Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Non-partisan think tank calling for Public Inquiry into “Kamloops Graves Hoax”

Published

5 minute read

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy 

Canada Needs a Public Inquiry into the “Kamloops Graves Hoax”

Call for a public inquiry is a step towards uncovering the truth and ensuring such a national scandal never happens again

WINNIPEG, June 28, 2024 – The Frontier Centre for Public Policy is urgently calling for a public inquiry into what has become known as the “Kamloops Graves Hoax.” The May 27, 2021, claim by the Kamloops Indian Band regarding the discovery of “human remains” in the apple orchard area of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School caused national hysteria and moral panic, both domestically and internationally. However, recent admissions have revealed these claims to be false.

In a press release issued three years after the sensational claims, Chief Roseanne Casimir of the Kamloops Indian Band finally admitted that there were no “human remains,” “bodies,” “graves,” or “mass graves” found at Kamloops. What was initially reported as grave sites turned out to be mere soil anomalies, which could easily be attributed to tree roots, rocks, or remnants of prior excavations. Notably, a 1924 excavation in the same area was likely the source of the detected soil disturbances.

The 2021 claims triggered a wave of national and international reactions, including lowered flags, burned churches, and widespread media coverage. These events also prompted the ailing Pope to visit Canada, led MPs to condemn their own country as genocidal, and resulted in the enactment of costly legislation. The Canadian government allocated millions of dollars towards the search for “missing children,” who, as it turns out, never existed. The entire episode is a blemish on Canada’s history, highlighting the need for a thorough public inquiry.

Chief Casimir stated that the initial claims were based on a ground-penetrating radar (GPR) report prepared by Sarah Beaulieu, a young anthropologist from the University of the Fraser Valley. However, it is widely known that GPR can only detect soil anomalies, not graves or human remains. The actual content of Beaulieu’s report remains undisclosed, as the Kamloops Indian Band has refused to release it despite initially promising to do so. This raises serious questions about the veracity of their claims and the possibility that the band knew the information was false.

The Kamloops Indian Band applied for and received $8,000,000 from the federal government based on their false claims. Neither the band nor the federal government has provided details about the representations made to secure these funds or how the money was spent, especially given that no excavation has taken place.

The refusal of the Kamloops Indian Band to release the GPR report, coupled with the federal government’s silence on the matter, indicates a need for a thorough investigation. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) will not investigate unless requested by the Kamloops Band. This leaves the Canadian public in the dark about how and why millions of taxpayer dollars were spent based on a false premise.

The claims made on May 27, 2021, have caused significant disruption in Canada, damaged the nation’s reputation, and led to misleading narratives being taught in schools. It is crucial to understand how these false claims were propagated and why. A public inquiry is essential to provide clarity and accountability and to restore public trust.

The Frontier Centre for Public Policy calls for this inquiry to ensure transparency and address the grave mistakes that have been made. Canadians deserve to know the truth and to hold accountable those who have misled the nation.

About the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

The Frontier Centre for Public Policy is an independent, non-partisan think tank that conducts research and analysis on a wide range of public policy issues. Committed to promoting economic freedom, individual liberty, and responsible governance, the Centre aims to contribute to informed public debates and shape effective policies that benefit Canadians.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Economy

Support For National Pipelines And LNG Projects Gain Momentum, Even In Quebec

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Joseph Quesnel

Public opinion on pipelines has shifted. Will Ottawa seize the moment for energy security or let politics stall progress?

The ongoing threats posed by U.S. tariffs on the Canadian economy have caused many Canadians to reconsider the need for national oil pipelines and other major resource projects.

The United States is Canada’s most significant trading partner, and the two countries have enjoyed over a century of peaceful commerce and good relations. However, the onset of tariffs and increasingly hostile rhetoric has made Canadians realize they should not be taking these good relations for granted.

Traditional opposition to energy development has given way to a renewed focus on energy security and domestic self-reliance. Over the last decade, Canadian energy producers have sought to build pipelines to move oil from landlocked Alberta to tidewater, aiming to reduce reliance on U.S. markets and expand exports internationally. Canada’s dependence on the U.S. for energy exports has long affected the prices it can obtain.

One province where this shift is becoming evident is Quebec. Historically, Quebec politicians and environmental interests have vehemently opposed oil and gas development. With an abundance of hydroelectric power, imported oil and gas, and little fossil fuel production, the province has had fewer economic incentives to support the industry.

However, recent polling suggests attitudes are changing. A SOM-La Presse poll from late February found that about 60 per cent of Quebec residents support reviving the Energy East pipeline project, while 61 per cent favour restarting the GNL Quebec natural gas pipeline project, a proposed LNG facility near Saguenay that would export liquefied natural gas to global markets. While support for these projects remains stronger in other parts of the country, this represents a substantial shift in Quebec.

Yet, despite this change, Quebec politicians at both the provincial and federal levels remain out of step with public opinion. The Montreal Economic Institute, a non-partisan think tank, has documented this disconnect for years. There are two key reasons for it: Quebec politicians tend to reflect the perspectives of a Montreal-based Laurentian elite rather than broader provincial sentiment, and entrenched interests such as Hydro-Québec benefit from limiting competition under the guise of environmental concerns.

Not only have Quebec politicians misrepresented public opinion, but they have also claimed to speak for the entire province on energy issues. Premier François Legault and Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet have argued that pipeline projects lack “social licence” from Quebecers.

However, the reality is that the federal government does not need any special license to build oil and gas infrastructure that crosses provincial borders. Under the Constitution, only the federal Parliament has jurisdiction over national pipeline and energy projects.

Despite this authority, no federal government has been willing to impose such a project on a province. Quebec’s history of resisting federal intervention makes this a politically delicate issue. There is also a broader electoral consideration: while it is possible to form a federal government without winning Quebec, its many seats make it a crucial battleground. In a bilingual country, a government that claims to speak for all Canadians benefits from having a presence in Quebec.

Ottawa could impose a national pipeline, but it doesn’t have to. New polling data from Quebec and across Canada suggest Canadians increasingly support projects that enhance energy security and reduce reliance on the United States. The federal government needs to stop speaking only to politicians—especially in Quebec—and take its case directly to the people.

With a federal election on the horizon, politicians of all parties should put national pipelines and natural gas projects on the ballot.

Joseph Quesnel is a senior research fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Agriculture

It’s time to end supply management

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Ian Madsen

Ending Canada’s dairy supply management system would lower costs, boost exports, and create greater economic opportunities.

The Trump administration’s trade warfare is not all bad. Aside from spurring overdue interprovincial trade barrier elimination and the removal of obstacles to energy corridors, it has also spotlighted Canada’s dairy supply management system.

The existing marketing board structure is a major hindrance to Canada’s efforts to increase non-U.S. trade and improve its dismal productivity growth rate—crucial to reviving stagnant living standards. Ending it would lower consumer costs, make dairy farming more dynamic, innovative and export-oriented, and create opportunities for overseas trade deals.

Politicians sold supply management to Canadians to ensure affordable milk and dairy products for consumers without costing taxpayers anything—while avoiding unsightly dumping surplus milk or sudden price spikes. While the government has not paid dairy farmers directly, consumers have paid more at the supermarket than their U.S. neighbours for decades.

An October 2023 C.D. Howe Institute analysis showed that, over five years, the Canadian price for four litres of partly skimmed milk generally exceeded the U.S. price (converted to Canadian dollars) by more than a dollar, sometimes significantly more, and rarely less.

A 2014 study conducted by the University of Manitoba, published in 2015, found that lower-income households bore an extra burden of 2.3 per cent of their income above the estimated cost for free-market-determined dairy and poultry products (i.e., vs. non-supply management), amounting to $339 in 2014 dollars ($435 in current dollars). Higher-income households paid an additional 0.5 per cent of their income, or $554 annually in 2014 dollars ($712 today).

One of the pillars of the current system is production control, enforced by production quotas for every dairy farm. These quotas only gradually rise annually, despite abundant production capacity. As a result, millions of litres of milk are dumped in some years, according to a 2022 article by the Montreal Economic Institute.

Beyond production control, minimum price enforcement further entrenches inefficiency. Prices are set based on estimated production costs rather than market forces, keeping consumer costs high and limiting competition.

Import restrictions are the final pillar. They ensure foreign producers do not undercut domestic ones. Jaime Castaneda, executive vice-president of the U.S. National Milk Producers Federation, complained that the official 2.86 per cent non-tariffed Canadian import limit was not reached due to non-tariff barriers. Canadian tariffs of over 250 per cent apply to imports exceeding quotas from the European Union, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA, or USMCA).

Dairy import protection obstructs efforts to reach more trade deals. Defending this system forces Canada to extend protection to foreign partners’ favoured industries. Affected sectors include several where Canada is competitive, such as machinery and devices, chemicals and plastics, and pharmaceuticals and medical products. This impedes efforts to increase non-U.S. exports of goods and services. Diverse and growing overseas exports are essential to reducing vulnerability to hostile U.S. trade policy.

It may require paying dairy farmers several billion dollars to transition from supply management—though this cartel-determined “market” value is dubious, as the current inflation-adjusted book value is much lower—but the cost to consumers and the economy is greater. New Zealand successfully evolved from a similar import-protected dairy industry into a vast global exporter. Canada must transform to excel. The current system limits Canada’s freedom to find greener pastures.

Ian Madsen is the Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X