Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Is the Senate in Violation of the 2006 Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, and Hindering Reconciliation?

Published

2 months ago

18 minute read

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Nina Green

Since it is abundantly clear there are no missing Indian residential school children, the ‘missing records’ by which they can be found are also imaginary, and the Senate Committee has been on a pointless wild goose chase

In July 2024 the Standing Senate Committee on Indigenous Peoples issued an Interim Report entitled ‘Missing Records, Missing Children’.

The problem with that title?  There are no missing Indian residential school children.

Special Interlocutor Kimberly Murray told the Senate Committee on 21 March 2023 that there are no missing children, and in support of that one need only look to her own two interim reports, neither of which identifies a single Indian residential school child who went missing and whose parents didn’t know what happened to their child.  In two years as Special Interlocutor, Kimberly Murray has not been able to name a single child who verifiably went missing from an Indian residential school.

Similarly, after two years of hearings, the Senate Committee itself was unable to name a single verifiably-missing Indian residential school child in its report.

Nor in fact has anyone in Canada to date been able to name a single verifiably-missing Indian residential school child.

Since it is abundantly clear there are no missing Indian residential school children, the ‘missing records’ by which they can be found are also imaginary, and the Senate Committee has been on a pointless wild goose chase which has cost Canadian provinces a very considerable amount of money since many of the witnesses called by the Committee have been provincial government employees whose departments have been forced to expend staff time and financial resources fruitlessly searching for records of missing Indian residential school children who are not missing.

Moreover by calling provincial coroners, medical examiners, and vital statistics department officials as witnesses, the Senate Committee has given the distinct impression that it is conducting a criminal investigation, and by focussing on Indian residential schools, the Committee has also given the distinct impression it has reconstituted itself as a new Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), and is therefore in violation of the 2006 Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement.

What justification does the Senate Committee have for conducting this public inquiry into ‘Missing Records, Missing Children’, and threatening to compel the attendance of witnesses at its hearings?

The Committee cites the following Order of Reference passed by the full Senate as justification for its July 2024 report, and for the sweeping and far-reaching recommendations the report contains:

ORDER OF REFERENCE

Extract from the Journals of the Senate of Thursday, March 3, 2022:

The Honourable Senator Francis moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cordy:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples be authorized to examine and report on the federal government’s constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples and any other subject concerning Indigenous Peoples; . . . .

It is glaringly obvious that the Order of Reference did not authorize the Committee to examine and report on missing Indian residential school children and missing records.  The Senate is part of the federal government, the major party to the 2006 Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement under which Canadian taxpayers paid out billions of dollars to have all matters related to Indian residential schools settled once and for all – not re-opened by the Senate Committee on a whim.  The Senate Committee has thus interpreted the Order of Reference as giving it an authority the full Senate did not explicitly mention, and in fact had no power to grant to the Committee.

During its proceedings over the past two years, the Senate Committee did not trouble itself to prove that there actually are missing Indian residential school children.  Instead, the Committee operated on the basis that there are missing children even when Special Interlocutor Kimberly Murray told the Committee that ‘The children aren’t missing’.

Based on the false assumption that there are missing Indian residential children, the Committee proceeded to castigate those the Committee falsely claimed were ‘withholding’ records which would help to find them.

In doing so, the Committee ignored the fact that the only body which was ever actually entitled to records was the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

Under the 2006 Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, $60 million dollars was allocated to fund a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and section 11 of the TRC’s Schedule N mandate stated that, subject to privacy interests:

Canada and the churches will provide all relevant documents in their possession or control to and for the use of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

It should be noted that under the TRC’s Schedule N mandate important limitations were put in place stipulating who was obligated to provide documents to the TRC, how long that obligation was to exist, and what was to be done in case of a dispute about the production of documents.  The TRC’s Schedule N mandate provided that:

(1) only the federal government and the churches  – i.e., not provincial governments or any other entity – were obliged to provide documents;

(2) the federal government and churches were only obliged to provide documents to the TRC during the TRC’s five-year mandate; and

(3) under section 2(l) of the TRC’s Schedule N mandate any ‘disputes over document production’ would be referred to an officially-designated body, the National Administration Committee (NAC) set up under section 4.11 of the 2006 Settlement Agreement.

The TRC concluded its work and issued a final report in 2015.  That marked the end of any obligation on the part of the federal government and the churches to provide documents to the TRC, which ceased to exist and had no successor.

The Senate Committee has thus invented a problem where none existed.

That being the case – there was no problem until the Senate Committee invented one – exactly what is the problem the Senate Committee invented?

Again, one must refer back to the 2006 Settlement Agreement and the TRC’s Schedule N mandate.  Section 2(a) of the Schedule N mandate states that, subject to privacy legislation, the TRC was:

authorized and required in the public interest to archive all such documents, materials, and transcripts or records of statements received, in a manner that will ensure their preservation and accessibility to the public.

To fulfil this part of its mandate, in 2013 the TRC entered into a trust deed with the University of Manitoba by which the University undertook to preserve the TRC records and make them available to the general public.  That has not been done.  The University of Manitoba has not made the records generated by the TRC itself in the course of its work and the records turned over to it by the federal government and the churches prior to 2015 available to the general public on its National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation (NCTR) Archives website.  In particular, the University of Manitoba has not made available on its NCTR website the Sisters’ chronicles and Oblate codices which recorded daily life in the schools.  Instead, the University has allowed its staff at the NCTR (which is not a legal entity and is not a successor to the TRC, but merely a building on the University of Manitoba campus staffed by University of Manitoba employees) to turn its millions of digitized records into a publicly-funded Indigenous genealogical service, as Head Archivist Raymond Frogner has explained on several occasions, and as Tanya Talaga documents in her new book, The Knowing.

Thus, if the Senate Committee had wanted to investigate an actual problem, it could have investigated why the University of Manitoba has not complied with its legal obligations under the 2013 trust deed and has not made the TRC records available to the general public as mandated by the 2006 Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement and the TRC’s Schedule N mandate, particularly the Sisters’ chronicles and Oblate codices which recorded daily life in the schools.

Instead of investigating that very real problem, the Senate Committee pursued a problem of its own invention by falsely claiming that records were being withheld from the ‘NCTR’ by Catholic church and provincial entities.  This appears to be deliberate obfuscation because the Senate Committee must surely know that the NCTR is not a legal entity, and thus cannot legally receive documents.  The actual recipient of documents sent to the ‘NCTR’ is the University of Manitoba, a fact which is never mentioned in the Senate report.  Moreover the Senate report provided no evidence that any documents were actually being withheld, which of course it could not have done even had it tried since there is no legal obligation on the part of any entity to provide the University of Manitoba and the University’s NCTR staff with documents or records.

Ignoring the fact that it had invented a non-existent problem, the Senate Committee forged ahead, holding hearings and threatening to compel the attendance of witnesses.  It is noteworthy that in so doing the Committee engaged in conduct which the TRC itself was forbidden to engage in under its Schedule N mandate, which states that ‘Pursuant to the Court-approved final settlement agreement and the class action judgments’, the TRC:

(b) shall not hold formal hearings, nor act as a public inquiry, nor conduct a formal legal process;

(c) shall not possess subpoena powers, and do not have powers to compel attendance or participation in any of its activities or events.  Participation in all Commission events and activities is entirely voluntary;

Here is what Senator Scott Tannas had to say about holding hearings and hauling up witnesses in public on 21 March 2023 in an exchange with the University of Manitoba’s employee, Stephanie Scott:

Senator Tannas: Thank you for being here today. Ms. Scott, you mentioned that there are still organizations and people with data that has not been turned over to you. We all want to do things to help. Part of helping is listening and talking, but sometimes part of help that we can provide is to actually do something. Here in the Senate, we do have the ability to hold oversight hearings. We can compel people to come and testify before us. What would you think if you gave us the names and the contacts for organizations that aren’t providing data, and we’ll haul them up here in public and we’ll ask them why?

Ms. Scott: I would love for you to do that. We have been waiting a long time, and I think it’s absolutely crucial. When Tk’emlúps happened and the children began to speak from beyond, that’s when the world and the landscape changed for us. We used to have to do a lot of reaching out across the country, developing partnerships, still trying to acquire different records. We have worked closely — I think it’s time — the time is now, the time could be today that you call upon those people, and I would be more than willing to share that information with you. We have done a public media campaign. There are no secrets. Everything has been public and we all know what’s happened, many of us here at this table. If you are willing to do that, I respectfully would ask you to help.

Senator Tannas: I certainly would advocate for that. If you want to send the clerk, for future discussions, the name of let’s say the three most flagrant and obvious resistors, we could start maybe there and talk about it as a group. All senators would have to agree that’s a kind of meeting that we were going to have. To me, there is a time for action. As Senator Arnot mentioned, we’re not going to get anywhere until we get all the data. We won’t get to the full and complete truth, which is what all Canadians should want. It’s the only way we’re going to move forward. Thank you, that’s the only question I had.

‘Flagrant and obvious resistors’?  It is unconscionable that Stephanie Scott, an employee of the University of Manitoba, would agree to provide (and did provide) the Senate Committee with a list of ‘flagrant and obvious resistors’ when she has to be aware that there is no legal obligation on the part of any entity to provide a single document to the University of Manitoba or its NCTR staff.

But even more importantly, it is unconscionable that the University of Manitoba and its NCTR employees continue to pretend that there are missing children, and continue to pretend that the University needs millions of records to identify these non-existent missing children.

Does the Senate Committee’s report further reconciliation? Obviously not.  The report misleads Canadians, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, in a way which is harmful to both by pretending that thousands of Indian residential school children are missing who are not missing, and that the provinces and the Catholic Church are withholding records that would help find them.

The Senate Committee should immediately withdraw its July 2024 interim report.

Nina Green is an independent researcher who lives in British Columbia.

Related Topics:

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

More from this author
Business / 1 hour ago

EXCLUSIVE: Former Biden Climate Czar Apparently Pushed Homeland Security To Ease Up On Chinese Company Linked To Slave Labor

COVID-19 / 1 hour ago

Esteemed UK Doctor pleads with governments to cancel COVID-19 vaccines

Brownstone Institute / 5 hours ago

A Potpourri of the World’s Unexposed Scandals

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

False Claims, Real Consequences: The ICC Referrals That Damaged Canada’s Reputation

Published on December 16, 2024

By

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.

Continue Reading

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Let’s Make Canada Great Again!

Published on December 13, 2024

By

Trump’s Team Unity… Tulsi Gabbard, JD Vance, President-elect Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy Jun., Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy… if they’re able to do all they’re promising, Canada will be more uncompetitive yet, writes Brian Giesbrecht and the best and brightest will leaveTrump campaign.

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Brian Giesbrecht

Trump will make America so tempting to the talented, that we’re going to get more uncompetitive still

“The number of people migrating to the US is not the main concern, more importantly it is who is leaving.”

The “brain drain” is a problem that has been a real concern for Canada at many times in our history. In the 1990s it was a topic fiercely debated by policy wonks, politicians and other concerned Canadians. Many of our best and brightest were benefitting from expensive college and university educations here, then promptly moving south for better opportunities.

Simply put, when Canada raises taxes, and stifles economic opportunity for young people here, while the Americans are lowering taxes and opening up their economy to the south of us, we can expect to see much of our best talent move south.

That’s what we have been seeing for some time now — doctors, engineers, trades and businesspeople of all types moving to escape the high taxes and the stagnant economy they see in what is today’s high-tax, big government, woke Canada.

Since 2015, housing costs have risen much faster than wages, making house ownership and rent costs absolutely punishing. Excessive immigration numbers have only added to the misery. Canada, for many years considered to be one of the best western countries in which to live is now one of the worst.

Canada’s current brain drain trickle can be expected to turn into a flood. Trump has promised to deregulate, lower taxes and “drain the swamp”. His appointment of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to the mischievously named “DOGE” (Department of Government Efficiency) is evidence of his seriousness.

As evidence of how quickly things are turning, consider the huge stock market gains that happened as a direct consequence of Trump’s election. Clearly, the “smart money” is anticipating that Trump’s promises to “drill, baby, drill” and reinvigorate an over-regulated and over-taxed Biden economy are more than empty promises.

So, while right now Trump is busy trolling Democrats with his cabinet picks, by the time we get around to a spring election here it is probable that Trump will have the American economy galloping along. Meanwhile, at the same time that Trump is lowering taxes and deregulating, the Trudeau government is going in exactly the opposite direction.

Chrystia Freeland is determined to raise the capital gains tax. A capital gains tax hike will cause widespread damage. Meanwhile her proud socialist colleague, Steven Guilbeault — who has never seen an extra tax or regulation he doesn’t like — is dead-set on hiking Canada’s job-killing carbon tax yet again.

And let’s not forget the Trudeau affirmative action, DEI, merit-killing philosophy that has steadily eroded our competitiveness and standard of living. When contrasted with the Biden race-based version of the same, it was bad enough that Canada’s productivity continues to fall relative America’s. (Our sickly dollar is barely over 70 percent of theirs, while our government expenditures make up a staggering 44% of GDP.)

The contrast between the two economies can only be expected to become more pronounced as Trump’s America becomes increasingly merit-based. DOGE will take a meat cleaver to government spending, and the DEI, critical race theory Bidenite mush, will be trashed.

While Canada is still dealing with such woke idiocies as boys in girl sports, child mutilation in the name of gender ideology, and pretending to believe indigenous activist claims about secret burials of indigenous school children, Trump’s America will look very attractive to ambitious young Canadians who want to skip the wokeism, and raise their families in a country that rewards hard work. It will be hard to blame our best engineers, and tradespeople from heading down to exciting opportunities in Texas, Montana and elsewhere in the United States, when their talents are not appreciated here.

Many have already departed. Canadian accents are increasingly common in Texas. The contrast between a Trump America that rewards hard work, and a Trudeau Canada that only taxes it will be stark. Enterprising Canadians will face the choice of staying in a Canada that takes bigger and bigger bites out of paychecks, or moving to a country that doesn’t.

Let’s remember that many of our highly educated doctors and professionals are recent immigrants, with no special loyalty to Canada. Steven Harper also spoke of the “anywhere people” and the “somewhere people”. Those in the first category are the educated and privileged class whose have the money and talent that make it possible for them to move anywhere in the world on short notice. We need both the talented immigrants and “anywheres”, but they will be the first to leave.

Canada has gone through similar brain drain episodes before. During the 1990s there was a very real concern that we were losing far too many good people. A debt problem that began with the big-spending Pierre Trudeau government got steadily worse, our civil service was bloated, and taxes were far higher than they were for our American counterparts. To their credit, the Chrétien/Martin government introduced a budget in 1995 that helped with those problems.

The incoming Steven Harper government 2006-15 further stemmed the tide of departures by building a competitive economy that had our dollar at par with the American dollar. For a brief time the Canadian dollar was even higher! In these days of our pathetic 70 cent dollar it now seems hard to believe that even happened.

There seems to be little hope that the current Liberal government — still dug in in Ottawa — will take steps to make our economy competitive with Trump’s. As Kevin O’Leary explains, the damage that Trudeau has done to the Canadian economy is incalculable.

Canada has been on a slow downward slide since 2015. This has been Canada’s “lost decade”.

But there are reasons other than just the economic for wanting to leave. Under Justin Trudeau Canada has become not only a poorer place, but a directionless dystopia for many conservative-leaning Canadians. Extreme progressivism — “woke” — is the Trudeau Liberal religion.

As Eric Kaufman points out, extreme beliefs, such as “a man becomes a woman by saying so,” the belief in such economy-killing absurdities as “carbon-zero by 2040,” “borders don’t matter,” “merit-based hiring is systemic racism” etc are accepted by only a small minority of Canadians, and yet those are the policies the current government is forcing on everyone.

To add insult to injury we have Trudeau tweeting “a trans woman is a woman,” “we accept all comers,” “Canada is a genocidal nation,” and other such inanities. The great majority of Canadians do not want Trudeau’s “post-national state with no core identity” bilge. They want Canada back.

Trump has promised to rid his country of the extreme progressivism that Americans so convincingly rejected on Nov 5. Post-election surveys have revealed that the single most important issue that persuaded swing voters to vote for Trump was Kamala Harris’s support for taxpayer funding for transgender surgery for prison inmates.

This bit of woke craziness proved to be a bridge too far even for those who usually voted Democrat.

We can expect to see a virtual war on woke when Trump assumes power. In fact, it is already happening. Absurdities, like men forcing their way into women’s sporting events and women’s spaces will come to an end. Most Americans simply don’t want radical progressivism. As Professor Kaufman’s survey shows (above) — neither do Canadians.

The old saying is that living next to America is like sleeping with an elephant. Every time that the elephant moves, we had better do so too. With the election of Donald Trump, Canada must quickly adjust to the moves that elephant makes. Or suffer the consequences.

The chance to do so will likely be next spring, when Justin Trudeau will finally be forced to call an election. His election strategy will almost certainly be the same one he has used against previous Conservative challengers — he accuses them of being “like Trump.” But this time this strategy might not work.

If Trump’s America is humming along on all cylinders, while Trudeau’s weak, woke Canada looks pathetic in comparison, this time Canadians might say, “Yes, like Trump’s America. That’s exactly what we want!”

We need our best and brightest to stay here. We need to end the brain drain. We can do that by making Canada into a 2025 version of the Canada we used to know.

Brian Giesbrecht, retired judge, is a Senior Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He was recently named the ‘Western Standard Columnist of the Year.’

Continue Reading

Trending

X