Poverty Alleviation and Population Inclusiveness Analysis in Canada (Case Study of Indigenous People of Canada)

Abstract

The Indigenous people of Canada are referred to as the First Nation or Aboriginal people of Canada. Their history can be traced as back as AD 100. The Aboriginal people as commonly referred were largely hunters in the early days. There are three categories of indigenous people in Canada: Inuit, Metis, and First Nation. The Inuit primarily inhabit the northern region of Canada, and their hometown is Inuit Nunangat of the Arctic region of Canada. The Metis people are mixed with European and indigenous ancestry and mainly inhabit Canada's Prairie and Ontario regions, with others settling in other parts of Canada. The First Nation people were the original inhabitants of the land that is now Canada, occupying south territories of Arctic Canada.

The early encounters between indigenous people and the European trans-trader explorers were not that great in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. This followed the arrival of the French explorers. The early Europeans who came to Canada established colonies in Canada. Through the technique of assimilation or extinction, the European colonizers attempted to force Aboriginal people to adopt European ways (Jason et al., 2012). The colonization of Aboriginal people by the Europeans came with maltreatment, and forceful conditions like, denial of the right to vote, forcible relocation and confinement of land, and assimilation of Aboriginal kids into non-Aboriginal communities like “residential schools” This early European regime in the Aboriginal communities escalated with a lot of resistance by the Aboriginal people which compounded the social and economic problems of Aboriginal people. With colonization and the European settlement, the traditional indigenous ways of life were forever altered. The colonial practices and policies such as the Indian Act rule of 1878, passed a system, reserve, and residential schools, that sought to control and assimilate indigenous people. These have had ongoing impacts on generations of Indigenous people of Canada. 

Over the years efforts have been made by the government of Canada to reconcile and address these challenges and pains faced by the Aboriginal communities in Canada. In 1985, the government of Canada introduced Bill C-31 to address and amend the Indian Act to conform with gender equality under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom. As part of a lasting effort by the government of Canada to bring recognition to Aboriginal people, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal People was established in 1991. The purpose of this commission is to “investigate” the evolution of relationships among Aboriginal people, the Canadian government, and the society as a whole (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada,1996).

In 2008, the government publicly apologized for the inhuman treatment of children in the Indian Residential schools in indigenous communities which remains a sad chapter in Canadian history. The government of Canada established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in 2008 primarily to promote healing, educate, listen, and make recommendations on the Indian Residential School system experience and legacy (Christian Aboriginal and Infrastructure, 2015)

The government of Canada has injected funds and resources as part of an ongoing reconciliation move to advance education, health, social, and economic programs within the Indigenous (Inuit, Metis, and First Nations) communities across Canada. The government of Canada has committed to improving the economic and social development of Indigenous communities across Canada. We can not discuss “reconciliation” without talking about how well people are fed, possess access, and live in a healthy environment, which connects with a society free of violent discrimination, with tolerable levels of equality, where the sick receive proper medical care and people do not have to sleep on the sidewalks. In short, most of us would insist that the “minimal” requirement for a “developed” nation is that physical quality of life must be high and be so uniform, rather than being restricted to an incongruously affluent minority (Debraj Ray, 1998).

This research, from a socio-economic development point of view, will answer what development means and relate it to performance, finding variables that correlate well with the multifaceted process and results of development inputs from the Government of Canada's poverty alleviation funding and investment programmes between 2008 and 2025, with emphasis on the outcomes of 2020 to 2025. This research will examine the impacts of Canada's government funding and investments in advancing development and alleviating poverty within the indigenous (Inuit, Metis, and First Nations) population, limited to input variables used as my scope. Are there more visible characteristics of economic underdevelopment regarding poverty? Most people would say that the removal of poverty is the fundamental goal of economic development (Debraj Ray, 1998). It is generally accepted that a community or nation is not well off economically and socially until it gets rid of its “poverty.” Let us now go ahead and examine data regarding the poverty alleviation measures and performance within the Indigenous population of Canada