To what extent is it wise, as journalists and as vice-Prime Ministers, to add oil to “heated” conflicts, just to score a political point about “systemic racism”, even if it at the expense of the sad NS fisheries dispute?

In a Global News article entitled “Systemic racism ‘runs very deep in Canada’”, Ms. Chrystia Freeland said the latter “when asked about the dispute over Mi’kmaq fishing rights in Nova Scotia”:

Even if that was 100 percent true (not just by criminals who committed arson of fire in the fishery plant and van but by every family member of every fisher of every NS town/village), the words seem unwise, even if they may be courageous, because they are not put into context and they are tempered in any way whatsoever.

Bambi will rise above this conflict that she is not an expert of anyhow, to just bring some perspective from a second life she had in one of the most boiling regions of the world, much more than the province of Nova Scotia for sure…

Lebanese political leaders, as disconnected from the population or as corrupt as they can be, at least ALL have the wisdom of calming things down. Even militia organizations despised by the majority have discipline and common sense when needed to stop abuses (and abuses there are constantly, and especially now).

In Bambi’s non-expert citizen’s opinion, Ms. Freeland should have explained to the population, through the question of the journalist, what is at stake in this conflict, out of respect for both Indigenous and other fishermen.

What is the main blocking point in the dispute? Why are we there and why have we been in this double bind Marshall judicial decision of 1999?

Why can’t we be at a different place, like for example our government helping the indigenous company in starting a business (as a start-up), providing a loan, etc. ?

Why don’t these indigenous fishermen work in the other industry or the other fishermen one day in their industry?

Why should we have an apartheid of fishing rules, in honouring not just peace and friendly treaties, but also common sense in our country?

Bambi is not an expert of fishing, even if she grew up by the Mediterranean sea and is a proud Atlantic Canadian. She just knows that people get angry when they see double standard in life (even when it is in the spirit of reconciliation, as Ms. Freeland said very well, thank you).

Is it normal to have one group fishing all year and the other only during legal season? Even in the name of “moderate livelihood” (even without a clear definition of the latter)?

By the way, why can’t Mi’kmaq lobster fishers fish MORE than moderate livelihood? Why can’t they become owners of successful and rich businesses down the road in 2, 5, 10 or 50 years from now?

In Bambi’s non-expert opinion, the above could be done whilst having the same rule about fishing seasons for all, for equity and democracy in our country.

Bambi will keep saying the same, even if a group of Lebanese-Canadians (former Phenicians) decide to begin a lobster business.

She is convinced of this. This is democracy 101. She will allow herself to borrow the words of a great natural psychologist (hello Gladson, Dear brother-in-law or rather brother 😊). He said many years ago about Lebanon during her visit there: “Lebanon always loses when one group takes control over the others, regardless of the group”. He meant group in power or interest group. Bambi thinks that the same logic would be a voice of wisdom in any country, including us in Canada.

This being said, she hopes from the bottom of her heart that the dispute will end. No one will be injured. Everyone will be fishing, eating, selling, and earning a living. When the pandemic will end, she hopes they will all celebrate lobster festivals together and we will eat their delicious products (same product of our same Dear Atlantic ocean!)!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *