What kind of abuse at residential schools? (News in Brief: Canada).

Ottawa--Claims of native abuse at residential schools during the twentieth century have still not been resolved. In November 2002, the federal government and the Anglican Church of Canada reached a settlement whereby the government will pay 70% of all validated claims of physical and sexual abuse. The Anglicans will shoulder the remaining 30% with a cap of $25 million.

The government's rationale for settling is the use of out-of-court adjudication. It is swifter and less stressful on the plaintiffs. It also eases the logjam in the judicial system. Before the Anglican deal was made public, the United and Presbyterian churches which also conducted some schools were informed, but the Catholics were not.

While Protestants have national churches, Catholics do not. There is no national Catholic Church of Canada. There are only dioceses, religious orders and institutions. These are legally and canonically autonomous from one another. This apparently confuses the government in dealing with Catholics who are involved in 73% of all claims.

Aside from this issue, what has never been resolved or even adequately discussed is just how many of the 12,000 natives suing the residential schools, are doing so for sexual abuse, or for physical abuse, or for cultural/linguistic reasons. Native children were taken from their communities and then forbidden to speak their own languages at the schools. This policy was devised by the federal government in order to prepare them for integration into the larger Canadian society.

So far, there has been no legal precedent to compensate for the cultural/ linguistic loss and in fact, the government has not, as yet, even considered any such claims. But the loss of language and culture rank much more highly in the priorities of native leaders than in those of the federal government.

Ken Young, vice-chief of the Assembly of First Nations, said in a letter to Ralph Goodale, the federal minister in charge of the issue: "Providing a resolution model that deals only with physical and sexual abuse cases as the sole legal solution. . .is totally unsatisfactory."

Matthew Coon-Come, former National Assembly chief was heard in a CBC radio interview on November 20, 2002, to say that the Federal/Anglican agreement was objectionable because it left out the cultural aspect. This aspect he said, was the principal harm inflicted in 90% of the cases (N.Post; Toronto Star; CBC).

Yet all this time, we have been told that the issue was sexual abuse, or at least physical abuse; now it seems to be mostly cultural.