Discrimination and COVID-19: Why did Saskatchewan Lockdown the North?
Photo Credit: (Regina Leadership Post / Google Images)
Written by: Jessi Gilchrist
In many ways, Saskatchewan’s experience of COVID-19 has been unique. While cases soared in cities across the country, they remained relatively low in Saskatchewan’s two major cities. The number of cases in Saskatoon and Regina would suggest that Saskatchewan has been relatively successful in mitigating the spread of COVID-19. Yet, per capita, Saskatchewan is currently the fourth leading province with the highest rate of cases in Canada – following Quebec, Ontario, and Alberta.
As cases rose in urban centres across Canada, it was Saskatchewan’s rural communities that were hit the hardest. Beginning in mid-April, cases began to rise in Indigenous communities in the North. Two months later, cases spiked in Hutterite communities across the south. Both of these outbreaks share a number of commonalities: they occurred in rural and isolated communities that each rely on larger neighboring centres for their means of subsistence. Despite their similar characteristics, the outbreaks in these communities have been met with surprisingly different public policy responses. Saskatchewan’s response to COVID-19 provides us with yet another example that while COVID-19 does not discriminate, governments and societies do.
The Saskatchewan government took a far more heavy-handed approach in response to outbreaks in the North than to those in the south. The 2016 Census indicates that more than 85 per cent of residents living in the North Saskatchewan Administration District (NSAD) identify as Indigenous. This region is home to the highest concentration of Indigenous peoples per capita in the province. When cases spiked in mid-April to affect less than 0.5 per cent of the NSAD population, the Saskatchewan government unilaterally intervened to lockdown the North. But when outbreaks began to rip through Hutterite communities across the province, infecting nearly 10 per cent of the total Hutterite population, the Saskatchewan government responded with dialogue, collaboration, and community-based approaches. The difference between these public policy approaches had little to do with the numbers.
In many ways, the Indigenous communities in Northern Saskatchewan did everything right. Nearly two months before the government intervened, Indigenous organizations across the North coordinated efforts to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. The Northern Inter-Tribal Health Authority (NITHA), a one-of-its-kind collaborative health initiative among 33 Indigenous communities that provides culturally informed health services, released its Pandemic Plan on March 9. The North West Communities Incident Command Centre (NWCICC) built upon this work and formed a collaborative initiative between the people of Treaty Ten, Treaty Eight, and Treaty Six, specifically designed to coordinate responses to COVID-19 between Indigenous communities and the government.
Communities even set up their own checkpoints along the only highway that stretches into the far north, highway 155, to contain the spread of COVID-19. The NITHA, the NWCICC, and Indigenous communities across the North took proactive action that focused on prevention and containment, because, as Commander of the NWCICC Rick Laliberte put it, “self-isolation is almost too late.” But the Saskatchewan government was not interested in working with Indigenous-led organizations.
As cases began to rise in the North in mid-April, the Government of Saskatchewan invoked emergency measures to surveil the movement and health of Indigenous peoples. Similar to the Canada-wide Quarantine Act (2005) that restricts travel in and out of Canada, Saskatchewan’s Public Health Act (1994) aims to protect the health of the people of Saskatchewan “by any means.” But in doing so, it waives an array of rights that would normally be protected under the Constitution. It gives the state a whole host of powers such as the right to restrict travel, to require individuals to disclose private information, and to subject suspect individuals and their property to a search. Nowhere other than the NSAD region has the Public Health Act been implemented to its full force.
On April 24, the Saskatchewan government released a unilateral Public Health Order that restricted travel to, out of, and within the NSAD region. Conservation officers armed with guns and tasers replaced the peaceful community members on the highway checkpoints. The Public Health Order limited residents to selecting one member of a household to go grocery shopping in the closest community once a week – regardless of whether that community’s shelves were stocked. A joint statement by the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations, the Meadow Lake Tribal Council, and the Métis Nation reveals that not only were Indigenous leaders “not consulted despite what the Provincial Health Order states,” but that Indigenous people have faced discrimination, intimidation, and aggressive treatment at these checkpoints. Instead of collaborating with Indigenous leaders and organizations in the North, the Saskatchewan government opted to detain them in their communities to “protect the health” of the “people of Saskatchewan.”
In Saskatchewan’s Hutterite communities, a very different situation unfolded. Beginning in March, the Hutterian Safety Council (HSC) formed a COVID-19 Task-Force and sent out loose guidelines to colonies across the prairies. To this day, the HSC guidelines still indicate that “it is not clear there is any significant benefit to wearing a mask” to prevent the spread of COVID-19. A joint statement made by the HSC and the Saskatchewan Health Authority in June noted that “a small group” within the Hutterite community has “resisted” precautions and in a press conference Premier Scott Moe pointed out that some communities have been unwilling to change communal eating and worshipping practices in accordance with Saskatchewan-wide Public Health Orders.
Despite instances of non-compliance, Hutterite communities were never subject to unilateral government intervention nor the full force of the Public Health Act like Indigenous communities in the North. When cases began to spike in mid-June, the Saskatchewan government made clear its intention to collaborate with Hutterite communities to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. On June 22, 2020, the Saskatchewan Health Authority and the HSC released a joint statement confirming their collaborative effort to “guide Hutterite communities through the COVID-19 pandemic.” The HSC has also released updates on conference calls with the Saskatchewan Health Authority and the Saskatchewan Health Ministry. While the Indigenous experience was characterized by unilateral government action, forced quarantine, and discrimination, the Hutterite experience was characterized by meaningful dialogue, collaboration, and community-based solutions.
It is clear that Saskatchewan’s Hutterite communities took considerably fewer precautions than Indigenous communities in the North – they did not propose a comprehensive pandemic plan to the government, there were no coordinated regional efforts, and no community mandated check-points. To recognize this difference is not to place blame on Hutterite communities. This situation is unprecedented. But it is to demonstrate that unilateral government intervention had little to do with the competency of the community in question to form and implement procedures designed to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
So, what did inform Saskatchewan’s pandemic policies?
The experience of COVID-19 in Indigenous communities versus Hutterite communities brings to the fore the colonial tropes that continue to inform Saskatchewan’s public policy. The perceived public health threat of particular bodies, the economic value of particular communities, and the government’s faith in these communities to self-regulate are deeply intertwined with the government’s decision to pursue unilateral action. Saskatchewan’s response to the pandemic is rooted in long-standing prejudices and colonial assumptions.
Within the colonial imagination, white bodies are healthy, economically productive, and self-regulating. The joint statement by the government and HSC recognizes that “Hutterite Communities are an integral part of the local food network and economy” and justifies episodes of non-compliance on the basis that some community members feared that it would “lead to an economic shutdown of their communities.” Further justifying this logic, author of I am Hutterite, Mary-Ann Kirkby states “forgive us for adding texture and colour to your universe, but we also contribute 3.5 billion dollars to the annual economy of Western Canada.” By this logic, the contribution of Hutterite colonies to the provincial economy gives these communities the right to self-monitor, self-regulate, and negotiate with the provincial government over COVID-19 regulations.
The lockdown of the North reveals a very different set of assumptions. The use of unilateral action brings to light deeply ingrained colonial views that the state has the right to control Indigenous bodies. The logic that Indigenous peoples do not productively work the land has been used to justify the colonial project since its beginning. Unlike Hutterites, Indigenous communities are not viewed as economically valuable – shutting down the North would have few economic ramifications. Even more problematic, the government’s decision-making reveals that an Indigenous body with COVID-19 is perceived as a more “serious public health threat” than a white body with COVID-19. It is clear that these colonial tropes informed the Saskatchewan government’s move to monitor, surveil, and restrict the movement of Indigenous bodies in the North.
COVID-19 also brings to light long-term colonial legacies affecting the North. It is well known that access to healthcare has been an issue for decades, making these communities even more vulnerable to overloaded healthcare facilities as cases spike. Many of these communities also lack basic infrastructure such as clean drinking water and affordable groceries. The lockdown disproportionately impacts a population that already suffers from government neglect.
The NWCICC sent a Pandemic Response Plan to the federal government highlighting these unique vulnerabilities. In response to the NWCICC’s proposal detailing a budget of $10.3 million to address access to healthcare, rising food insecurity, and funding for regional health organizations, the federal government announced on May 13, 2020 that it would offer $2.3 million. To put this in perspective, the federal government has also offered $18.2 million in emergency funding to the National Arts Centre to “ensure continuity of its operations.” While the North has been subject to more severe public health measures than anywhere else in the province, the government has refused to provide it with the resources necessary to address COVID-19.
This comparison between Indigenous communities in the North and Hutterite communities in the south is not to say that the government’s response should have been identical. These communities are different and public policy should respond to the uniqueness of each situation. But comparing the government’s policy towards Indigenous communities versus Hutterite communities shows us that the differences in Saskatchewan’s policymaking were not grounded in evidence-based decision-making. The decision of the Saskatchewan government to unilaterally quarantine the North was not based on the degree of community-preparation, the level of compliance, or even the infection rate. It was based on colonial legacies that continue to inform public policy across Canada – that Indigenous bodies are a threat that need to be controlled by the state.
Unfortunately, Premier Scott Moe was wrong when he said “discrimination has no place in Saskatchewan.” It has been at the very centre of Saskatchewan’s response to COVID-19.
More Articles
