Oral Traditions and Jody Wilson-Raybould
On February 27th, Wilson-Raybould concluded her riveting testimony in a way that no previous senior cabinet minister would have ever done, and a way that signals a milestone in Canadian relations with Indigenous peoples.
“These are the teachings of my parents, my grandparents, and my community. I come from a long line of matriarchs, and I am a truth-teller, in accordance with the laws and traditions of our Big House. This is who I am, and who I will always be.
“Gilakas’la / Thank you.”
Her Indigenous Kwakwaka’wakw culture, from southern BC, had a male chieftaincy. It was a gift culture centred on the potlatch (before our government banned that in 1885 to rip Indigenous social and economic identity up by the roots). The Big House was where the community gathered, where gifts were exchanged, and where decisions effecting the community were made. When Wilson-Raybould refers to a matriarchy, she is referring to an oral tradition in which senior women in the community, such as the chief’s mother or aunts or wife, or other wealthy and respected women, could publicly debate the chief’s words and decisions in the Big House, and through their role as ‘truth-tellers’ change or influence decisions. She is referring to a tradition that viewed the matriarchy as a source of wisdom and a check on arbitrary power or error.
When she spoke ‘her truth’ in Canada’s ‘Big House’ last week, she was performing this role. Her words have been referred to in the media, in our culture, as ‘speaking truth to power.’ But in her accounting of her relationship with Trudeau and his minions, she is looking to her own traditions, and the ability of matriarchs to counsel and advise an errant chief who has forgotten or neglected the laws of his people. A chief can ignore this advice, but does so at his peril once the matter has been discussed in the Big House and it is clear to everyone that his position is not well founded. While Canada’s Parliament is not simply a ‘Big House’, the dynamics in our secondary oral world are similar. We are no longer dependent TV editors or newspaper pundits to know what she told the Justice Committee. In large numbers, we watched it for ourselves.
It is here, now, that the rubber in Canada’s truth and reconciliation process hits the road. No conventional mainstream politician would have put the rule of law ahead of partisan interests in this case, given the electoral risks and an ability to conceal the truth from the public. Only a person who understands Canadian law and history in both its nation-building glory and its errant hypocrisy and blind spots in certain respects could have resisted the temptation to put party above the rule of law.
As Canadians, we all lose from this situation. Few if any of us believe a Conservative government would fail to fall for the same temptation. If it is not an engineering company in one riding, it will be an oil or pipeline company in another. Believing the sanctimonious words of Andrew Scheer is simply setting ourselves up to be deceived again. And unlike the Kwakwaka’wakw we don’t really have a tradition of ‘truth-teller’ in Canada, though social media are increasingly playing that sort of role. Truth-tellers within political parties generally lose everything they have spent their lives working for, and it is only Wilson-Raybould’s Indigenous constituency that protects her from the same fate.
Trudeau can now show that he understands and respects both Canada, and the Truth and Reconciliation process he has wrapped so much of his government’s identity around. He should start by admitting his own wrong-doing, allowing the criminal prosecution of SNC Lavalin to proceed, re-instating Jody Wilson-Raybould as Minister of Justice and Attorney-General, and initiating the legislative process required to separate the Attorney General’s office from cabinet.
If he does not do this or something like it, he will be communicating to all interested parties — from the Chinese government to large Alberta corporations to the Indigenous people — that Canada is only governed by rule of law when it suits the convenience of the political party in power. If there is anything that the Truth and Reconciliation process is intended to change, this is it. And as a nation, we will benefit immeasurably from seeing this process through in both its letter and its spirit. We may not deserve this gift from an Indigenous population we have been too rarely walked with in respect, but as it has been offered, let us take it.
If Trudeau chooses to double-down on his unwise abuse of his authority, the Liberal Party should remove him as leader and hold a leadership convention before the next election, replacing him with someone who is prepared to commit unequivocally to the rule of law and a genuine Truth and Reconciliation process. As Canadians, we deserve no less.
