Fontaine Recaptures AFN Helm

Coon Come bounced after first ballot

By Len Kruzenga

Edmonton Ab—Moments after conceding his defeat at Matthew Coon Come’s hands after the third ballot at the AFN election in Ottawa in 2000, an exhausted and visibly shaken Phil Fontaine warned the chiefs, who had rejected his record of accomplishments at the AFN helm the previous three years, that confrontation with the federal government, and by extension, Canada at large, would be fraught with peril and ultimate disappointment for the aspirations of first nations peoples.

Three years later as he regained the leadership after his second round defeat of Roberta Jamieson in Edmonton, it was clear that the chiefs now concede his prognosis then had been right on the mark..

And the stunning first ballot elimination of his chief ideological rival and the man who had orchestrated his defeat in Ottawa three years ago provided the first sign that the prodigal chiefs who had abandoned his political camp had returned, and returned in force.

After the first ballot results were announced Fontaine had already marshalled the support of 292 (51.per cent) of the record 557 chiefs or their proxies that had registered at this year's assembly, while Coon Come only managed to attract a dismal 105 votes (18. per cent). Six Nations Chief Roberta Jamieson stunned many chiefs and onlookers alike securing 167 votes (31 per cent), and set the stage for a second ballot showdown with Fontaine.

While Jamieson’s supporters were buoyed by the results and by Coon Come’s very clear demonstration that his support would be thrown behind the Six Nations’ chief, Fontaine’s camp knew they only needed to secure a small portion of the soft Coon Come vote and maintain their first ballot support to secure the 60 per cent threshold required to win the race.

And his supporters were quick to point out to the chiefs that a Fontaine victory would also guarantee a smooth transition period. As a former AFN leader with an experienced political team it was widely perceived he could hit the ground running almost immediately--an important consideration given the fact that the federal government’s first nations suite of legislation is still waiting in Parliament

That and other suasive arguments were successful, as Fontaine’s team delivered the remaining votes needed to secure his triumphant return to Ottawa.

While Jamieson’s strong showing confirmed her strong political acumen and the savvy of her campaign team, her inability to attract the majority of Coon Come’s support, and potentially force a third ballotm cut her challenge short.

Yet the chiefs’ level of support for a female candidate sent a clear message that that the once thought of “old boys club” is beginning to act a little more progressively.

After being eliminated in the first ballot Coon Come, stung by his humiliating defeat, escalated his ongoing attack on Fontaine by telling chiefs that a victory by the Manitoba born leader would mark a return to “hopelessness and dependency,” an assessment that only served to stir up the political arm twisting efforts of Fontaine’s key campaign strategists and allies.

Coon Come’s remarks, like much of his campaign rhetoric, took many observers and chiefs by surprise for its negative tack that attempted to paint Fontaine as a willing supporter of the First Nations Governance Act and scarcely more than a government dupe.

In campaign ads for Coon Come that appeared in native newspapers across the country Fontaine’s integrity was openly attacked.

But observers say Coon Come’s failure to deliver any significant agreements with any level of government forced many of the chiefs who had originally supported his election bid in 2000 to return to the Fontaine camp.

“Matthew promised then that he was a skilled negotiator and not just a protest oriented person but in the last three years he hasn’t negotiated anything other than forcing the AFN right off the political map in Ottawa,” said Cree Nation member Daniel Moose.

“He was outmaneuvered repeatedly by the federal government and Nault and by groups within the AFN who tried to impede his effectiveness.”

The last point was one Coon Come admitted during a Manitoba stop in his campaign when he revealed his personal frustration over the level of infighting within the AFN at the executive level, telling reporters that the situation within the organization was effectively “cannibalistic.”

Indeed supporters within Coon Come’s own campaign team have admitted that the former Quebec Cree Grand Chief had been frustrated by the level of opposition he faced on a daily basis from chiefs within the AFN.

“The powerful chiefs within the AFN made life difficult for Matthew. Every time he tried to portray an image of unity or consensus on an issue you had regional chiefs appearing on TV or radio openly contradicting him,” said the source, who requested anonymity. “The FNGA was a good example really because Mathew had set up a team that was meeting with the government on the proposed governance initiative and on the shape of the consultation process, but the confederacy wouldn’t let him lead and forced the whole AFN team to withdraw from the process.

“The next thing you know the AFN comes out saying it is against the whole thing even before one actual clause in the legislation had even been written. It damaged the AFN’s credibility and more importantly it damaged the credibility of the national chief’s position with the federal government and with the rest of Canada,” added Coon Come team insider.

Ands it was a theme seized on by Fontaine during his campaign when he repeatedly called the actions of the organization and its leader “schizophrenic and unfocused.”

It was an accusation that Fontaine’s campaign team was able to make stick as Coon Come was continually forced to fended off such criticisms in the press and with AFN chiefs.

“There’s no doubt that Matthew was on the defensive and didn’t have a record of real achievement to produce to deflect criticism of his leadership style,” said the source.

During his victory speech Fontaine quickly acted to send a message to those chiefs concerned he wasn’t tough enough.

“To the government of Canada I say we may be at each other’s throats sometimes, and we may be in agreement on first nations issues, but I can assure you that we will always be here.

And he told the enthusiastic delegates that first nations categorically reject any unilateral imposition of legislation.

“We must have a seat at the table at all tables of discussion that involve or potentially involve our rights, that present opportunities to first nations and that effect our communities and our future.

“We will take our rightful seat at these tables.