Picking up on Anna’s blog, I’ll add my thoughts on today’s plenary, Global Decision Making: Moving Margins to the Centre. The presentations reflected the diversity of panelists, from a Google Head of Community Affairs who ran in the Vermont gubernatorial race to a World Bank representative focusing on innovation.
I was pleased with most but not all presentations, which ranged from predictable to surprising. The presence of Ghislain Picard, Chief of the Assembly of First Nations for Quebec and Labrador was necessary but the scope of the issues raised fell beyond the limitations of the panel. On participation – and by extension migration from the margins – Mr. Picard stressed Art. 32 (2) of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples:
States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples […] to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories […].
While the panelists responded from their own perspectives, and I realize the time constraints, I would have appreciated listening to the panelists talk more to each other, not only to us.
For example, after Mr. Picard’s intervention, Mr. Šimonović from the OHCHR was quick to mention involvement of indigenous peoples at the UN. It’s fine to talk of inclusiveness, but it’s equally important to push for action to improve lives. In this respect, actions are either lacking or are ineffective. So while the UN listens to indigenous people – the UN Special Rapporteur was critical of the Canadian government in his report – it’s clear that indigenous people in Canada will continue to be marginalized as long as the government discriminates against them.
For the UN to listen and criticize is not enough. Clearly, the government doesn’t care; Art. 32 is meaningless. The others on the panel, however, could have offered solutions, and that’s when it gets interesting.
When I talk of exchange between the panelists, I am suggesting all actors can consciously and creatively search for opportunities of convergence where none existed before. Mr. Tujan’s experience from BetterAid could certainly help CSOs through set of principles that would improve their efforts to promote the rights of marginalized populations. Mr. Walji’s World Bank Innovation Team could probably map (with Google) health problems in relation to resource extraction in indigenous communities.
As a member of the audience, I want to leave a presentation thinking, “I learned something new, I’ve changed the way I’m thinking, I’m going to try something different.” The convergence of ideas is an added value that CSOs have to catalyze the migration of the marginalized to the centre. There are too many opportunities to ignore. It’s not something that applies only to plenary presentations, but it’s just as valid in our small group discussions; we need to leave knowing things will be different.
