Meanwhile, out in the communities, unprecedentednumbers of people, inspired by the rhetoric of a decade of constitutionaldebate, the Royal Commission recommendations, and the vague promise ofrights and benefits, were seeking ways to affirm and develop their Métisidentity and heritage.  Frustrated by the indifference or outrightrejection of existing Métis organizations, they have formed andare forming their own formal and informal groups at local, regional, provincialand even national levels.

 The snapshot of Métis organizationsin Canada today is not a pretty picture.  Since the constitutionalaffirmation of Métis in 1982, a single national representative Métisorganization with its 12 provincial and territorial affiliates has balkanizedinto dozens -- if not scores -- of local, regional and national Métisorganizations. As indicated earlier, some of these new groups are splintergroups from previously existing organizations and still others have developedindependently across the country out of a variety of both valid and, frommy perspective, completely hairbrained ideas.

From the point of view of those whohold there is strength in numbers, and power in unity, the situation wouldappear to be a complete disaster.  Since I, personally, hold the thatview that the capacity of Métis culture to survive depends moreon diversity than on monolithic conformity, I see more than a few silverlinings in the otherwise darkening clouds. 

To the extent that the existing multiplicityof Métis groups is the result of a greed-driven aspirations forgovernment funding, special benefits and advantages, the current situationis indeed bleak.  To the extent these groups are the results of powerstruggles and/or competing egos of inept politicians, we can only hangour heads in shame. To the extent these groups are a desperate reactionto the exclusionary policies of existing self-serving cliqueocracies, wecan only expect the extinction of effective Métis organizations.

But in my own experience I can honestlysay these factors only account for a minority of these organizations --and they know who they are.  It should be understood that even inmany of these organization there is a sharp and growing difference betweenan entrenched self-serving leadership, and more healthy and accommodatingmembership. 

On the other side of the coin, manyof today’s organizations are reflective of a wholly different, and verypositive, set of circumstances.  There are those who are dedicatedto correcting the mistakes of past organizations, and that bodes well forthe survival of Métis organizations.  There are some that springfrom a conviction that the values of our Métis heritage are essentialin a modern world and that promises well for the future of Canada. Many others are launched as a base for the discovery and reaffirmationof almost forgotten, or deliberately repressed Métis family connections. All of these factors seemed lost in our colonial history only a few decadesago, and are now vibrant and growing elements in asserting our modern Métisreality.

Once again, all of this is offered asfood for thought.  I certainly don’t expect everyone to agree withme.  But I do hope it will give some a better understanding of howour Métis organizations got to be where they are.