Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Indigenous

There are no Indian Residential School denialists, so why criminalize them?

Published

7 minute read

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Rodney A. Clifton, professor emeritus at the University of Manitoba and a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. (He was a former Senior Boys’ Supervisor in Stringer Hall, the Anglican residence in Inuvik.)

” both sides agree that Indian Residential Schools existed, and that some children were harmed. But they disagree on the evidence needed to prove whether children were murdered and buried unceremoniously in residential schoolyards. “

In a recent Canadian Press story, Kimberly Murray, the government’s special interlocutor on unmarked graves of missing Indigenous children from residential schools, is reported as saying: “We could … make it an offense to incite hate and promote hate against Indigenous people by … denying that residential (schools) happened or downplaying what happened in the institutions.” Not surprisingly, the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is sympathetic to the special interlocutor’s call to action.

Ms. Murray says that Indigenous leaders across the country support her call for legislation. The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs (AMC), for example, asked the Justice Minister, Arif Virani, to amend the criminal code to criminalize denialism. AMC Grand Chief Cathy Merrick said that enacting such a law would provide “an opportunity for Canada to demonstrate an honest commitment to reconciliation…. to deny the existence of these institutions is a form of violence.”

The focus on missing and murdered Indigenous children at residential schools became a national disgrace at the end of May 2021 when the Kamloops First Nation announced that stories from Knowledge Keepers and evidence from ground-penetrating radar (GPR) had “discovered” the graves of 215 children in the schoolyard of the Kamloops Indian Residential School.

Since that announcement, first nations across the country have discovered many more “graves,” also relying on Knowledge Keepers stories and GPR evidence. But so far, no bodies of IRS students have been exhumed from the schoolyards, even though the Chief TRC Commissioner, Justice Murry Sinclair, told CBC Radio host Matt Galloway a couple of years ago that as many as 15,000 to 25,000 Indian Residential School students are missing.

Surprisingly, these claims are not included in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Report. In fact, only one story of a murdered child is reported in the TRC Report, and it is the unverified story told by Doris Young about seeing a child’s murder at the Anglican Elkhorn Indian Residential School in Manitoba. The Commission reported this alleged murder but did not investigate the claim. Indeed, the Commission spent $60 million over six years and did not report any evidence, other than the Doris Young’s claim, of the murder of Indigenous children at residential schools.

What does this mean for criminalizing denialism?

There are at least three problems with potential legislation to criminalize denialism. First, Canada already has legislation on hate speech, and so new legislation is unnecessary.

Second, the definition of “denialism,” as reported above, is so vague that it would be almost impossible to convict anyone.

Finally, and most importantly, from what can be gathered from both Ms. Murray’s interim report and recent news items, practically no Canadians deny that Indian Residential Schools existed or that some children were harmed at those schools.

What Canadians seem to disagree on is the evidence that is needed to prove that IRS students were murdered, and their bodies were unceremoniously buried in unmarked graves in residential schoolyards.

On Ms. Murray’s side, supporters’ reason that “hear-say” evidence from Indigenous Knowledge Keepers and shadows on GPR screens are adequate to prove the claim. On the other side, the so-called “deniers” reason that forensic evidence from exhumed bodies is needed.

So, both sides agree that Indian Residential Schools existed, and that some children were harmed. But they disagree on the evidence needed to prove whether children were murdered and buried unceremoniously in residential schoolyards.

The Canadian law enforcement and justice system is the proper agency for an impartial investigation of this claim, and if evidence is obtained, to criminally charge those Indigenous and non-Indigenous IRS employees responsible and to report their names and crimes if they are deceased.

Surely Canadians would support such an impartial investigation leading to possible criminal charges. Till that happens, there is no reason to demonize the so-called “deniers” by those who disagree with the evidence they think is necessary to answer this important question. Without an independent investigation along with a public report, Canada cannot reach a fair and just reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadians.

Indeed, many people are wondering why such a rigorous, systematic, investigation has not yet been conducted. It is the time to settle this issue so that both sides—indeed all Canadians—can move on from being pitted against each other over an issue that can be easily resolved with an independent investigation by competent justice officials.

Rodney A. Clifton is a is a professor emeritus at the University of Manitoba and a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He lived for four months in Old Sun, the Anglican Residential School on the Blackfoot (Siksika) First Nation, and was the Senior Boys’ Supervisor in Stringer Hall, the Anglican residence in Inuvik. Rodney Clifton and Mard DeWolf are the editors of From Truth Comes Reconciliation: An Assessment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report (Frontier Centre for Public Policy, 2021). A second and expanded edition of this book will be published in 2024.

Canadian Energy Centre

Saskatchewan Indigenous leaders urging need for access to natural gas

Published on

Piapot First Nation near Regina, Saskatchewan. Photo courtesy Piapot First Nation/Facebook

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Cody Ciona and Deborah Jaremko

“Come to my nation and see how my people are living, and the struggles that they have day to day out here because of the high cost of energy, of electric heat and propane.”

Indigenous communities across Canada need access to natural gas to reduce energy poverty, says a new report by Energy for a Secure Future (ESF).

It’s a serious issue that needs to be addressed, say Indigenous community and business leaders in Saskatchewan.

“We’re here today to implore upon the federal government that we need the installation of natural gas and access to natural gas so that we can have safe and reliable service,” said Guy Lonechild, CEO of the Regina-based First Nations Power Authority, on a March 11 ESF webinar.

Last year, 20 Saskatchewan communities moved a resolution at the Assembly of First Nations’ annual general assembly calling on the federal government to “immediately enhance” First Nations financial supports for “more desirable energy security measures such as natural gas for home heating.”

“We’ve been calling it heat poverty because that’s what it really is…our families are finding that they have to either choose between buying groceries or heating their home,” Chief Christine Longjohn of Sturgeon Lake First Nation said in the ESF report.

“We should be able to live comfortably within our homes. We want to be just like every other homeowner that has that choice to be able to use natural gas.”

At least 333 First Nations communities across Canada are not connected to natural gas utilities, according to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER).

ESF says that while there are many federal programs that help cover the upfront costs of accessing electricity, primarily from renewable sources, there are no comparable ones to support natural gas access.

“Most Canadian and Indigenous communities support actions to address climate change. However, the policy priority of reducing fossil fuel use has had unintended consequences,” the ESF report said.

“Recent funding support has been directed not at improving reliability or affordability of the energy, but rather at sustainability.”

Natural gas costs less than half — or even a quarter — of electricity prices in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, according to CER data.

“Natural gas is something NRCan [Natural Resources Canada] will not fund. It’s not considered a renewable for them,” said Chief Mark Fox of the Piapot First Nation, located about 50 kilometres northeast of Regina.

“Come to my nation and see how my people are living, and the struggles that they have day to day out here because of the high cost of energy, of electric heat and propane.”

According to ESF, some Indigenous communities compare the challenge of natural gas access to the multiyear effort to raise awareness and, ultimately funding, to address poor water quality and access on reserve.

“Natural gas is the new water,” Lonechild said.

Continue Reading

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

John Rustad’s Residential School Claim Is False And Dangerous

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Marco Navarro-Genie

When politicians misrepresent facts or historical events, whether out of ignorance or political expediency, they do a disservice to the truth and public trust. On Feb. 24, 2025, B.C. Conservative Party Leader John Rustad reportedly told Global News that “more than 4,000 children did not return home” from residential schools because “those children died in residential schools.” As researcher Nina Green points out, this statement is demonstrably false and contradicts the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s (TRC) final report.

Sadly, Rustad is not the only one making such claims. Similar statements, portrayed as facts, are repeated by politicians who should know better.

The truth, according to the TRC, is that 423 named children died on the premises of residential schools between 1867 and 2000. That is a tragedy, and we must expand our understanding of how and why these deaths occurred. To learn from tragedies, we must acknowledge and reflect on them. But to truly understand, we must accept what is true rather than bending or distorting it. Repeating the claim that “more than 4,000” children died in residential schools, as Rustad and others have uncritically reported, misrepresents reality.

The vastly inflated number, according to Green, originates from the University of Manitoba’s National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation (NCTR), which has misrepresented the data by including children who died after leaving school—in hospitals, in accidents at home, and even well into adulthood. This distortion has led to widespread misrepresentation, misleading policymakers and the public.

Why does this matter?

Canada’s history with Indigenous residential schools is deeply painful. Abuses, neglect and forced assimilation were real in many instances. However, distorting the facts about residential school deaths promotes a false narrative of genocide that does not serve justice—in fact, this false narrative undermines it. If reconciliation means anything, it must be built on truth, not contrived political narratives.

By repeating the claim that more than 4,000 children died at residential schools, Rustad is spreading falsehoods and stoking division. This figure has been used to justify claims of mass graves, leading to international headlines and widespread outrage that harm present generations of Indigenous people. Yet, nearly four years after the first claims of unmarked graves, no remains have been excavated or verified.

Rustad is not a private citizen—he is a public figure whose words carry weight. As such, he is responsible for ensuring that the information he disseminates is accurate. Rustad is failing in his duty to the public. Depending on his motivation, he contributes to a culture in which historical accuracy is sacrificed for political expediency.

Some may argue that the exact number of students who died at residential schools is not important. But truth is not negotiable. If we accept exaggerated claims in one instance, we set a dangerous pattern for historical distortions. The truth should not be ideological or political.

If Rustad is serious about Indigenous issues, he should demand transparency from the University of Manitoba and its NCTR. Instead of accepting misleading figures, he should call for the full release of the TRC records, as was promised in 2013.

Leaders like Rustad must be held accountable. Falsehoods, no matter how well-intentioned, do not advance reconciliation. They erode trust, divide Canadians, and ultimately undermine the cause they claim to support. All Canadians deserve much better.

Marco Navarro-Genie is the vice president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. With Barry Cooper, he is coauthor of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).

Continue Reading

Trending

X