"0ae8555a-1c14-46a5-a0e9-067ef48b0ed5"@en . "CONTENTdm"@en . "http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=1213576"@en . "Kinesis"@en . "2013-08-15"@en . "1992-11-01"@en . "https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/kinesis/items/1.0045773/source.json"@en . "application/pdf"@en . " November 1992 Why women said 'No' CMPA$2.25 Inside KINESIS #301-1720 Grant Street Vancouver, BC V5L 2Y6 Tel: (604)255-5499 Fax:(604)255-5511 Kinesis welcomes volunteers to work on all aspects of the paper. Our next Writer's Meeting is Nov 3 for the Dec/Jan issue at 7 pm at Kinesis. All women welcome even if you don't have experience. EDITORIAL BOARD Ria Bluemer, Lissa J. Geller, Agnes Huang, Fatima Jaffer, Anne Jew, Kelly O'Brien, Kathleen Oliver, Gladys We STAFF Advertising: Birgit Schinke Circulation and Distribution: Cat L'Hirondelle, Jennifer Johnstone, Tory Johnstone, Birgit Schinke Production Co-ordinator: Anne Jew Typesetter: Dee Baptiste PRODUCTION THIS ISSUE Fatima Jaffer, Anne Jew, Diana Baptiste, Esther, Tien, Carolyn Delheij- Joyce, Faith Jones, Winnifred Tovey, Lissa Geller, Gladys We, Cynthia Low, Elizabeth Kendall, Charmaine Saulnier, Kathleen Oliver, Carla Maftechuk, Kelly O'Brien, Lana Hope, Kim Sorenson. FRONT COVER Stephanie Morgenstern and Lynne Adams in Forbidden Love, directed by Aerlyn Weissman and Lynne Fernie. Photo courtesy National Film Board. PRESS DATE October28, 1992 Kinesis is published ten times a year by the Vancouver Status of Women. Its objectives are to be a non-sectarian feminist voice for women and to work actively for social change, specifically combatting sexism, racism.homophobia, ableism. and imperialism. Views expressed in Kinesis are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect ' VSW policy. All unsigned material is the responsibility of the Kinesis Editorial SUBSCRIPTIONS lndividual:$20 per year (+$1.40 GST) or what you can afford. lnstutions/Groups:$45 per year (+$3.15 GST) VSW Membership (includes 1 year Kinesis subscription): $30 per year (+$1.40 GST) SUBMISSIONS Women and girls are welcome to make submissions. We reserve the right to edit and submission does not gaurantee publication. If possible, submissions should be typed, double spaced and must be signed and include ah address, phone number and SASE. Kinesis does not accept poetry orfiction.Editorial guidelines are available upon request. DEADLINES All submissions must be received in the month preceding publication. Note: Jul/Aug and Nov/Dec are double issues. Features and reviews: 10th News: 15th Letters and Bulletin Board: 18th Display advertising (camera ready): 18th (design required): 16th Kinesis is produced on an IBM PC using WordPerfect 5.1, PageMaker 4.0 and an NEC laser printer. Camera work by The Peak. Printing by Web Press i Kinesis is indexed in the Canadian Women's Periodicals Index, the Alternative Press Index and is amember of the Canadian Magazine PublishersAssociation. ISSN 0317-9095 Second class mail #6426 News Post-referendum constitutional coverage 3 by Fatima Jaffer Family allowance benefits scrapped....:. 4 by Susan Briscoe Women in Focus out of focus 5 by Agnes Huang Training dollars and social assistance 5 by Christina Wiens Features Native Women's Association of Canada 7 speech by Sharon Mclvor NWAC update 7 by Kinesis staff writer The No vote and Quebec 8 No t0 the constitution speech by Monique Simard Talkin' 'bout the constitution and social programs 8 |^~\"\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\"\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\"\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\"~\"\u00E2\u0096\u00A0 by Pam Fleming Commentary A country gal's life 9 by Luanne Armstrong The anti-psychiatry movement and drugs 10 by Elf Stainsby Palestinian and Jewish women dialogue 11 by Karen Sloan Centrespread A look at NAFTA: What does it mean for women? 12 by Ellen Woodsworth, Lynn Bueckert, Denise Nabeau, Heather Jahrig, Barbara Binns Maquiladores and NAFTA 12 by Maude Barlow NAFTA and its affects on women in the Philippines 13 by Cecelia Dioscon Arts Heavenly alarming females in review 14 by Archana Gandhi Some kiss and tell: a review 14 by Kathleen Oliver Reviewing a tale of forbidden love 15 by Kathleen Oliver Women in the Shadows in review ..15 by Kerrie Charnley A few film fest reviews 16 by Celeste Insell None to Give Away, a review 17 by Heather Gray Life-Size: a review 18 by Wendy Breen-Needham Some itsy bitsy teeny weeny book reviews 18 by Kathleen Oliver, Susan Briscoe, Tracey Dietrich, and Gladys We Cynthia Flood's My Father Took a Cake to France 19 by Margaret Bricker Regulars As Kinesis Goes to Press 2 Inside Kinesis 2 What's News 6 by Erin Mullan and Lissa Geller Movement Matters 6 by Ria Bleumer Paging Women 17 by Christine Cosby Letters 20 Bulletin Board 21 compiled by Lissa Geller NOVEMBER 1992 As Kinesis I n s i d e goes to press \K i n e s i s It has to happen as we're going to press-lesbian comedian Kate Clinton is performing at the Van East Cultural Centre, the country is voting Yes and No in the referendum/the DisAbled Women's Network and N ACare having a post-referendum party down the road, ... and we were looking for a story on Sheila Baxter we were supposed to run on page 19. We never found it, but then someone turned the radio in the production room on and we heard more people in Quebec, BC, Alberta, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and the Yukon had said No to the Charlottetown constitutional accord than yes... And the first thing that flashed through our minds was, oh no, what a waste of five-and- a-half pages of Yes ads in the pre-referendum Saturday editions of most of the dailies in the country, not to mention over $300 million the feds spent trying to sell the deal to us! Yeah, the second thought that went through our heads was that Cafe Roma still charges $1 for a coffee, the globe didn't stop spinning, the economy still hurts, and we still have to make our deadline. And the rumour that feminists were having closet Blue Jays celebration parties on Saturday night is still a rumour. Anyway, so we got on the phone and talked to a few women on post-referendum scenarios [see our story on page 3]. The story's a little short on feedback from union women- -they were all in Victoria for the debate on BC's labour laws. We'll have more on that in the next issue. Speaking of contracting out, we wonder if Outrigh ts, the national conference on gay and lesbian rights that took place in October, contracted out the people who showed up at the conference's opening night reception at the Law Courts in Vancouver. Everyone was in suits and ties and looked like lawyers. NDP-candidate-for-the-federal-riding-of-Vancouver- Centre Betty Baxter showed up in ripped jeans, leather jacket and cowboy boots, and still looked like a lawyer. (She isn't one.) Speaking of conferences, the CRIAW's Making the Links: Anti-racism and Feminism conference in Toronto mid-November is attracting a number of Aboriginal and women-of- colour activists. Nobel Peace Prize winner and Guatemalan activist Rigoberta Menchu is among key note speakers for the conference. Another highlight will be a panel on feminist publishing-okay, we think it'll be great because Kinesis has been asked to sit on it and we're excited. We'll let you know who was there and who said what and... Another conference coming soon is women and unions on November 15 at the Heritage Hall on Main Street in Vancouver. It's being put on by SORWUC and AUCE, two feminist unions that have been around for 20 years. And we have received a call for support from women in Campbell River out on strike for a first contract with the multinational corporation K-Mart. Read our centrespread on NAFTA for more on multinational corporations and the 'wonderful' things they bring in their wake. There's a reform of BC's health care system under way and our sneak preview story wa s too sneaky (life at an underfunded feminist newspaper has its moments) to run this month. We'll have a story on how women fit into the NDP's plans and the NDP fits into women's plans for a more community based health care system next month. Maybe we shouldn't be letting you in on what's coming up in our next issue because, sometimes, we can't deliver. Remember last month's As Kinesis Goes to Press, where we promised a story on the new immigration bill C-86 and reviews of Deepa Dhanraj's documentary film, Something Like A War (which incidentally is showing, at La Quena in November [see Bulletin Board]...well, we goofed. We'll be running these stories and more in the next exciting issue of Kinesis. We were about to print up this column when the radio\u00E2\u0080\u0094a relatively cheap, accessible and entertaining way to find out what's happening outside the production room-told us: \"the Federal Court of Canada has ruled that the Canadian military's policy of barring lesbians and gays violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Department of National Defense says they will remove discriminatory barriers against lesbians and gays.\" Well...er...yippee, yahoo. What we are thrilled about is, it's only 4 am and there's a couple of hours before our deadline. We're going to make it\u00E2\u0080\u0094unless someone turns that radio on again as Kinesis goes to press... ...oh, golly gee darn, stop the presses! We forgot to apologise for the lack of accents on words throughout this issue-we haven't figured it out on PageMaker yet. Help! Someone. Anyone. Writers' Meeting November 3 AND January 5 Guaranteed to BE FUN AND INFORMATIVE AT THE SAME TIME WHAT MORE CAN YOU ASK FOR Volunteer needed to assemble Bulletin Board listings each month before publication. We're lots of fun and we'll be really nice to you. Six month obligation preferred. Call 255*5499 for more info. Welcome to the redesigned Kinesis. It's newer. It's better. And we didn't go all the wa y, either\u00E2\u0080\u0094there's more to come. We hope you like what we've done so far. We've used PageMaker throughout in this issue. We've changed the font of the body copy to one that spreads out a little more\u00E2\u0080\u0094it's the same size as our old type, but it is easier to read. Our running heads (the strip up top that identifies News, Arts and Features) are also new. We'll try out our other version in the next issue\u00E2\u0080\u0094that'll give you an idea of what we're looking at, so you'll be able to comment better on what you like and don't. We welcome your feedback and are open to changing some of our changes if enough of our readers say \"yeuch.\" Credit for the redesign goes to many volunteers and, especially, to Anne Jew, our production coordinator, for taking care of the details and implementing the spiffy design. Also, the'contest'to redesign the flag/ masthead of Kinesis is still on. Everyone's a winner. Call Anne Jew at 255-5499 for more information or mail your design to Kinesis, 301-1720 Grant Street, Vancouver, BC, V5L 2Y7. We're sorry to say goodbye adieu farewell to Christine Cosby. She's been an editorial board member for the longest time and was production coordinator before that. Christine is going back to school full-time and can't afford the time to help us plan endless subscription drives and attend ed board meetings. Christine, you are a wiz at editorial management, not to mention with an exacto- knife, and you'll be missed tew^ibly\u00E2\u0080\u0094oh yes, and we'll miss your proof-raeding skills too. Christine hasn't left us altogether, though. We have it in writing that she'll still be co ordinating Paging Women, our fall subscription drive, exchange ads and...Christine, are you sure you're leaving? We are also sorry to say goodbye to Cathy Griffin, super-organizer of Bulletin Board. After over a year of putting the BB calender together, Cathy is exhausted. She's leaving us for a helluva busy schedule that just got busier. It's been fun, Cathy. Thank you from the ed board. And if anyone is interested in taking over the mammoth task of compiling Bulletin Board, don't listen to Cathy's stories of sleepless nights and broken pencils at 2 am...call Fatima at 255-5499. New to the. editorial board are Lissa Geller and Kathleen Oliver. Lissa became hooked on Kinesis in Regina, Saskatchewan, and when she moved to Vancouver this year, she was drawn to find out just who those humourless women whoputKiHesfstogetherreallyare. She found out, and she sta yed. Welcome aboard, Lissa. Kathleen is another eastern import who's made herself indispensable around Kinesis\u00E2\u0080\u0094 her backrubs and muffins have gotten us through several production weekends, as well as our recent Kinesis retreat. Kathleen is also volunteer coordinator for the Writer's Festival, was active at last year's Fringe Festandworksat Women in View. We sometimes wonder when she sleeps. Quite a few hellos this issue to new writers on the scene: Susan Briscoe, Karen Sloan, Elf Stainsby, Margaret Bricker, Heather Gray, Tracey Dietrich and Wendy Breen-Needham. Oh yes, we got some great responses to the new column we launched last month. \"As Kinesis Goes To Press\" passes thegradeand we will continue using this column to bring you late-breaking news bites. ^Thanks Our thanks to Vancouver Status of Women members who support us year 'round with memberships and donations. Our appreciation to the following supporters who became members, renewed their memberships or donated to VSW in October: Carol Anderson \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Rita Bealy \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Rita Chudnovsky \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Gillian Creese \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Frances Darling \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Joanne Drake - Nancy Duff \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Catharine Esson \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Marilyn Fuchs \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Margaret Fulton \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Darby Honeyman \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Agnes Huang \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Angela Kelly \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Leslie Komori \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Barbara Lebrasseur \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Celine Leonard \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Karen Lewis \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Judith Lynne \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Alex Maas \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Diane Mercy \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Bev Mill \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Chris Morrissey \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Clare O'Reilly \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Margaret Ostrowski \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Janet Patterson \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Chantal Phillips \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Neil Power \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Diane Prince Marguerite Scandiffio \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Carolyn Schettler \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Esther Shannon \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Shoreline Security Patrol \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Jeanne St. Pierre \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Sheilah Thompson \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Judith Walker \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Peggy Ward \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Katharine Young We would also like to express our appreciation to the following donors who have responded so generously and so quickly to our recent fundraising appeal: Laureen Anderson \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Liz Bennett \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Steve Bentley \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Marlene Coulthard \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Marian Dodds \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Deborrah Dunne \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Mary Frey \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Jeanette Frost \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Margaret Fulton \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Lynn Giraud \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Diane Jacobs \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Olive Johnson \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Janet Kellough-Pollock \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Angela Kelly \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Karen Kilbride \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Inger Kronseth \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Andrea Lebowitz \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Heather Leighton \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Beatrice MacAloney \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Patricia Marchak \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Fraidie Martz \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Valerie Mathews \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Chris McDowell \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Patty & Katie Moore \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Prudence Moore \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Margaret Newton \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Patricia Pi'ller \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Jerilyn Prior \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Maya Russell \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Patricia Russell \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Mary Schendlinger \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Shelly Schnee \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Esther Shannon \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Anita Skihar \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Margaret Slight \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Carrie Smith \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Penny Thompson \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Karen Unger \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Carol Anne Wishart \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Pamela Withers \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Maria Zazilia Dettwiler A huge thank you as well to the volunteers who stuffed, sealed and stamped literally thousandsof envelopes for our fundraising appeal: Olivia Anderson MicheHill-Elizabeth Kendall Tory Johnstone \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Shamsah Mohamed- Chris Rahim Finally, a belated butheartfelt thank you to the following sponsors and donors who helped make our summer Volunteer Appreciation Picnic a big success: Que Pasa Mexican Foods \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Purdy's Chocolates \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Murchies Tea & Coffee \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Uprising Breads Bakery \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 CRS Food Distributors \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Fletchers . can you illustrate on demand with barely any notice and only vague story summaries from the production co-ordinator? then you're the one we've been looking for all our Kinesis lives! but if you just like to draw give us a call anyway at 255-5499 NOVEMBER 1992 News Referendum on accord: What's up next? as told to Fatima Jaffer No. The October 26 referendum lias been an- sivered and it's businessas usual in thewomen's movement. Almost. A lot happened on the way to the No-outcome. Around referendum day, Kinesis spoke with women active on No and Yes sides during the referendum. While we made many efforts to reach representatives from the organized and grassroots women's movement [mostly No], the labour movement [mostly Yes] and the New Democratic Party [Yes], some voices are missing. The following are responses to two basic questions: Looking beyond the referendum, what are your thoughts on what comes next? Has anything positive and/or negative residtedfrom the referendum process\u00E2\u0080\u0094for example, new allies or a rift among women in the women's movement, labour organizations and the NDP? Sharon Mclvor, Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) As far as the constitution is concerned, we're not sure where we're going to go with it. We have been working on this whole issue for many years. I'm quite pleased to say I think we've made some inroads\u00E2\u0080\u0094if and when the constitution does come up for discussion again, we may get a better reception when we try to have some input [into the process]. We feel we should work with the other Aboriginal organizations on some issues\u00E2\u0080\u0094 maybe not the constitutional issue, because we have differences that are probably insurmountable. But in the areas of violence and justice, we believe that we can set up a working relationship with the other [Aboriginal] organizations. [As for allies,] it's a dangerous thing to look at people as allies in a political sphere, when they are allies only on one issue. We've had a fairly good relationship with the National Action Committee on the Status of Women [NAC] for quite a while. [Being on the same side] has helped our relationship because we have the same concerns in certain areas. We seem to be taking a leadership role in some of the issues. I have noticed and the feedback we've received tells us the Canadian public listened to our concerns, and they're concerned as well, and many of them [voted] No because of it. I'm really pleased about that. We thought, because we're such a small organization, and because Aboriginal women make up such a small portion of the population, we could be forgotten. The Canadian public has let us know that that's not true. Many of them are behind us. Sunera Thobani, SAWAN (South Asian Women's Action Network) The referendum clearly shows there's a total lack of confidence in the government of this country. It's a complete crisis of confidence. People are saying No to this kind of undemocratic process, that whatever happens in the future, there is no way that the government is going to get away with excluding people. The government's agenda has been completely derailed and [prime minister Brian] Mulroney should resign. It was a grassroots revolt against the elite\u00E2\u0080\u0094and that elite includes male leaders of the labour movement and the NDP. The women's movement is going to keep pressing for more democratic representation and processes at every level in Canadian society. The progressive forces have been incredibly strengthened by the No-result and the women's movement is going to build on that. And not just the women's movement. NWAC and Native women have been pushing for democratic representation and it's been a long historical process\u00E2\u0080\u0094it didn't start when they came up with this new accord. This [vote] has been a big victory. Now we'll get moving. It's strengthened, it's consolidated, it's built alliances which are really going to make all the social movements much stronger in the future. The good thing that came out of the process was our support for each other. As for NWAC, there was so much loaded against it. Even though NAC didn't have many resources, it still had more than tion. It's quite clear [the women's movement and the NDP] are going to have to work together again. Marg Bezug, Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) The answer to the referendum question hasn't put us back anywhere nor has it put us forward. The struggles continue. I think this accord was the corporate agenda and I'm really happy Canadians let the elite know they reject it. If there's any indication of a rift after the No-outcome, I would say it's between the leadership and membership of unions. It was the leadership of many unions that recommended a Yes-position. CUPW's de- NWAC. There was real privilege there but NAC chose to use their privilege to support [First Nations women]. I think that's a sign of the maturity of the white women's political understanding, that they are gaining some at last. Partly it's a sign of how much Native women and women of colour working within NAC have been able to push and bring it to this point where now they're supporting NWAC. Within so-called progressive movements\u00E2\u0080\u0094one would have thought that the leadership of the NDP was progressive\u00E2\u0080\u0094it completely reveals the limitations of so- called progressive leadership or groups\u00E2\u0080\u0094 they are not willing to go beyond a certain level. It showed who was really progressive and who wasn't. We have to keep pushing the NDP to become much more representational, which is a lesson the NDP has to learn. We need to make them accountable and we need loud voices saying that. Miche Hill, Vancouver Status of Women I think women in the women's community and certainly feminists in feminist organizations, will once again be prepared to roll up our sleeves and get back to work. Now, whether that's going to happen from the other [politicians'] side, we'll see. I'm concerned there may be some resentment from the women's community towards provincial governments, political parties like the NDP, and labour movements, who quite clearly have left us out in the cold on this one. It isn't the first time we've been ignored and marginalized and treated like a special-interest group when we're 52 percent of the population. It makes me furious. It's another indication of how much they still have to learn. It's going to be difficult to start the process of working together again. I think it's going to be crucial for us because we're coming up to a federal election. If we don't get it together and this split continues, we're not going to be able to fight this next elec- cision to recommend a No-vote is nothing new-our leadership has often taken positions different from the rest of labour. The question is how does the leadership regain the confidence of the membership? Betty Baxter, NDP candidate for Vancouver Centre federal riding One thing we have to do is start addressing the kinds of separations and divisions this whole process has led us to. I don't think we should forget how much those divisions feed into a right-wing agenda of separating people who care about issues affecting those who have traditionally not had the power. Another thing we could do is call for some action on the whole Aboriginal question very soon. I hope the NDP, as a party, will take some leadership in getting this process back on the table, in calling for a constituent assembly and a process that will address concerns raised by the progressive No's-NAC, NWAC and others. In terms of accountability, yes, we should be accountable to our communities. I'm not the only woman who said I'm a qualified yes. We have to figure out who represents our communities. Who am I accountable to? Am I accountable to the party, to women, to the constituents of Vancouver Centre, to my own community in Kitsilano? It's all over the place and there were as many women on the Yes-side as on the No-side. I had to go by my conscience in the long run. I want to be accountable to the women's community in terms of women's issues, in terms of women's strategies in lots of ways. I know many people who thoroughly disagree with my decision around the strategy of a Yes-vote. I hope we can overcome that disagreement around strategy because we have solidarity on some of the issues. We can debate whether the NDP was in error around this strategy. We can debate whether I'm in error around my strategy in this one. In some ways it depends on what the long-range outcome of this is and what were we able to get. I think the NDP has to look very closely at how to mend rifts that have happened as a result. I would hope what we get is a very quick call for an election. I hope what we get out of this process is absolute refusal to continue with a conservative government any longer. Penny Priddy, Minister of Women's Equality, BC While the government has found itself taking a different position from some of our natural allies\u00E2\u0080\u0094in this case women's groups, though not all women's groups-I have worked very hard to ensure discussions stay at a respectful level. My vision has always been that there is still a lot of work to be done. We share many common values as women, as feminists and as people who are concerned about moving towards child care, support for working people in this province, pay equity, intervention and prevention against violence against women. There are some messages that are clear in this [No-outcome], We need to acknowledge and be respectful of them as we move on. One is to make sure we talk again about our common goals and values. Secondly, there has been a really strong message about participatory democracy, not only from women but from others in this country. I think that message has to be clearly heard by people who usually begin those initiatives in government. People who elect politicians and those politicians have a responsibility to ensure that, at the political level, we work towards a common goal of having broader representation in our elected officials. People in BC don't always see themselves as physically represented in the legislature. The participatory democracy message has been very clear. We need to work really hard to ensure there are more politicians who are women, people with disabilities, women of colour, Aboriginal people, lesbian, gay, so that, when those things are initiated, there is a different kind of representation that people can see and feel more connected to. I think there is a real reaching out to be done and there are bridges [between the women's movement and the NDP], not to build but to keep intact, as we move forward in our work. I will be talking, as I throughout, with women in the feminist community to best find out how that can happen. I will be talking to women in the feminist community about ways I can take the initiative in ensuring it happens or at least ensuring that it happens for my part. There are strong bridges already, and if there is a need to make them stronger, I will work to do that. There is a messageofhealingthatneedstogotowomen, to all of us and I want to take whatever part I can in making that successful. Jackie Larkin, National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC) The most important thing is for the first ministers to continue to work out the guarantee for Aboriginal self-government at a pace acceptable to Aboriginal peoples. There's a strong majority in this country in support of thataspect of theaccord and we'll continue to organize and fight to make that happen. See CONSTITUTION page 4 = NOVEMBER 1992 News Federal child tax benefits program: Bye bye bonus by Susan Briscoe In September, while the nation's attention was diverted by the impending constitutional referendum, the federal government abolished Canada's oldest universal social program, the family allowance. Bill C-80 eliminates the family allowance program along with child taxcreditsand child income tax deductions, replacing all three with the child tax benefits program beginning January 1st, 1993. Welfare and children's rights activists have strongly condemned the new child ben- efits program, citing it as a profound federa 1 government attack on the principle of universality of social programs. Anti-poverty advocates also argue the child benefits program sets up two classes of poor families in Canada providing different access to federal support depending on whether a family is working poor or on social assistanceorunemploymentinsurance. According to the federal government, the new child benefits program targets support to lower income families by tying eligibility for benefits to income. Families with incomes exceeding $70,981, who under the previous system received family allowance but had it taxed back, will get nothing. Those with incomes of 550,000 will receive about $70 a month. All lower-income families will receive the basic benefit of $85 a month for each child. But the new program also incorporates a work-incentive feature in the form of a supplement of up to $500 a year for low- income families not receiving welfare or unemployment. Such working-poor families are also eligible for an additional $75 for each child after the first two. This \"baby bonus\" is not available to those on social assistance. In effect, the working poor are entitled to bonuses and benefits which will be denied to those families who need them most: the unemployed. While the government argues the program is intended to address the critical problem of child poverty, the people who will most suffer under the new program are the children in Canada's poorest families. As a spokesperson for the Society for Children's Rights to Adequate Parental Support (SCRAPS) notes, \"The new child benefit scheme doesn't give the children living in poverty much of a break. Only 15 percent of children living in poverty with their mothers will receive the full increase of $42 per month and 63 percent will receive nothing because their parents receive social assistance payments.\" Florence Hackett, a representative of Indian Homemakers, is particularly concerned for single Na ti ve mothers confronted with the loss of the family allowance. Hackett predicts that\"... without family allowance mothers will have to depend on food banks to feed their children. This bill is causing hard ship rather than providing for need.\" She adds that the bill works against efforts to keep Native children in Native families, pointing out that it is \"...already difficult for Native mothers to compete with working, whitefosterfamilies,andBillC-80only serves to widen that economic and social gap.\" End Legislated Poverty (ELP), a BC coalition of 28 low-income advocacy groups, also urges rejection of the new program. ELP believes the new child benefits program is \"...part of a larger Tory government strategy to undermineCanada's commitment to universal social programs. The child benefits program lays the groundwork for a big business version of a guaranteed annual income that will guarantee poverty and low wages.\" The coalition is also gravely concerned that some provinces\u00E2\u0080\u0094which face increasing welfare costs due to cuts in federal transfer payments\u00E2\u0080\u0094maycutchildbenefitpay- ments from social assistance cheques. ELP also criticizes the federal government's advertisingcampaign promoting the new program, describing it as \"sleazy and misleading.\" Betty McPhee, a worker at the YWCA's Crabtree Corner da ycare in Vancouver Downtown Eastside, discussed Bill C-80 with someofthesinglemotherswhouseCrabtree's services. These women believe the new program stigmatises the poor and fear that it is yet \"...another program that can be easily slashed in the future.\" \"They should put more energy into taxing the rich,\" was one single mother's suggested alternative to the government's current approach. Susan Briscoe, a first-time writer for Kinesis, works for a transition house in the Vancouver Lower Mainland. EastsscIe DataGrapIhcs 1460 Commercial Drive i teI: 255-9559 Fax: 255'5075 OfficE SuppliEs Now in Stock! Art SuppliEs 1993 Date Books Quo Vadis, Dayrunner, Brownline *p-Ui\iioiN Shop CaU or Fax ano1 we'U sencj you our MONihly flyER of qREAT officE supply speci'aIs. Free NEXT'dAy dElivERy. Did you know... Despite the pouring rain about 120 people attended a NAC \"NO TO THE DEAL\" rally in front of the Vancouver Art Gallery on Oct 23. After standing on all four corners surrounding the Gallery for three long hours the damp and drippy No/ non folks assembled for one last anti-constitutional demo. The crowd cheered on speakers from the South Asian Women's Network (SAWAN), Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC), Vancouver Status of Women (VSW), BC Coalition for People with Disabilities, West Coast Domestic Worker's , and other No groups. Pictured above is No supporter Loucette Hansen. CONSTITUTION from page 3 I would look next at recognition for Quebec. The third element of what NAC thinks should happen next is a constituent assembly\u00E2\u0080\u0094the election of delegates from the three com m unities in Canada: Quebec, Aboriginal peoples, and the rest of Canada. Many of us were surprised about the NDP's position, federally and in BC. I think the party has to be accountable. We continue to have very real concerns about the fact that none of the ministers of women's equality were prepared to debate us directly, and I believe those ministers are in their positions because of the women's movement. I have no doubt there will be lots of issues around which women from NAC and the labour movement and the NDP will be able to unite in the next year or two, including free trade, the upcoming federal election, and campaigns against violence against women and for daycare, for example. Launching a national daycare program, is certainly one of the demands we'll be making on all of the governments\u00E2\u0080\u0094if they're so convinced there's no danger to new national social programs, let's have them implement a national daycare strategy. The best healer of political wounds is action around common issues. Maybe we'll all need a little space, and a little rest for a while. But throughout, even though there have been some tensions, the dialogue among women on the progressive side, whatever their position has been, has been quite respectful and so we'll continue to work together. I would expect there to be some important soul-searching among all the progressive forces, definitely including the NDP, about how we can actually democratize the political process. The amount of anger and frustration in the rejection of the accord expresses a very deep disenchantment with the process, and all the political parties have to look at that, especially those who believe in social change. Libby Davies, Vancouver city councillor First of all, I think it's very important for progressive women who have been divided over this question to go through a process of examining what happened and trying to work out whatever differences there might be. It's very important we review the impact of the No vote, what happened, why it was No. Beyond that, I think what we need to do is begin breaking down the issues. A fundamental flaw of the accord was it was totally an all-or-nothing proposition. You only had one choice and that was a huge mistake. If any of this is to help us to go forward, it has to be done one issue at a time. For many women, there were particular things we agree on, for example, Aboriginal self-government. I hope these politicians have learned they have to start picking up the pieces. There is no reason why we can't sit down now and start negotiating with Quebec and making that a separate issue from the rest of the constitution\u00E2\u0080\u0094social charter, economic union, division of powers, senate, and on and on. I think NAC's role in this has been incredible. [NAC president] Judy Rebickand others were absolutely outstanding\u00E2\u0080\u0094they articulated arguments and presented a very credible agenda in terms of issues for people to debate. If it hadn't been for NAC, this would have been a very right-wing debate. We saw big labour and mainstream politics and big business all hang out together. It was ordinary people who said No. I was originally very opposed to the idea of a referendum, but as the campaign progressed, Judy Rebick said\u00E2\u0080\u0094and she was right\u00E2\u0080\u0094it will turn out to be very powerful in terms of the democratic expression from people across the country. Many thanks to Faith ]ones and Lissa Geller for the fastest and cheeriest transcribing in town. NOVEMBER 1992 News Racism and art: Women out of focus by Agnes Huang A controversy over an art show a t one of Canada's few feminist arts centres has once again caused divisions among women close to the organization. The dispute at the Women In Focus (WIF) Gallery in Vancouver, surrounding an exhibit by Diana Kemble, has led to the resignation of its gallery committee and two of its board members. Members of the gallery committee say they are offended by the images in Kemble's paintings and masks, and are unanimous in expressing their concern about cultural appropriation and racism. This is not the first time WIF has had to answer to charges of racism. The organization is still reeling from a series of legal battles with In Visible Colours (IVC), a woman of colour film and video group. In June 1991, WIF seized money raised by IVC through its film festival, and challenged IVC in court over the ownership of the funds [see Kinesis June 1991 and February 1992]. At the time, WIF was severely in debt and on the brink of shutting down. Diana Kemble's show, Memory's Body, which opened October 2, was the first WIF- curated show since the In Visible Colours incident was settled. In fact, her show had been scheduled to open at the WIF gallery last year just as the WIF-1VC affair was breaking out. In support of IVC, Kemble refused to allow her show to be hung. Kemble's exhibition consists of seven acrylic paintings and eleven masks. She says her work is based on her readings of world literature and her understanding of cultural groups. \"I'm working out of my dreams, my notions of how the world isv\" says Kemble. Two paintings in particular, representing women of colour, caught the eye of co- curator, Sur Mehat. One, called \"Frog Child\", is a painting of a brown-skinned woman lying on her back with a brown-skinned child perched on her chest. The woman's head and face are distorted. The child has legs like a frog and long, long arms which are crossed over the woman's throat. The other, \"Bone Flower,\" also depicts a brown-skinned woman lying on her back with her legs spread open. A white umbilical cord leads from her white vagina and to a white flower. She is headless and a white hand attached to a brown arm is positioned over the place where her head would be. In their resignation letter to the board of WIF dated October 10, the seven members of the gallery committee stated their objections to the show which they say \"offends the basic commitments to anti-racism, inclusion, and accountability we discussed and set out as our preliminary mandate.\" Mehat, who resigned both as co-curator and a memberof the gallery committee, says Kemble's paintings are disturbing because \"she's not just representing our images, she's also borrowing our mythology\u00E2\u0080\u0094it doesn't matter what culture she's drawing from. This fascination with borrowing from other cultures and mythologies indiscriminately hurts.\" \"What gets to me is that she is in a position where most women of colour will not be for a long time-representing women of colour, representing ourselves,\" says Mehat. Kemble, a white woman, does not understand the objections to her paintings. \"I don't think the paintings are disrespectful to people with other coloured-skin.\" There is some confusion over the process which resulted in Kemble's show being put on the current programming slate. Members of the now defunct gallery committee say that board member Corry Wyngaarden, who was also a member of the gallery committee when the year's programming was selected, brought forward Diana Kemble's work. Kemble has told Kinesis she had given Wyngaarden slides of her show. Ex-gallery committee member, Shelina Velji, adds that Wyngaarden told the committee that it was imperative to give Kemble a show because of all the politics around IVC. \"Corry told us that we owe it to Diana,\" says Velji. Wyngaarden denies ha ving brought the work forward, and says she had not seen Kemble's show or slides. Other gallery committee members say they had not seen the slides prior to the opening. Kemble has also confirmed that co-curator Mehat visited her house two weeks prior to the opening and saw the paintings, including one of the two Mehat eventually asked to have removed from the gallery. Mehat did not raise objections to Kemble's show until the pieces were being hung. Jill -Baird, who resigned from both the gallery committee and the board, says that the committee made some key assumptions when they included Kemble's show as part of the programming slate. \"We assumed that someone else with WIF had previously seen Diana Kemble's work since it had been approved for showing last year,\" says Baird. A number of factors contributed to the situation WIF finds itself in: the inexperience of the gallery committee, time pressure to meet grant deadlines, lack of procedural guidance from the board, and a lack of continuity between the gallery committee and previous committees. Along with their resignation letter, the gallery committee members submitted eight recommendations to the WIF board, including: that the board immediately re-evaluate the society's goals, objectives, and structure; acknowledge the racist legacy of WIF; arrange and participate in an anti-racism workshop; and stop all programming and day-today functions of the society that prevent WIF from addressing all of these issues. The gallery committee offered to participate in activities that would fulfil the recommendations, but most of the former members refuse to sit in the gallery as long as Memory's Body is showing. The board met on October 20 and was presented with the gallery committee's recommendations, but has yet to contact any of the committee's former members about their proposals. Another board meeting is scheduled to happen just as Kinesis goes to press. Board member Lorna Boschman says the board agrees with all the points brought up by the gallery committee. But Corry Wyngaarden dismisses their recommendations as being too general and accusatory. \"They are hard recommendations to follow up on because there are no substantive directions to follow,\" says Wyngaarden. Board members are having problems agreeing on what direction to take from here. The gallery committee hasadmitted that they made mistakes throughout the selection process, but says that the board must also take responsibility for the situation WIF finds itself in. Gwethalyn Gauvreau attended the October 20 board meeting and said she did not leave with a feeling that the board was ready to deal with the controversy. \"It is not clear that the board was willing to acknowledge their responsibility in the situation,\" says Gauvreau. She resigned from the board following the meeting. The current board of WIF has five active members: Wyngaarden, Boschman, Kim Blain, Ali Mcllwaine, and Andrea Fatona, and two members on leave. \"I can't believe the lack of responsibility on [the board's] part. I'm very angry,\" says Shelina Velji. \"It's okay to make mistakes, but to totally disregard what has happened, to not take the initiative in looking into the situation, and to place the responsibility solely on the gallery committee is insulting.\" Fa tona, the only woman of colour active on the WIF board, could not be reached for comment. The board feels it has a responsibility to the artist, Diana Kemble, to keep the gallery open now that the show is up. They have decided to try to open the gallery at least on Saturdays until November 30, when the show is scheduled to close. Board members have yet to reach consensus as to how best to deal with this situation. \"The show should never have been hung in the first place,\" says Ali Mcllwaine, \"but now the question is, \"what should be done?'\" Agnes Huang is a legend in her own time- BC social services initiative: Training bucks for single moms by Christiana Wiens Single mothers on welfare in BC could have an easier time accessing educational and vocational training under a new provincial initiative. In early October the Ministry of Social Services announced new funding of over $17 million to the job creation and training budget for people on social assistance. The new funding brings the total job creation and training budget to $56.5 million. But anti-poverty groups say that the additional funds are not being used to address root problems faced by women on welfare in any meaningful way. The job creation plan overall is shortsighted, says Pam Fleming of End Legislated Poverty (ELP). \"Ifgovernmentwanted to effectively put money in the hands of the \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 poor, the Ministry of Social Services could have raised both welfare rates and the minimum wage in BC,\" she says. The majority of people receiving social assistance in BC are women, especially, sin gle mothers. Fleming, who is spokesperson for ELP, a coalition of 28 anti-poverty groups, . says that under the initiative, women will have somewhat better access to educational or vocational training because single parents will be allowed to go to school part-time while they work. \"Before it was either all or nothing. You could work full time or train full time but not both.\" But Fleming cautions that the initiative's reference to \"jobs in forests\" really means tree planting. \"So people will go off welfare, work for six months, go on unemployment insurance until it runs out, then go back on welfare. Ineffect,thegovernment has simply added to the seasonal workforce.\" And, she says, since most forestry jobs are outside of the lower mainland, they are not accessible to single mothers. Fleming also notes that the $17 million in new funding represents a realization on the government's part that the current system isn't working. \"The ministry is currently acting as the ministry of last resort. It is forced to make initiativesand economic concessions because of free trade, the GST, and cuts in both unemployment benefits and full time jobs,\" she says. In a press release announcing the new monies, Social Services Minister Joan Smallwood says the funds are intended to help an additional 25,000 people on income assistance\"gaingreaterindependence\"dur- ing economic hard times. \"British Columbians on social assistance want to work and we're making sure they're given greater opportunities to find work,\" says Smallwood. Smallwood also notes that the funding is in response to a 15 percent increase in ministry caseloads this year, for which she blames federal government policies. \"We're seeing [this increase] because of the Mulroney government's misguided fiscal policies and cuts to unemployment insurance. That's putting more barriers in front of people on income assistance who are looking for a way out of the poverty cycle.\" About $10 million of the new funding will go to the government's \"partnership with communities and private industries\" job- creation program. Included is a wage- subsidy program that will allow employers to claim up to $3.50 an hour in subsidy over and above their required minimum wage payment. Another $6 million is for education and training initiatives that include such things as helping participants prepare resumes and develop job-search and interview techniques. Roughly $1 million is slated for a \"bridging to jobs\" program, to provide transportation and childcare subsidies, and to pay for medical and dental coverage for up to one year after social assistance is ended. Those receiving handicapped benefits will receive medical and dental coverage indefinitely. As well, participants may beentitled to clothing allowances if they have confirmed job interviews, or are just starting work. Cliristiana Wiens is a new writer for \u00E2\u0080\u00A2Kinesis and a student at UBC. NOVEMBER 1992 What's News By Lissa Geller Rigoberta Menchu Rigoberta Menchu is the Nobel Peace Prize winner for 1992. It is the first time the award has been granted to an Indigenous woman. Calling her a \"vivid symbol of peace and reconciliation,\" the Nobel committee awarded the prize to Menchu for her work as an activist for the rights of women and Indigenous people in her native Guatemala, and for her work with the Campesino Unity Committee (CUC), a human rights organization founded by peasants in the highlands of Guatemala. More recently, Menchu has been very active in the Campaign of 500 Years of Indigenous and Popular Resistance, commemorating the arrival of Columbus in North America and the subsequent oppression and genocide of Indigenous peoples, and celebrating the resistance to that oppression. Menchu lives in exile in Mexico, since the brutal murders of her activist father, mother and brother at the hands of the Guatemalan army in 1980. She has also actively criticized the government of Guatemala for many years for its treatment of women and Aboriginal people as well as for the violence of poverty. In an interview in Kinesis in March 1992, Menchu points out that, \"during the last four or five decades in Latin America, it's always been said that, first, we have to achieve social, political and economic power, then comes the women's struggle. The indigenous movement is challenging this and showing that our struggle and the class struggle cannot be separated.\" Menchu's nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize was supported in Canada by the CUC Support Committee. Says Vancouver activist Sharon Moran, \"it is a very important struggle to achieve respect for the human rights of Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in the Americas, and we hope that we can continue working together in this struggle.\" Gov't sidesteps lesbian rights As an attempt to avoid the court challenge launched by lesbian activist Christine Morrisey of Vancouver, the federal department of immigration has granted Morrisey's partner of 15 years, Bridget Coll, independent landed immigrant status. Morrisey challenged the federal government's sponsorship policy on the basis that it discriminates against lesbian and gay relationships.Heterosexualsareallowed to sponsor family members, including spouses, for immigration, while lesbians and gays are not, aslesbian relationships have no legal recognition. Morrisey's lawyer, Rob Hughes, considers this move by the federal government as a partial victory. \"Christine's suit has focused national attention on the fact that lesbians and gays face discrimination in this area, and the federal government is running scared.\" Morrisey has vowed to continue with her law suit. \"It is because of our attempts to fight a precedent-setting case that Bridget has been granted landed immigrant status...the issue will not go away, because we will not go away.\" Doug Sanders, co-chair with Morrisey of the Lesbian and Gay Task Force on Immigration, adds that it won't be easy for the government to sidestep this issue for long. This month, 12 more lesbian and gay couples will be filing cases with Immigration to fight for their right to sponsor same-sex partners for immigration to Canada. by Erin Mullan Ireland abortion referendum The government in Ireland has finally announced its plans for a referendum on abortion. The referendum, to be held on December 3, will contain three separate yes-or-no questions. Voters will be asked whether they believe Irish women should have the right to travel abroad for an abortion; whether women should be given access to abortion information;andwhetherIreland's existing anti-abortion legislation should be modified. At present, abortion is illegal in both the South of Ireland and the six counties of the North. In the South, an anti- abortion referendum was passed in 1983, which entrenched in the constitution the right to life of the fetus as equal to that of the mother. Since that time, anti-choice forces in Ireland, spear-headed by the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child (SPUC), have tried to cut off all access to abortion information. This means the vast majority of the thousands of Irish women who travel to Britain for abortions each year do so in secrecy, with no information or counselling. The abortion situation in Ireland gained worldwide attention last March when the Dublin High Court banned a suicidal 14- year-old rape victim from having an abortion in Britain. Followinga massive public outcry from both within and outside of Ireland, the Irish Supreme Court overruled the decision, arguing that the girl's life was threatened, and stating that abortion should be allowed in certain limited circumstances. The case forced the Irish government to reexamine the abortion issue, resulting in the upcoming referendum [see Kinesis, April, and May, 92]. The outcome of the vote is far from certain. Irish pro-choice activists warn that the strength of the anti-abortion movement in Ireland can never be under-estimated. Organizations like SPUC have huge assets, and receive support from the country's powerful Catholic church. Pro-choicers in Ireland are unhappy with the decision to have three questions, instead of one, in the upcoming referendum. They are especially concerned with the wording of one of the questions. It asks voters to endorse a change in legislation which would allow an abortion to be performed in Ireland if the woman's life is at risk. However, this proposal specifically rules out, as insufficient grounds for abortion, women who are suicidal. The Irish government is facing increasing pressure to change the wording of this question. Regardless of the outcome of the referendum, Irish women will probably continue to make that long journey across the water to Britain, to obtain abortions. But if the rights to travel and to information were entrenched in law, then fear and ignorance would no longer have to be companions on that journey. Movement Matters listings information Movement Matters is designed to be a network of news, updates and information of special interest to the women's movement. Submissions to Movement Matters should be no more than 500 words, typed, double spaced and may be edited for length. Deadline is the 18th of the month preceding publication. Getting there In-Sight '92 ' Creating a shelter In-Sight '92 organizers in Edmonton encourage women from across Canada to represent this year's theme \"The Body of Women\" on video for the Festival of Women's Film & Video. The recording should be a one minute home video which reflects a woman's own experience. The theme should reflect our individual bodies in action, reaction or silence. These short glimpses of Canadian women's lives will be presented on the big screen throughout the In-Sight festival among the other films and videos made by women. As well, the clips will be compiled on tapes that will run continuously on monitors in festival venues. Later, the tapes will be made available for exhibition at other film festivals, conferences and women's centres across the country. fri-Sight '92 will be held November 20-22. Contact address: In-Sight '92,2nd Floor, 9722- 102 Street, Edmonton, Alberta, T5K 0X4, Tel.: (403) 448-0703, Fax: (403) 495-6412. Womenof Colour Collectiveannounces the publication of \"Getting There: Minority experiences in the Corporate Sector\", a study on the employment experiences of women, people of colour, Aboriginal people, and people with disabilities employed in major corporations in Calgary. Women of Colour Collective believes that information dissemination and increased awareness of issues affecting women and minorities in the employment arena a re an essential part of the struggle towards workplace equality. To order contact: WCC- EE PROJECT, 319,223-12 Avenue SW, Calgary, Alberta, T2R OG9, Tel.: (403) 281- 7460. Bad Atitude Bad Attitude, a new radical women's newspaper from Britain is expected to come out in December 1992. Bad Attitude aims to concentrate on international news of interest to women. They need individual women and progressive/revolutionary organizations to send articles, news clippings and information about happenings in their area. The paper will cover issues dealing with reproductive rights, labour struggles, violence against women, religious fundamentalism and imperialism. Bad Attitude hopes to build greater links between women around the world. Address: Bad Attitude, 121 Railton Road, London SE24 OLR, Brit- The first international conference on Judaism, Feminism and Psychology \"Creating a Shelter in the Wilderness\" will be held in Seattle from October 29 - November 1. Over50workshops,discussionsandpan- elswilladdressthepsychological significance of being Jewish and female. Topics include: Jewish identity development, ritual as heal- ingassimilation,reclaimingourJewishmoth- ers body image, Jewish lesbians, female Holocaust survivors, Sephardic culture African- American/Jewish relations, and more. The goals of the conference, sponsored by the Jewish Women's Caucus of the Asso- ciation for Women in Psychology, are to help integrate the identitiesof Jewish, feministand mental health professionals; to raise awareness of Jewish issues among mental health practitioners, academics and community workers and to examine the reality of Jewish women living in a predominantly male- centered non-Jewish world. Women and men from all religious and ethnic backgrounds and all sexual orientations are welcome. \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Accommodations for special needs as well as a sliding scale and financial aid are available. For information and /or donations contact: Kayla Weiner, Conference Coordinator, 600FirstAvenue,Suite530,Seattle,WA98104- 2221, U.S.A., Tel: (206) 343-0828. Starting January 1993 CCEC Credit Union will be Open six days a week! GCEC offers: \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Personal & business loans & lines of credit \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Lower interest on loans to co-ops & societies \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Term deposits \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 RRSPs \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Mortgages \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 ATM cards A jull-servtce \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 LoW service charges & credit union dedicated to many more services community economic development NOVEMBER 1992 Feature Native Women's Association of Canada: Mclvor lays it out by Sharon Mclvor The following was written for presentation at a panel on Women and the Constitution in Vancouver on October 12. Sharon Mclvor is a member of the executive of the Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) and a member of the Lower Nicola Indian Band in Merritt, BC. Mclvor is also a lawyer in the province ofBC, a member of the BCNative Women's Society, and holds executive positions with the BC Native Courtworkers' Association, BC Legal Services Society and the Legal Aid Society of Merritt. On behalf of the Native Women's Association of Canada [NWAC], I want to thank you for giving me this opportunity to ex: press our concerns with the Charlottetown package [the 1992 constitutional accord]. I want to address the representation issue first. The Native Women's Association of Canada is the bona-fide organization representing Native women's voices in Canada. It is not for Chief Wendy Grant or other women chiefs to say they speak for Aboriginal women. NWAC is a democratic organization representing the voices of 120,000 Native women. These women have made individual choices to belong to one of the 13 provincial and territorial organizations which make up NWAC. It is true we do not have unanimity within our organization on the constitutional issues. Nevertheless, in a majority decision vote, NWAC decided to form the Aboriginal Women's No Committee, and to proceed with our court case against Canada for discrimination against Native women in the constitutional process. I want to say the constitutional renewal process has been flawed from the very beginning because Native women were denied their right to freedom of expression guaranteed to all Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Sincejunel991, NWAC has made direct pleas to all parties to allow Native women to speak for themselves in this process. When we were denied this opportunity, we hired one of the top female litigators in Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094Mary Eberts of Toronto\u00E2\u0080\u0094and took our case to the Federal Court Trial Division. This was March 16,1992. We lost our bid in a record three days! NWAC appealed almost immediately to the Federal Court of Appeal, which ruled in our favour. The Court declared unanimously that NWAC's and Native women's freedom of political expression rights had been infringed upon in the current constitutional process [See Kinesis, April, May, and June, 1992]. Sharon Mclvor On August 21-22,1992, the federal government ignored this declaration of the Federal Court of Appeal and held a Multilateral Ministerial Meeting on theConstitution without the involvement of Native women. The NWAC was also omitted from the historic meeting on the constitution held in Charlottetown on August 27 and 28, 1992 [See Kinesis, Sept, 1992]. As a consequence of this omission, NWAC [was] again in the Federal Court Trial Division on October 13 and 14,1992 in Ottawa. Our counsel, Mary Eberts, [argued] that the Charlottetown Accord is illegal [and therefore] null and void, because Canada did not respect the Federal Court [and] grant us an injunction to stop the referendum of October 26th, which is based on an illegal document [see story this page]. Asa back-up strategy, the NWAC Board of Directors has put together the Aboriginal Women's No Committee to encourage Canadians to vote No in the national referendum [on] October 26,1992. NWAC is opposed to changes to sections 3 to 5 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms because they are designed to deprive all Aboriginal peoples of their right to exercise democratic rights under Aboriginal self-government. No Native will have the right to vote under a self-government The Charlottetown accord does nothing to add to Native self- sufficiency\u00E2\u0080\u0094 it simply means Aboriginal peoples can administer their own poverty. regime; Natives will retain the right to vote for the legislatures and parliament. NWAC is opposed to changes to section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Changes proposed by [Grand Chiefof the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), Ovide Mercredi and [Native Council of Canada president] Ron George will deny First Nations women the opportunity to return to theircommunitiesif theymarrynon- native men. Native women and Canadians thought sex discrimination in law had ended against Native women with Bill C-31. .[This act], passed in June 1985, repealed sex-discriminatory sections of the Indian Act and restored status and band membership to women, who lost it for intermarrying outside their Band. In fact, sex discrimination did not end. Of 70,000 Bil 1 C-31 Indians, only two percent were allowed to return to their home communities. One Band, Saddle Lake in northern Alberta, wrote the Bill C-31 women, informing them that the Band did not recognize the legislation and refused to allow the treaty women to return home. Another Alberta treaty band is in court trying to overturn [this legislation] as unconstitutional because it offends the inherent right to self government. Bands, such as Sawridge, and leaders like Senator Walter Twinn, say their inherent right to determine band membership means they may discriminate against women on the basis of sex. Such views are opposed by NWAC The changes It ain't over till it's over to section 6 are supported by leaders like these NWACopposesamendmentstosection6. NWAC opposes amendments to the Canada Clause put forward by the AFN as long as there is no amendment specifically protecting Native women's sexual equality rights. To endorsetheCanadaClauseamend- ment would mean subjecting Native women's sexual equality rights to custom, culture and tradition in the courts. We have seen, in the courts today, a tendency by our men to use \"tradition\" as justification for crimes committed against women and children. Native men have used \"cultural beliefs and traditions\" to argue in court that they have the right to commit incest free of punishment, or to sexually abuse Native children. Native males accused of crimes on Vancouver Island have used \"tradition and spiritual practices\" to avoid incarceration for violent rapes of girls, boys, and women. Without checks and balances, and [a guarantee of] a stronger role for Native women in criminal justice administration, NWAC cannot support the Canada Clause amendment. NWAC is opposed to the imposition of peace, order and good government to aboriginal laws [Amendment number 47 in the Charlottetown accord]. We remember all too well the calling of 4,000 Canadian troops against the Mohawks in the Summer of 1990. Federal and provincial ministers preached to us about the \"rule of law\". Yet, Canada breached the rule of law by failing to respect the court declaration of August 20, 1992 [recognizing NWAC's exclusion from constitutional talks]. Canada breached the rule by calling in the Armed Forces when there was clearly no national emergency\u00E2\u0080\u0094Parliament was not recalled, no law was drafted, and yet, the civil and human rights of Kanaesatake and Kahnawake residents were breached daily by the Surete du Quebec, the RCMP and the Canadian Armed Forces. In conclusion, I want to say that there are many flaws with the constitutional deal which cameoutof Charlottetown, including discrimination against Native women [in the process]. The self-government arrangement adds nothing to what we have today. The self-government negotiation process put in place by the Charlottetown accord was there already. TheCharlottetown accord does not guarantee Native self-government\u00E2\u0080\u0094it simply puts in place a process for negotiation. The Charlottetown accord does nothing to add to Native self-sufficiency\u00E2\u0080\u0094it simply means Aboriginal peoples can administer their own poverty. by Kinesis staff writer The Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) will be in court three weeks after the referendum to demand a stop to all further constitutional discussions until the voices of Aboriginal women are adequately represented at the table. On November 13, a federal court of appeal will hear NWAC's demandfor an end to any further constitutional discussions that excludeorganizations tha t represent Native women, such as the NWAC, which represents 120,000 women nationally. The NWAC is also demanding $5 million in government funding, to enable them to participate equally in future talks. This would alsoput them on par with the four male- dominated Native organizations,that participated in negotiations for the Charlottetown accord. Winning this case \"may open the door to a whole new realm of some kind of participatory democracy,\" says Sharon Mclvor of NWAC. \"We're looking for that, not only for ourselves, but also for other women, non-Aboriginal women, and other groups who are totally cut out because they don't have the numbers and they don't have the power.\" NWAC's decision to appeal follows a federal court decision on October 16, rejecting NWAC's bid for an injunction to stop the referendum. NWAC's counsel Mary Eberts argued that because the NWAC was improperly excluded from the process leading up to the Charlottetown accord, the referendum was based on an illegal document. Justice Barry Strayer ruled NWAC's case was \"an abuse of process\" because it is not the function of judges to make up an \"invitation list for a constitutional conference,\" nor do the courts have the right to tell the federal and provincial governments who they should invite. Says NWAC spokesperson Gail Stacy-Moore, \"does the rule of law apply only to the citizens of this country or does it apply to the politicians as well? That's the question.\" In another case, to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) is appealing a federal appeal court decision in August that found the federal government had violated Aboriginal women's and NWAC's rights by refusing them a seat at the table and funding equal to four other Native organizations. However, the court stopped short of ordering the government fund the NWAC, but said that, if talks were held with Aboriginal groups, the NWAC should be included. Later that month, when talks did resume on the question of Aboriginal self government, the government defied the court ruling by refusing to include NWAC. The Supreme Court has not yet said when it will hear this case. NOVEMBER 1992 Feature Monique Simard: On the no in Quebec by Monique Simard Over 55 percent of people in Quebec voted No to the Charlottetown constitutional accord on October26. The following excerpts of a speech by Monique Simard on October 12 examinehow, in Quebec, a Canada-wide rejection of the accord may be looked at as a progressive move. Simard is a vice-president of National Action Committee for the Status of Women (NAC), and was a vice president of the CSN, the largest labour federation in Quebec. She is now the host of a radio talk show in Montreal. I think taking the initiative to speak to each other from different parts of the country is an example of the healthy debate the women's movement has been initiating in this country. I believe it takes much more courage for women outside of Quebec to say No to the Charlottetown accord than the ones that are in Quebec, and I want to salute NAC [for taking the No position] because I know it's not easy to be associated every day with [Reform Party leader] Preston Manning and other people like that, or to be cut off from what are our traditional allies\u00E2\u0080\u0094our labour movements, for example. I don't think this really changes the content and the integrity of our position [on the constitutional agreement]. I want to say I feel very much at ease about voting No. Nobody in Quebec, especially progressive people, thinks you're voting against Quebec. That is the main message I would like you to get from my presence here. The 'Yesses' are [Quebec premier] Bourassa, essentially, and big business, and Guy LaFleur, the hockey player. This is only a small exaggeration. But there aren't any progressive groups, credible intellectuals or artists [on the Yes side]. The Yesses are essentially traditional business, big business, the Liberal Party, the head-the members of parliament\u00E2\u0080\u0094of the Equality Party, which is a small anglophone party, and yes, Alliance Quebec, which is the pressure group for minority language rights in Quebec. The No-side is composed of the Parti Quebecois, Le Bloc Quebecois\u00E2\u0080\u0094 all sovereignistsare against the deal. People say sovereignists will be against all deals. That's not true\u00E2\u0080\u0094they favoured the Meech Lake accord [in 1987]. And the No-camp also has the federalists, the Liberals, which I think is important for us to know, politically. The 'Yesses'are Bourassa... big business and Guy Lafleur, the hockey player. Furthermore and with no exceptions, all labour organizations, allpopular groups, anti-poverty groups, and churchgroups have taken positions on the No-side, as well as all women's groups, artists and intellectuals. So if you look at the Yesses and the Nos, the progressive people feel very at ease with a No-vote by [women outside Quebec]. You're voting on the same side as progressive people in Quebec. Sodon't let politicians tell you a No-vote is No to Quebec. The Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) in Quebec is a strong No and very high-profile No. What I think is important for us in Quebec is that you [in English Canada] understand that the process by which this deal was negotiated was awful. I agree with [former prime minister] Pierre Trudeau when he says it's a mess. It is a mess, and for Quebec especially. Not only do you not find in there the historical demands of Quebec, but you find demands Quebec has never made-es- pecially that 25 percent guarantee of seats in parliament for Quebec. Nobody had ever heard of that in Quebec before this. It came from [Quebec premier] Bourassa\u00E2\u0080\u0094he was tired one night, you know, trying to deal with the 'senate thing', and well, he says, what can I exchange with [Ontario premier] Bob Rae-how about something which has never been a demand in Quebec? [A guarantee of 25 percent of the seats in parliament and the Senate issue] bothers a lot of progressive people in Quebec because it changes the principle of equitable representation and it's an unhealthy relationship with the rest of Canada. That's the proof of the mess, I think. The pressure is going to be there for progressive people to say this No-vote is awful. You'll get the economic threats that this country is going to fall apart, that you're voting against Quebec. No, it's not true. Quebecers are going to vote against it and the best thing that can happen is more than just Quebecers vote No. If there is a No elsewhere in Canada, it'll be a way to change the dynamics of these constitutional discussions. A constitution is not a labour contract\u00E2\u0080\u0094 you don't change it every year or every second year. That's what they are trying to say, and it's not true. A constitution is here to stay and that is why it's so important for women, for Quebecers in Canada, or for a sovereign Quebec. It is an important thing, and so when we do it, we have to do it right. Thanks to KeUy O'Brien for hours of transcribing\u00E2\u0080\u0094in between sneezes. Charlottetoiyp accord: A poor deal for the poor by Pam Fleming In September, the Royal Bank and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce told business leaders \"A yes vote in the October 26 referendum could lay the foundation for a competitive economy.\" The Business Council on National Issues, the largest corporate lobby group in Canada, also wants this deal. These are the rich and powerful men who are making record profits while average Canadians are experiencing record job losses and poverty. These are the people who lobbied for Free Trade, the GST and the end to social programs. Why do they want the Charlottetown accord? Here is almost everything I know about the proposed deal and what it would have done to the future of Canada's social programs and low income people: Poor people had the least rights in this agreement. Poor people aren't even in the Canada Clause. Their rights are mixed in with an unenforceable social and economic union, the framework for which will be established by the first ministers. This means we are. being asked to vote Yes on a framework that does not even exist yet. That's like buying a house before it's been built. This deal gives power to premiers to decide important issues behind closed doors without public debate. The deal would give them the right to establish guidelines for social programs, reasonable standard of.living and full employment. Do we trust these guys to outline these things?