Indigenous
B.C.’s plan to ‘reconcile’ by giving First Nations a veto on land use
From the MacDonald Laurier Institute
By Bruce Pardy
UNDRIP-inspired land law reforms are poised to turn province into an untenable host for mining, forestry and much more.
We live in strange times. A new generation of political leaders seems determined to cripple their own societies. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, of course, comes to mind. But in Canada, he is not alone. In British Columbia, NDP Premier David Eby is preparing to bring his province to its knees.
The B.C. government plans to share management of Crown land with First Nations. The scheme will apply not to limited sections of public land here and there, but across the province. The government quietly opened public consultations on the proposal last week. According to the scant materials, the government will amend the B.C. Land Act to incorporate agreements with Indigenous governing bodies.
These agreements will empower B.C.’s hundreds of First Nations to make joint decisions with the minister responsible for the Land Act, the main law under which the provincial government grants leases, licences, permits and rights-of-way over Crown land. That means that First Nations will have a veto over how most of B.C. is used. Joint management can be expected to apply to mining, hydro projects, farming, forestry, docks and communication towers, just to start. Activities at the heart of B.C.’s economy will be at risk.
In 2007, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). UNDRIP states, among other things, that Indigenous people own the land and resources of the countries in which they live. They have “the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired … to own, use, develop and control.”
At the time, Canada sensibly voted “no,” along with the United States, Australia and New Zealand. Eleven countries abstained. In 2016, Trudeau’s government reversed Canada’s objection.
As a General Assembly declaration, UNDRIP is not binding in international law nor enforceable in domestic courts. But in 2019, under the leadership of Eby’s predecessor John Horgan, the B.C. legislature passed Bill 41, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. The act requires the government of B.C. to “take all measures necessary to ensure the laws of British Columbia are consistent with the Declaration.” Eby’s joint management plan is the next step in this project.
Long before UNDRIP, the Supreme Court of Canada created a constitutional “duty to consult” with Aboriginal peoples. The court said that the “honour of the Crown” governs the relationship between the government and Aboriginal people. The Crown’s fiduciary duties include a duty to consult whenever proposed action may adversely affect established or asserted Aboriginal rights under Section 35 of the Constitution. This duty is notoriously uncertain, onerous and time-consuming. It has become an albatross around the neck of the Canadian resource industry. The courts seem unable to specify what the duty to consult requires, except after the fact.
Now, the B.C. government aims to make things even more unpredictable. Whatever the contours of the right to be consulted, the Supreme Court at least has been clear that it does not constitute a veto. Eby will create one.
Shortly before the B.C. legislature passed Bill 41 in November 2019, the Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia sponsored an Aboriginal Law Conference featuring several Indigenous proponents of the bill. They promised that the new law would render the province unrecognizable.
It will “set up a whole new norm,“ “give teeth to (UNDRIP),” and move the province away, if “not fully,” from the Westminster model of governance. The veto to be conferred on Indigenous interest groups, they said, will mean that “consent will not be given very often, if at all.”
“We’re not talking small changes; we’re talking big changes,” one speaker suggested, adding that money provided by the government so far hasn’t been enough.
“Compensation for sacred sites, for lands taken, for relocation … it’s going to be an overwhelming number of compensation claims … and so I’m hoping that the province is ready for that…. Life (in B.C.) can and will change.”
For many, it is likely to change for the worse. B.C. could become an untenable host for land-based, resource-related enterprise. Impenetrable layers of red tape would entangle applications for leases and licenses. The price for First Nations approvals could be an increasing share of royalties and kickbacks, without which consent will be refused. Both governments and First Nations will siphon an ever-larger piece of a shrinking pie.
The government’s timeline is short. Written submissions will be accepted until the end of March, and anyone giving feedback will be limited by how little information the B.C. government has offered in the consultation. Bureaucrats will begin drafting amendments to the Land Act in early February, and the government plans to introduce a bill in April or May.
If you are feeling grateful not to live in B.C., don’t count your chickens. In 2021, Parliament passed its own version of B.C.’s Bill 41, the federal United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. It requires the federal government to “take all measures necessary to ensure that the laws of Canada are consistent with the Declaration.” An action plan outlining more than 100 specific measures was released in 2023.
In a speech to the B.C. Business Council in 2016, I argued that our leaders could not do a better job of preventing Canadian business from succeeding in the global economy. I underestimated them. Their determination and ingenuity know no bounds.
Bruce Pardy is executive director of Rights Probe, professor of law at Queen’s University, and senior fellow with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.
Frontier Centre for Public Policy
False Claims, Real Consequences: The ICC Referrals That Damaged Canada’s Reputation
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Nina Green
The University of Manitoba has not provided the name of a single Indian residential school student who went missing and whose parents did not know at the time what had happened to their child. Not one.
Why has Canada twice been referred to the International Criminal Court on the basis of false claims about Indian residential schools?
The answer is simple.
The ultimate cause is the University of Manitoba’s National Student Memorial which falsely claims that it is a list of students who died on the premises of Indian residential schools and students who went missing from Indian residential schools. The University of Manitoba site tells users to:
Click on a region below to see a list of residential schools. Each residential school page contains a list of students who died or went missing at that school.
Those claims by the University of Manitoba are not true.
Firstly, the majority of the 4139 students currently on the University of Manitoba’s Student Memorial Register did not die on the premises of an Indian residential school. Most died elsewhere, as established by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report entitled Missing Children and Unmarked Burials, which is in Table 4. Location of residential school deaths, 1867–2000 on page 21 states that only 423 named students died on the premises of an Indian residential school over the course of 133 years, an average of 3 students a year.
Thus, the majority of students did not die on the premises of Indian residential schools. They died elsewhere – in public hospitals or of illness or accidents on their home reserves, accidents which included house fires, drownings, gunshot wounds, vehicle accidents, falling trees, being hit by trains, and other accidental deaths, as established in hundreds of provincial death certificates.
Secondly, none of the students on the University of Manitoba’s lists went missing from an Indian residential school. To date, the University of Manitoba has not provided the name of a single Indian residential school student who went missing and whose parents did not know at the time what had happened to their child. Not one. And far from being ‘missing’, in fact hundreds of provincial death certificates establish that the students were buried on their home reserves by their families and communities.
Based on the University of Manitoba’s misleading lists, the media and the federal government uncritically accepted the false claim by the Kamloops Band on 27 May 2021 that the Band had discovered ‘the remains of 215 children’. After three years, the Band downgraded that false claim on 18 May 2024 to the claim that it had merely discovered ‘215 anomalies’, which could be anything, and are almost certainly the remains of the 2000 linear feet of trenches of a septic field installed in 1924 to dispose of the school’s sewage.
The first referral to the International Criminal Court by a group of 22 lawyers
Only a few days after the Kamloops Band made its false claim, on 3 June 2021 a group of 22 lawyers sent a 14-page complaint to the ICC requesting the Prosecutor to initiate an investigation of a ‘mass grave’ of Indian residential school students which had been discovered at Kamloops. The claim by the 22 lawyers that a ‘mass grave’ had been discovered at Kamloops was, of course, false.
The International Criminal Court quickly declined jurisdiction in November 2021, and on 13 September 2022 Dr Chile Eboe-Osuji, former President and Judge of the International Criminal Court, informed Special Interlocutor Kimberly Murray and those present at her National Gathering in Edmonton of the reasons for doing so. As reported by Chief Derek Nepinak, Dr Eboe-Osuji stated unequivocally that:
There is no pathway to the International Criminal Court for the situation of the historical Indian residential school system in Canada.
Dr Eboe-Osuji’s presentation has never been made available on the Special Interlocutor’s website, and requests to both Kimberly Murray and Dr Eboe-Osuji for a copy of his presentation have gone unanswered.
The second referral to the International Criminal Court by Special Interlocutor Kimberly Murray
Undeterred by the ICC’s refusal to accept jurisdiction and the reasons offered by Dr Eboe-Osuji in his presentation to her 13 September 2022 National Gathering, Kimberly Murray pursued the issue based on the University of Manitoba’s lists falsely claiming that all the students on its lists died on the premises of specific Indian residential schools or went missing from those schools.
On 29 October 2024, Kimberly Murray delivered her final report to Minister of Justice Arif Virani. However, as she told the Senate Standing Committee on Indigenous Peoples on 27 November 2024, Kimberly Murray also sent her report to the International Criminal Court, requesting Canada’s prosecution by the Court.
How the ICC will react to Kimberly Murray’s referral of Canada for prosecution is as yet unknown.
Damage to Canada’s international reputation
Canada’s reputation has been irreparably damaged by these two referrals to the International Criminal Court based on the University of Manitoba’s National Student Memorial which falsely claims that it is a list of students who died on the premises of specific residential schools or went missing from those specific schools.
It cannot be reiterated often enough:
(1) that most students whose names are on the University of Manitoba’s National Student Memorial did not die on the premises of a residential school;
(2) that most students on the University of Manitoba’s National Student Memorial died in public hospitals or of illness and accidents on their home reserves;
(3) that the University of Manitoba has never provided the name of a single student who ever went missing from an Indian residential school whose parents didn’t know what happened to their child; and
(4) that the majority of students whose names are on the University of Manitoba’s National Student Memorial were buried by their families and communities on their home reserves. Over time, their families and communities have forgotten them, and through neglect of the grave markers, no longer know where in their reserve cemeteries they are buried.
The University of Manitoba’s National Student Memorial has misled Canadians and has resulted in two referrals of Canada for prosecution by the International Criminal Court based on false claims about ‘mass graves’ and ‘missing’ and ‘disappeared’ Indian residential school students.
The federal government and the Catholic Church must demand that the University of Manitoba take down its false and misleading National Student Memorial.
Nina Green is an independent researcher who lives in British Columbia.
Indigenous
Trudeau cabinet adviser says residential school grave skepticism is ‘hate’ speech
From LifeSiteNews
Special Interlocutor for Missing Children and Unmarked Graves Kimberly Murray believes there are mass graves despite unfounded claims of secret burials and deaths of Indigenous children.
An adviser to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s cabinet said that even though there is skepticism toward unfounded claims of “deaths and secret burials” of Indigenous children at residential schools, deliberate deceptions of the graves should be considered “hate” speech.
The comments were made by independent Special Interlocutor for Missing Children and Unmarked Graves Kimberly Murray at a recent Senate Indigenous Peoples committee meeting. She said it is “one thing to say you don’t believe there are burials,” and it is “your opinion and you can have freedom of speech to say that.”
However, Murray then said that when a person says “there are no burials, that First Nations people or the Indians are lying because they want you to go burn down churches or they want to take away your cottages,” this is “inciting hate against Indigenous people.”
“That’s the type of speech we need to stop,” she added.
The reality is that Canada’s Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations confirmed it spent millions searching for “unmarked graves” at a now-closed residential school, but the search has turned up no human remains.
As reported by LifeSiteNews in August, Trudeau’s cabinet will expand a multimillion-dollar fund geared toward documenting thus far unfounded claims that hundreds of young children died and were clandestinely buried at now-closed residential schools, some of them run by the Catholic Church.
Murray, who said she thinks there are mass graves at residential schools, claimed that those fully denying graves exist are somehow inciting “hate speech” that she said is “not protected by the Charter and it is getting worse in the country.”
“We need to ensure survivors and communities are safe. We need to send a clear message to Canadians that it is not OK to incite this kind of hate,” she said.
“When the children died, government and church officials did not return the children home for burial …They were buried in cemeteries at the institutions, often in unmarked and mass graves which were sometimes dug by the other children.”
In October, retired Manitoba judge Brian Giesbrecht said Canadians are being “deliberately deceived by their own government” after blasting the Trudeau government for “actively pursuing” a policy that blames the Catholic Church for the unfounded “deaths and secret burials” of Indigenous children.
“The indigenous leadership has exploited an obviously false claim — pocketing a mountain of tax dollars, while our moribund mainstream media sits in silence,” the judge said.
Giesbrecht was vocal about criticizing the claims made by the legacy media and the Trudeau government that the Catholic Church is complicit in the deaths of thousands of Indigenous Canadians who attended government-mandated residential schools.
As a result of the claims, since the spring of 2021, 112 churches, most of them Catholic, many of them on indigenous lands that serve the local population, have been burned to the ground, vandalized, or defiled in Canada.
The church burnings started in 2021 after the mainstream media and the federal government ran with inflammatory and dubious claims that hundreds of children were buried and disregarded by Catholic priests and nuns who ran some of the now-closed residential schools.
Giesbrecht observed that the reality is that historical records “clearly show” that “the children who died of disease or accident while attending residential school were all given Christian burials, with their deaths properly recorded.”
Despite the attacks on Canadian churches, Leah Gazan, a backbencher MP from the New Democratic Party, brought forth a bill earlier this year that seeks to criminalize the denial of the unproven claim that the residential school system once operating in Canada was a “genocide.”
Canadian indigenous residential schools, run by the Catholic Church and other Christian groups, were set up by the federal government and were open from the late 19th century until 1996.
While there were indeed some Catholics who committed serious abuses against native children, the unproved “mass graves” narrative has led to widespread anti-Catholic sentiment since 2021.
Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) MP Jamil Jivani urged support from his political opponents for a bill that would give stiffer penalties to arsonists caught burning churches down, saying the recent rash of destruction is a “very serious issue” that is a direct “attack” on families as well as “religious freedom in Canada.”
-
Alberta1 day ago
Proposed $70 billion AI data centre in MD of Greenview could launch an incredible new chapter for western Canadian energy
-
Business2 days ago
Massive growth in federal workforce contributes to Ottawa’s red ink
-
Alberta21 hours ago
Your towing rights! AMA unveils measures to help fight predatory towing
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy2 days ago
False Claims, Real Consequences: The ICC Referrals That Damaged Canada’s Reputation
-
National2 days ago
When’s the election? Singh finally commits. Poilievre asks Governor General to step in
-
COVID-192 days ago
Former Trudeau minister faces censure for ‘deliberately lying’ about Emergencies Act invocation
-
Alberta13 hours ago
Ford and Trudeau are playing checkers. Trump and Smith are playing chess
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
Party Leaders Exposed For ‘Lying’ About Biden Health