Another lesson in apology politics

Are the Tories getting too good at grovelling?
Don Martin, National Post

Published: Monday, June 09, 2008

Tuesday's half-hour statement from Prime Minister Stephen Harper to a hushed House of Commons will be the greatest grovel in Canadian history, completing a ten-year process of parliamentary remorse for the residential schools tragedy and starting another five years of reconciliation.

On a Commons floor filled with dignitaries, native leaders and survivors of the notorious school system, a formal apology will drag on for thousands of words, every syllable agonized over to ensure it was sufficiently contrite and conveying suitable gravitas.

The government, Parliament, indeed every Canadian will be apologizing without exception for every student's experience, be it positive, negative or abusive.

But there are still high-level concerns it won't be enough and, while unlikely, could be rejected by native leaders as a political stunt that isn't sufficiently sincere. One senior government official involved in drafting the apology acknowledged in mid-gulp on an Ottawa beer patio: "Of course, we're still not sure they'll accept it."

Beverage splattered. Excuse me?

Native leaders have not been allowed to view an advance draft of the statement and Assembly of First Nations chief Phil Fontaine was not involved, as he requested, in authoring the apology.

Now, I'm not sure how involving the victims in writing their own apology adds to the sincerity of the script, but this remorse-filled statement will dramatically dwarf other acts of regret that have gone before.

Still, Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl allows there is "nervousness" at the potential reaction. "There's a lot of anxiety because people are asking themselves the ‘what if?' questions. What if he backs off or doesn't say the right expressions?"

That seems unfathomable given the unprecedented attention it's been given. The Commons will shut down for the entire day to focus all political attention on speeches by all political parties before native leaders participate in ceremonies in nearby rooms.

Compared to the Chinese head tax or Japanese internment camp apologies, this will elevate grovelling to an art form by a Parliament that has already had plenty of experience pleading for forgiveness on this file.

It's been 10 years since Parliament first heard a government minister apologize for the residential schools debacle. "To those of you who suffered this tragedy at residential schools, we are deeply sorry," said Jane Stewart, Indian Affairs minister in 1998.

The RCMP apologized for its role in the federally funded program in May, 2004.

The United Church of Canada weighed in as well, describing the students as "victims of evil acts that cannot under any circumstances be justified or excused."

The federal government apologized in every manner possible to some B.C. First Nations in 2000.

Finally, last year the House of Commons voted unanimously to apologize for the federal role in establishing and funding the schools.

And yet, Wednesday's televised ceremonies will be doomed to disappoint in some quarters.

Ted Quewezance of the National Residential School Survivors Society, for example, insists the government describe the students as "kidnapped" and "imprisoned" while being "beaten, humiliated, starved, introduced to contagious diseases like tuberculosis and sexually abused." Sorry, that's not expected to happen.

There's also (always) the demand for more money. "The Settlement Agreement does not compensate the pain and suffering, but it is only a small token to acknowledge this travesty," Mr. Quewezance says.

At $2-billion-plus, that's some "token." And that doesn't include the $60-million to launch a five-year search for tragic recollections by the truth and reconciliation commission or the $400-million total for aboriginal healing approved in 1998 and 2005.

There are whispers the Harper Cabinet is sick of saying it's sorry for ancient events and feels if it starts saying it often enough, apologies will be debased to the point there's no compensation liability or political risk attached.

That might explain why the Conservatives unexpectedly supported an official apology for turning away 376 Sikh passengers aboard the steamer Komagata Maru in 1914, pushed through by Liberal MP Ruby Dhalla last month.

One fed-up Liberal MP is quietly musing about proposing a Day of Apology so MPs can rise in the House to seek forgiveness from the victim of their choice.

Polling suggests the public hasn't quite reached the point of being flippant or fed up with the government response to the residential schools tragedy.

But if money doesn't talk and tomorrow's glitzy apology doesn't work, the mood may sour. Sincerity can't be bought, but cynicism can.

National Post
dmartin@nationalpost.com


Rodney A. Clifton: For many aboriginal children, residential schools were a positive experience

........Finally, some aboriginal children had been physically and sexually
abused in their home communities, and residential schools actually saved some of
them from continued abuse.Even though this evidence has been available for some
time, it is obvious that Michael Ignatieff did not consider it before saying:
“Another illusion is that the intentions behind the [residential] schools were
good.”

....In Stringer Hall, for example, I was responsible for 85 senior boys
between the ages of 12 and 21 for 22 hours a day, six days a week. The work was
difficult, even for a strong 21-year-old. Yet today, the reward for former
residential school employees is denigration in the national press by people such
as Mr. Ignatieff — and, more surprisingly, by the churches they served. I pray
that the Commission will hear a variety of perspectives. Unfortunately, I do not
think this will happen because of the hostile climate that now exists.

Few former school employees — both non-aboriginal and aboriginal — will acknowledge that they worked in residential schools, and even fewer will appear before the Commission. They already know that the “truth” has been pre-determined, and that “reconciliation” means financial compensation, which is already being distributed in any event. Few people will praise the residential schools — their administrators, their teachers or their supervisors. Fewer still will dare publicly admit that their residential-school experiences were
positive.

by Rodney A. Clifton