   The Canadian Press. (May 31, 2011). “Going International over Site C Dam.”    The Canadian Press. (January 30, 2013). “Residents React to Site C Plan.” Daybreak North. 30522687/    The Canadian Press. (August 23, 2013). “BC Hydro depending on Site C Dam, conservations,  says draft plan.” on-site-c-dam-conservation-says-draft-plan-1.1398762   The Conference Board of Canada. (2013). “University Completion.”   United Nations. (2008). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.   Usher, P. (2000). “Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Assessment and Management.”   Arctic 53:183-193.   Verba S, Kay L. Schlozman & Henry E. (1995). Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in   American Democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.   Vermette, d’Arcy. (2008). “Colonialism and the Suppression of Aboriginal Voice.” Ottawa Law   92 Review 40(2): 225-264.   Werther, F.A. Guntram. (1992). Self-Determination in Western Democracies: Aboriginal Politics   in a Comparative Perspective. Wesport: Greenwood Press.   West Moberly First Nations v. British Columbia (Chief Inspector of Mines), 2010 BCSC 359   (March 19, 2010). Reasons for Judgement.   Wherrett, Jill. (1999). “Aboriginal Self-Government.” Library of Parliament.   Whittles, Martin. (2005). "Degree and Kind: Civic Engagement and Aboriginal Canadians,” in   Finding Their Voice: Civic Engagement Among Aboriginal and New Canadians. Centre    for Research and Information on Canada.   Winch, Peter. (1958). The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy. USA:  Humanities Press International, Inc.    Wismer, S. (1996). “The Nasty Game: How Environmental Assessment Is Failing Aboriginal   Communities in Canada's North.” Alternatives Journal 22:10-17.   Woehrle, L. M. (1992).  Social constructions of power and empowerment: Thoughts from   feminist  approaches to peace research and peace-making . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse  University Press.   Yazzie, Robert. (2000). "Indigenous Peoples and Postcolonial Colonialism," in Reclaiming  Indigenous Voice and Vision, Marie Batiste (Ed.). British Columbia, Canada: UBC Press.   Yen, Hope. (September 23, 2011), “Census: Recession Turning Young Adults Into Lost Generation.” Huffington Post.    93APPENDICES  APPENDIX A: Aboriginal Leaders Involved in Canadian Politics  Table 2: Ministers of the Crown First Nations    Name Political Party Portfolio Date Sworn In ( Marchand, Len Liberal Party of Canada ● Minister of State (Small Businesses) 1976.09.14 Blondin-Andrew, Ethel Dorothy Liberal Party of Canada ● Secretary of State 1993.11.04 Penashue, Peter Conservative Party of Canada ● Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs ● President of the Queen’s Privy Council 2011.05.18 Inuit    Aglukkaq, Leona Conservative Party of Canada ● Minister of Health 2008.10.30 Métis    Teillet, Roger-Joseph Liberal Party of Canada ● Minister of Veteran Affairs 1963.04.22 St. Germain, Gerry Progressive Conservative Party ● Minister of State (Transport) 1988.03.31 DeVillers, Paul Liberal Party of Canada ● Secretary of State ● Secretary of State (Amateur Sport). 2002.01.15  Table 3: Members of Parliament First Nations    Name Political Party Constituency Date Elected   94( Marchand, Len Liberal Party of Canada Kamloops--Cariboo, British Columbia 1968.06.25 Blondin-Andrew, Ethel Dorothy Liberal Party of Canada Western Arctic, Northwest Territories 1988.11.21 Littlechild, Wilton (Willie) Progressive Conservative Party Wetaskiwin, Alberta 1988.11.21 Inuit    Ittinuar, Peter New Democratic Party Nunatsiaq, Northwest Territories 1979.05.22 Suluk, Thomas Progressive Conservative Party Nunatsiaq, Northwest Territories 1984.09.04 Anawak, Jack Iyerak Liberal Party of Canada Nunatsiaq, Northwest Territories 1988.11.21 Métis    McKay, Angus Conservative (1867-1942) Marquette, Manitoba 1871.03.02 Delorme, Pierre Conservative (1867-1942) Provencher, Manitoba 1871.03.03 Riel, Louis Independent Provencher, Manitoba 1873.10.13  Table 4: Senators First Nations    Name Political Party Province/ Territory Date Sworn In ( Gladstone, James Independent Conservative Alberta 1958.01.31 Williams, Guy R. Liberal Party of Canada British Columbia 1971.12.09 Marchand, Len Liberal Party of Canada British Columbia 1984.06.29 Inuit    Adams, Willie Liberal Party of Canada Northwest Territories 1977.04.05   95Watt, Charlie Liberal Party of Canada Quebec 1984.01.16 Métis    Hardisty, Richard Charles Conservative (1867-1942) Northwest Territories 1888.02.23 Boucher, William Albert Liberal Party of Canada Saskatchewan 1957.01.03 St. Germain, Gerry  Progressive Conservative Party British Columbia 1993.06.23  (Source: Library of Parliament, 2011)                         96APPENDIX B  Table 5: Databases Media Database Inclusion of Information, and the Portrayal of BC Hydro comparatively to Aboriginal Peoples. Sources The Vancouver Sun In articles generated by the Vancouver Sun, the Site C Clean Energy Project was mostly portrayed in a positive manner. BC Hydro is connoted as a supplier of “affordable” electricity for both the people and businesses. The Site C hydroelectric dam was often praised as a viable economic option (a low-cost option for rate payers). In particular it was portrayed as beneficial due to its low and predictable operating costs over a planning life of 70 years. Any opposition emerged was primarily environmental. In a few articles the dam was presented as a potential threat to the environment due to its potential to produce large quantities of greenhouse gases and its destruction of many hectares of forest.   Less than 20% of the articles found in The Vancouver Sun’s database mentioned Aboriginal peoples. When they were mentioned, it was usually near the end of article with precedence given to any political or economic arguments first.  (Lekstrom & Miller, 2013; Koechl & Kroecher, 2013; Conway, 2013; Simpson, 2010; Hamilton, 2013) The Canadian Press (CBC) The CBC took more of a political and legal approach to its coverage of the Site C Clean Energy Project. In particular it framed BC Hydro’s project as a renewal to its commitment to conservation. For the most part there was no mention of Aboriginals with the exception of one article which mentioned Chief Liz Logan’s political efforts whereby she expressed concerns about the planned Site C dam which she had presented to the United Nations.   Note: The biodiversity of the Peace River Valley was recognized by CBC radio’s DayBreak program.  (The Canadian Press, August 2013; The Canadian Press, 2011; The Canadian Press, January 2013)            97APPENDIX C  Table 6: Aboriginal Candidates Elected in Canadian General Elections (1867-2000) Year Name of Candidate Electoral District Province/ Territory Political Affiliation Origin Plurality 2000 Lawrence D. O’Brien Rick Laliberte Nancy Karetak-Lindell Ethel Dorothy Blondin-Andrew Labrador Churchill Nunavut Western Arctic Nfld Sask. Nunavut N.W.T. Liberal Liberal Liberal Liberal Metis Metis Inuit N.A.I. 5,869 2,177 3,917 2,425 1997 Lawrence D. O’Brien Rick Laliberte Nancy Karetak-Lindell Ethel Dorothy Blondin-Andrew Labrador Churchill Nunavut Western Arctic Nfld Sask. N.W.T. N.W.T. Liberal N.D.P. Liberal Liberal Metis Metis Inuit N.A.I. 1,567 538 1,565 2,985 1993 Elijah Harper Jack Iyerak Anawak Ethel Dorothy Blondin-Andrew Churchill Nunatsaq Western Arctic Man. N.W.T. N.W.T. Liberal Liberal Liberal N.A.I. Inuit N.A.I. 907 4.715 6,867 1988 Wilton Littlechild Jack Iyerak Anawak Ethel Dorothy Blondin-Andrew Wetaskiwin Nunatsaq Western Arctic Alta. N.W.T. N.W.T. Prog. Conservative Liberal Liberal N.A.I. Inuit N.A.I. 12,672 570 1,758 1984 Cyril Keeper Cerry St. Germain  Thomas Suluk Winnipeg-St. James Mission-Port Moody Nunatsaq Man. B.C.  N.W.T. N.D.P Prog. Conservative  Prog. Conservative Metis Metis  Inuit 4,089 4,753  247 1980 Cyril Keeper Peter Ittnuar Winnipeg-St. James Nunatsaq Man. N.W.T. N.D.P N.D.P Metis Inuit 438 311 1979 Peter Ittnuar Nunatsaq N.W.T. N.D.P. Inuit 76 1974 Leonard Stephen Marchand Walter Firth Kamloops-Cariboo N.W.T. B.C. N.W.T. Liberal N.D.P. N.A.I. Metis 3,146 1,139 1972 Leonard Stephen Marchand Walter Firth Kamloops-Cariboo N.W.T. B.C. N.W.T. Liberal N.D.P. N.A.I. Metis 714 1,258 1968 Leonard Stephen Marchand Kamloops-Cariboo B.C. Liberal N.A.I. 3,296 1963 Eugene Rheaume N.W.T. N.W.T. Prog.Conservative Metis 1,155 1949 William Albert Boucher Rosthem Sask. Liberal Metis 3,698 1930 Errick French Willis Souris Man. Prog. Conservative N.A.I. 472  (Source: Hunter, 2003)    98APPENDIX D Table 7: Superintendents-General of Indian Affairs (1868-1936) Hector Louis Langevin 1868-1869 Joseph Howe 1869-1873 James Cox Aikins May 1873-June 1873 Thomas Nicholson Gibbs 1873 Alexander Campbell July 1873 - November 1873 David Laird 1873-1876 Richard William Scott 1876 David Mills 1876-1878 Sir John A. Macdonald 1878-1887 Edgar Dewdney 1888-1892 Thomas Mayne Daly 1892-1896 Hugh John Macdonald 1896 Richard William Scott July 1896 - November 1896 Clifford Sifton 1896-1905 Sir Wilfrid Laurier 1905 Frank Oliver 1905-1911 Robert Rogers 1911-1912 William James Roche 1912-1917 Arthur Meighen 1917-1920 Sir James Alexander Lougheed 1920-1921 Charles Stewart 1921-1926 Henry Herbert Stevens 1926 Richard Bedford Bennett 1926 Charles Stewart 1926-1930 Ian Alistair Mackenzie 1930 Thomas Gerow Murphy 1930-1935 Thomas Alexander Crerar 1935-1936   99 Table 8: Ministers responsible for Indian Affairs (1936-1950) Thomas Alexander Crerar 1936-1945 James Allison Glen 1945-1948 James Angus MacKinnon 1948-1949 Colin William George Gibson 1949-1950  Table 9: Ministers responsible for Indian Affairs - Minister of Citizenship (1950-1964) Walter Harris 1950-1954 Jack Pickersgill 1954-1957 E. Davie Fulton 1957-1958 Ellen Fairclough 1958-1962 Richard Albert Bell 1962-1963 Guy Favreau 1963-1964 René Tremblay 1964-1965 John Robert Nicholson 1965 Jean Marchand 1965-1966  Table 10: Ministers of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (1966-Present) Arthur Laing 1966-1968 Jean Chrétien 1968-1974 J. Judd Buchanan 1974-1976 Warren Allmand 1976-1977 James Hugh Faulkner 1977-1979 Jake Epp 1979-1980 John Munro 1980-1984 Doug Frith 1984 David Crombie 1984-1986 Bill McKnight 1986-1989 Pierre Cadieux 1989-1990   100Tom Siddon 1990-1993 Pauline Browes 1993 Ron Irwin 1993-1997 Jane Stewart 1997-1999 Bob Nault 1999-2003 Andy Mitchell 2003-2004 Andy Scott 2004-2006 Jim Prentice 2006-2007 Chuck Strahl 2007-2010 John Morris Duncan 2010-2013 James Moore February 2013 Bernard Valcourt 2013-Present  (Source: AANDC) 


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items