Representations of Indigenous and Settler-Canadian Political Identities in Canadian Speeches from the Throne, 1867-2015.

Agenda setting scholars use speeches from the throne as instances of official state discourse, to investigate the economic, political, and social interests that take priority in government agenda. Throne speeches outline governments’ view of the ‘state of things’, their agenda, and the initiatives governments will pursue to achieve their agenda. Primarily, agenda setting scholars seek to explain changes in agenda by situation them within complex social, political, and historical contexts. While this literature offers valuable insights into the effects external conditions have on government agenda setting, the issue-topic focus neglects any analysis of how group political identities are constructed and negotiated within the discourse. This is important given Canada’s history of denying Indigenous people citizenship and attempts to unilaterally define Indigenous identities through legislation.

In my study I use critical discourse analysis to investigate how Indigenous and non-Indigenous political identities have been constructed in Speeches from the Throne from confederation (1867) to present. I ask, ‘How have these representations been shaped by Canada’s history, and what does this mean for our current contexts of reconciliation and decolonization?’ I find that up to about 1967 Indigenous people are largely excluded from state discourse constructions of citizenship and national identity. Afterward, Indigenous people are brought into the discourse under the auspices of multiculturalism and national unity. This is brought about as a result of declining public trust in government tied to conditions of economic and social uncertainty. Currently Indigenous political identities remain unilaterally constructed mainly in terms of equal participation in the economy. However the economy is predicated on colonial resource extraction and dispossession of Indigenous lands and rights, making these political identities extremely problematic. I argue for the decolonization of state discourses and constructions of political identity as one step in the process of reconciliation.