The Dominion - Indigenous Rights

It's a Matter of Jordan's Principle

Martin Lukacs — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 10:43:16 +0000

Canada's health care system leaves Native child behind

PICTOU LANDING, NS—Maurina Beadle doesn’t sleep at night. She naps. While her son Jeremy sleeps on a bed attached to her own, Beadle has trained herself to be constantly alert.

“After 16 years, your body gets used to it,” she says.

Jeremy Beadle Meawasige, known as Kicking Bear in his hometown of Pictou Landing First Nation in Nova Scotia, has been diagnosed with hydrocephalus, cerebral palsy, spinal curvature and autism. He needs to be fed, changed and dressed. He can’t walk by himself. He frequently visits the hospital and has undergone numerous operations.

Beadle was always the sole caregiver for the 16-year-old. Their lives changed dramatically last May, when she suffered a double stroke that left her incontinent, in a wheelchair and unable to use her hands. "Doctors said I would never walk again," says Beadle.

"Maurina never had any help," says Philippa Pictou, Health Director for Pictou Landing First Nation, who has known the family for years. She said that after Beadle's stroke, "she worked really hard to regain capacity with writing exercises—hours and hours. She was determined to walk again."

Maurina Beadle walks with a cane and opts for the lighter plates in the cupboard to serve dinner. Her strong features and wit more than compensate for her modest stature.

She now accepts day workers into her home to help with housekeeping and caring for her son, although she says this was difficult for her at first.

"Maurina is committed to caring for Jeremy," says Pictou, but when the stroke made it impossible for Beadle to do so by herself, the health director began the process of accessing an $11 million federal fund for First Nations children with complex disabilities.

The fund was initiated by Health Canada in response to Jordan's Principle, a "child-first" policy designed to ensure First Nations children do not suffer delays or disruptions in essential health services if the funding source for their care becomes unclear.

Pictou’s inquiry was stymied first at the federal level, which is responsible for First Nations health care. Then it was stymied by the province, which controls most of, arguably the best, and certainly the most readily available health services.

In spite of Pictou and Beadle’s diligence, it took five months for any level of government to offer Jeremy health services. Jeremy's case is just one more added to the astounding statistics that show how the most vulnerable people in Canada—First Nations children—have the greatest difficulty receiving the health care they need.

A year-and-a-half later, Jeremy’s future care remains unsettled, and the family has decided to take the federal government to court.

"Through all this," says Beadle, as she lifts her right ankle on top of her left knee and lights a cigarette, "I think about the things that nobody saw, the years of seeing him puke, seeing him take off his diaper and play with his..." She trails off. "And I had to put him in a tub with a little water so he could play around—not too much water—while I cleaned up."

Jeremy sits on the couch, ankle crossed over his opposite knee, balancing his toy piano across his lap, trumpeting his lips to the machine's rendition of "Besame Mucho." A t-shirt holds his arms loosely against his chest—to prevent him from hitting himself—and his long fingers press the toy's buttons. His smile grows wide when George Billington, his evening caretaker, asks whether he wants to go for a cruise. "Socks 'n' shoes on," says Jeremy. "Seatbelt on for safety."

"When I was trained by FNIH [First Nations and Inuit Health], we were given workshops and attended meetings about Jordan's Principle and what it meant," says Pictou, who was also trained in the child-first policy while she worked for Health Canada. "It didn't occur to me that when we ran into a situation that fell under Jordan's Principle that [the funding] would be so hard to access."

Jordan's Principle is named in honour of Jordan River Anderson of Norway House Cree Nation, who spent all his life in hospital while the province of Manitoba and the government of Canada argued over who was responsible for funding the child's care at home. Jordan died at the age of four, having never lived at home.

"To access Jordan's Principle, we had to prove what kind of care Jeremy would get if he were off-reserve," says Pictou. An assessment was required, one that would identify the normative—standard—level of health services any non-status Nova Scotian child would receive.

In the meantime, while Beadle was recovering in hospital, Pictou Landing Band Council hired home-care workers to take care of Jeremy, "without knowing whether we were doing the right thing, whether the workers were able to provide Jeremy what he needed," says Pictou.

Five months after Beadle's stroke, Pictou Landing received approval from the office of Maureen MacDonald, Health Minister of Nova Scotia, for Continuing Care to assess Jeremy's needs. Continuing Care—the provincial service that performs home assessments—uses sophisticated computerized programs and trained staff whose services could weigh Jeremy’s needs against available provincial programs. However, Nova Scotia Continuing Care’s policy does not allow staff to work on reserves—First Nations health care is supposed to be covered by the federal Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (AAND). However, no equivalent assessment program exists for First Nations in Nova Scotia.

"The Minister's office made it clear that the approval was for one instance only, and that no other services would be provided," says Pictou.

According to a report by an ad-hoc coalition of Aboriginal and social justice organizations, First Nations children receive two-and-a-half times fewer resources than non-status Canadian children. Although AAND (previously Indian and Northern Affairs Canada—INAC) has committed to mirror provincial health care programs for people living on reserves, the relative geographic isolation of reserves across the country means resources for people living on reserve are distributed over greater distances, making specialized services particularly difficult to access.

After months of conferences with the Pictou Landing community health nurse, INAC, Health Canada, Jeremy's school, the tribal council, Band lawyers and the Band council, the provincial and federal governments decided that the funding to be offered to Jeremy for respite (at-home) services would be $2,200 per month—the standard respite cap in Nova Scotia. If Jeremy's care cost more than that—which it does—he would have to be moved to an institution.

According to Nova Scotia’s Department of Community Services, no institution in Nova Scotia can meet Jeremy's round-the-clock needs.

Situations such as Jeremy’s are not uncommon, and they are compounded by disputes between governments over who is responsible for paying for health care for status-Indian children. Research in the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada 2005 Wen:de Report indicates that these bureaucratic conflicts are common, with 393 cases in 12 sample First Nations in 2005.

“[J]urisdictional disputes continue to have significant impacts on the lived experiences of First Nations children—particularly those with special needs. Although both the federal and provincial governments embrace the principle that the safety and well being of the child is a paramount consideration, in practice jurisdictional disputes often supersede the interests of children," according to the report.

Jordan's Principle was supposed to fill this gap in health services. The bill states, "The obligation to meet the needs of the child first always supersedes government interests to establish jurisdictional dispute processes." Although Jordan's Principle passed unanimously in the House of Commons in 2007 as Private Members Bill 296, it has never been implemented in full, either by the federal government or the provinces and territories.

In 2008, a bill for the implementation of Jordan's Principle never made it through the Manitoba Legislature.

"When the bill comes to be paid," said Manitoba Premier Gary Doer, concerned for the cost to the provincial tax-payer, "the federal government goes to the bathroom."

When asked how Nova Scotia sees the province’s role in providing health care services to children such as Jeremy who fall between jurisdictional cracks, the office of Maureen MacDonald responded, "[W]e support the child-first concept behind Jordan's Principle and recognize the importance of governments working together to ensure that all children, including First Nations children, receive the supports and services they need here in Nova Scotia." While it may support the child-first concept, the province has never implemented Jordan's Principle, which would require services to be provided without delay.

The response from the Nova Scotia health minister’s office goes on: "Fundamentally, we provide the best care we can in circumstances like this and there are negotiations about funds that sometimes follow."

"There's a complete lack of access across the country to Jordan's Principle," says Pictou. "This is a gatekeeper practice. The feds can say there are no jurisdictional issues and therefore the need for [Jordan's Principle] doesn't exist."

Pictou believes political conveniences encourage the institutionalization of First Nations children.

"It's a win-win situation for governments," she says. "Evergreen [Home for Special Care] is the only institution for under-18 children [with complex disabilities] in Nova Scotia. It only has 20 beds, currently four vacancies. If an off-reserve child is taking up a bed, the province pays. If a First Nations child is in a bed, the federal government pays."

In other words, the province benefits financially—to the tune of $350 per day—when status-Indian children are kept in care facilities. AAND, under pressure to deliver health care equal to provincial programs, benefits because it is seen to be providing good services.

According to Pictou, if he is moved out of his community, Jeremy will lose his culture, language and, most significantly, his mother's involvement in his life. "It would be a huge loss for Jeremy. I can't imagine it. The idea is inhumane."

The $350 per day cost at Evergreen is double what it would cost to keep Jeremy at home.

"It would make a lot of sense to have a small-options home in Pictou Landing," says Pictou. "Three to four beds, 24-hour staff. It would create more economic viability in the community.”

Pictou Landing First Nation is a community in pain. The reserve is sandwiched between Boat Harbour and Pictou Harbour, a stunning coastline where doctors and lawyers used to own summer cottages. But in 1965 Scott Maritimes built a pulp millon in Pictou Harbour and began dumping effluent in Boat Harbour via a long underground pipe. For 46 years, pulp waste has been gushing into Boat Harbour at the rate of 50,000 gallons per day. Sulfurous smog lies over the harbour, the beach and the bluffs. Residents of Pictou Landing say there have been no natural deaths in the community in the past four decades. There is no doubt that the reserve could use more health resources.

Plus, for Pictou, the sensible alternative to the expense and emotional pain of moving Jeremy out of his home is to move the services, not the child.

"I've worked in public health and in housing. I've fought for low-income families to get special needs funding," says Pictou. "I really don't think this happens off-reserve."

She began researching other options.

Pictou’s research revealed a bureaucratic gap between respite paid by the province to non-status children, and the at-home care available to on-reserve children through AAND. Nova Scotia offers a support program for persons with disabilities, designed to "maintain the integrity of families," including enabling people with disabilities to live at home and preventing the need for them to be moved out of their homes, according to the 2006 provincial policy document.

For Pictou, the interesting part of the policy is a section titled, "Exceptional Circumstances for Funding over $2,200."

The document outlines six criteria to be evaluated for approval of long-term funding above the $2,200 respite cap, and four criteria for additional short-term respite.

"Maurina and Jeremy fulfill every single one," says Pictou, as she scrolls through the lists and reads them aloud.

When Pictou raised this, AAND said its commitment to status-Indians does not include exceptional circumstances such as those identified by the provincial program.

In March 2011, a few days after AAND refused Beadle's application for extra funding, a Nova Scotian family in a similar situation filed for a judicial review of the $2,200 respite cap. They won. The judge ruled that the cap was an administrative policy designed to save money, and that it contradicted the Social Assistance Act. Nova Scotia Community Services was required to pay for the care necessary to keep Brian Boudreau, a 34-year-old with autism, at home.

The Pictou Landing Band Council and Maurina Beadle have brought the matter to court, challenging AAND, Health Canada and the Government of Canada on its decision to deny the Beadles additional at-home support.

Theirs is the first court challenge to use Jordan's Principle. In their notice of application, Band lawyers call the federal decision "contrary to provincial statutes and policies, Jordan's Principle and the right to equality under section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." Section 15 of the Charter says that every Canadian has the right to "equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race."

Pictou expects to be in court by January or February 2012.

"What irks me is I know what we could access if [Jeremy] were off-reserve, and it seems that roadblocks are put in place deliberately," says Pictou. "The same philosophies that drove the establishment of residential schools—that governments can raise children better than First Nations can—are behind the policies that trickle down today.”

The smog rolls over Beadle’s back porch. “No matter how long you live here, you never get used to it,” she says. It’s unclear whether she is talking about the pulp mill’s discharge, or something broader, deeper. An outsider can’t help wondering why the people in Pictou Landing don’t simply up and leave.

"When reporters ask me what I’ll do if Jeremy is moved to an institution, I tell them, 'Over my dead body,'" says Beadle. She watches Melanie Thomas, Jeremy’s day-time care worker, spoon-feed Jeremy his lunch.

"He won’t get no love in an institution."

A rally in support of implementing Jordan's Principle will take place in Halifax tomorrow.

Moira Peters lives and bikes in Halifax.

Jordan's Principle.Jeremy

Jordan's Principle.Maurina

First Nations Under Surveillance

Martin Lukacs — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:00:00 +0000

Harper government prepares for Native “unrest"

TORONTO—Internal documents from Indian Affairs and the RCMP show that shortly after being elected in January of 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper had the federal government intensify the gathering and sharing of intelligence on First Nations. This was done so that the government could anticipate and manage potential First Nation unrest across Canada.

Documents obtained by Access to Information requests reveals that almost immediately upon taking power in 2006, the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) was given the lead role to spy on First Nations. The goal was to identify the leaders, participants and outside supporters of First Nation occupations and protests, and then to closely monitor their actions.

To accomplish this task, INAC established a "Hot Spot Reporting System." These weekly reports highlight all those communities across the country that engage in direct action to protect their lands and communities. They include bands from the coast of Vancouver Island to the shores of the Atlantic Ocean.

What we see in these documents—from the hot spot reports themselves, to the intelligence-sharing between government and security forces—is a closely monitored population of First Nations, who clearly are causing a panic at the highest levels of Canadian bureaucracy and political office.

In 2006, INAC gave the name"hot spots" to those First Nations conflicts of "growing concern" due to "unrest" and increasing "militancy." In a briefing presentation that INAC gave the RCMP that year, they identified certain communities as hotspots: Caledonia, Ontario (Douglas Creek Estates occupation); Belleville, Ontario (Montreal/Toronto Rail Blockade in sympathy to Caledonia); Brantford, Ontario (Grand River Conservation Authority Lands); Desoronto, Ontario (Occupation of Quarry); Grassy Narrows (Blockade of Trans Canada Hwy by environmentalists); and Maniwaki, Quebec (Blockade of Route 117).

But the "hot spot binder" prepared each week by INAC officials closely monitors any and all action taking place across the country and names dozens more communities as sources of potential unrest. A particular concern of the federal government is that these "hotspots" are unpredictable. ‘Hotspot’ protests are generally led by what the federal government labels "splinter groups" of "Aboriginal Extremists." As INAC describes in the same presentation to the RCMP:

Incidents led by splinter groups are arguably harder to manage as they exist outside negotiation processes to resolve recognized grievances with duly elected leaders. We seek to avoid giving standing to such splinter groups so as not to debase the legally recognized government. Incidents are also complicated by external groups such as Warrior Societies or non-Aboriginal counter-protest groups.

Telling in the INAC statement above is that the identified protests are "outside of negotiation processes" with elected councils. Canada is clearly spooked by the spectre of First Nations demanding Crown recognition of Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination, as well as Aboriginal and Treaty Rights, beyond the narrow confines of Crown land claims and self-government policies. These so-called "splinter" groups also threaten the status quo by demanding their own First Nation leaders, staff and advisors to pull out of the compromising negotiations

Judging from the INAC briefing to the RCMP, Indian Affairs now operates less as an institution of reconciliation and negotiation and more as a management office to control the costs of Native unrest.

In addition to hotspot reporting, the Deputy Ministers of Public Safety Emergency Preparedness Canada and INAC directed that a summer operational plan be prepared in 2006 to deal with Aboriginal occupations and protests. A progress report on the operational plan reveals the blueprint for security integration on First Nations issues.

The Standing Information Sharing Forum, for example, is chaired by the RCMP and includes as its members the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the Department of Fisheries, Government of Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Transportation Canada, and involves weekly conference calls and continuous information dissemination by INAC to its partners.

The inclusion of these government departments at the Information Sharing Forum should also alert us to the commercial threat of Aboriginal resistance to the free trade agenda.

Aboriginal people who are defending their lands are now treated on a spectrum from criminals to terrorists. Under Harper, an intensification of intelligence gathering and surveillance procedures now govern the new regime.

Haudenosaunee/Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy

The reports mention "Warrior Societies" and an "illicit agenda" referring at several points to concerns around smuggling. The federal government deems the tobacco/cigarette trade as "illicit" because Canada is not getting paid taxes by the Mohawks who are operating the businesses.

However, the 1995 federal Aboriginal Self-Government policy, which was developed unilaterally by the federal government, does not allow First Nations to share jurisdiction with government over trade and commerce matters. The federal self-government policy only allows small business operations on-reserve. Historically, the federal government has used the Indian Act to control and manage on-reserve economic development to prevent adversarial competition with surrounding non-Indian businesses and towns. For example, On the prairies, First Nations agriculture was undermined and led to the failure of farming on-reserve because of complaints from non-Indians. This policy of non-competition is still the reality today.

The federal government is particularly concerned about the Haudenosaunee/Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy actions at Caledonia. As the INAC 2006 report describes it:"Caledonia was and remains a significant event in risk management."

The RCMP agree. In a 2007 report to CSIS, they state: "Caledonia continues to serve as a beacon on land claims and Aboriginal rights issues across Canada."

The Canadian government is extremely worried about First Nations taking back lands and resources outside the scope of their one-sided land claims and self-government "negotiation processes," as was done at Kanenhstaton/Caledonia.

In order to contain the situation, the Crown governments have dispatched hard-nosed, experienced negotiators who have presented fixed negotiating positions from the Harper government, which is likely why there hasn't been any negotiated resolution of the situation at Kanenhstaton/Caledonia to this date. The Crown government obviously remains worried more lands will be "occupied" by the Six Nations "extremist" "splinter groups."

Ever since the 1990 stand-off in Kanesatake and Kahnawake, the federal government, the security and police agencies, and the Canadian army have been worried about a repeat of coordinated First Nation political actions across Canada.

The 2007 National Day Of Action

Specific information about policing First Nations was obtained in a series of Access to Information requests about the AFN National Day of Action that took place on June 29th, 2007. A 2007 RCMP brief to CSIS lays out a number of concerns regarding the National Day of Action. The RCMP were mainly concerned with protecting their men and women in uniform from First Nations protesters who confronted the police on the front lines. They were also concerned, by the bad public relations that might result from a particularly heavy handed approach to protesters at the event: "The often disparate and fractured nature of these events can lead the police to become the proverbial meat in the sandwich and the subject of negative public sentiment."

The RCMP also show concern that a lack of coordination, or "a fractured and inconsistent approach" by police forces, could "galvanize Nations throughout Canada." In response, cooperation between departments, security forces, and ministries are deemed to be necessary to provide a strong united front against First Nations protest.

The RCMP also caution that "Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal extremists often see these events as an opportunity to escalate or agitate the conflict." By inference, we can guess that they may be referring to groups unaffiliated with the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), unwilling to negotiate under Crown policies, or prepared to engage in tactics not sanctioned by the official leadership, such as property destruction and armed conflict. Non-Aboriginal groups are also cited here as potentially threatening, giving credence to recent targeting of G20 "ringleaders" who feel their Indigenous solidarity work has made them targets of the Crown and police forces.

Cost is a serious concern to the RCMP as well. The price tag for policing these nation-wide events is "exorbitant" and therefore can lead to rash policing decisions where force is used in order to bring a quick end to conflicts. The economic risks of blockades are themselves potentially catastrophic. As the RCMP warn, "The recent CN strike represents the extent in which a national railway blockade could effect the economy of Canada."

The RCMP also express this curious concern: "The police role may be complicated by the conventional and sometimes political view that there is a clear distinction between policy and police operations." Clearly, where the distinction slips between police and policy roles, the RCMP become simply Indian Agents, carrying out the colonial work of the department. Given the information disclosed here, this distinction is impossible to maintain. Where police intimidate and arrest Indigenous peoples on their own lands, there is no law on the police's side.

There is also a considerable public relations issue at stake here. The RCMP displayed concern at the potential fall-out of a number of "perception" problems that could befall the forces:

Perception of a two-tiered approach to enforcement can generate significant criticism and motivate non-Aboriginal activists.

An intense and protracted event may lead to long-standing erosion of relationships for the police and the community—they are usually always the victims.

Because there are limitations on what the police can negotiate and success often depends on others, the role of the police can become frustrating.

It appears as though the RCMP realize to some extent that they must choose between First Nations approval of their policing tactics and the wrath of a public convinced that blockades are criminal, rather than political acts. The police, however, contrary to their assertions, are not the victims here. They are just the dupes in a much older game of cowboys and Indians.

The above RCMP statements show that even with federal financial and managerial control over First Nation Chiefs and Leaders, the same Chiefs and Leaders were still not trusted by the federal government.

One insight emerges strongly here: most threatening of all to security and government forces is coordinated First Nations action. At one point in the 2007 INAC to RCMP briefing, concern is expressed about a First Nations conference because, "The 2006 Numbered Treaty Conference proposed a 'national' movement of independent actions to express discontent."

The concern is obvious in the documents where the government follows the trajectory of the Day of Action. It was first proposed by Chief Terrance Nelson at the Assembly of First Nations' general assembly, where the motion carried. After having been approved at the AFN general assembly the nation-wide day of action was later confirmed in a personal meeting between the RCMP Commissioner and then-National Chief Phil Fontaine. "Mr. Fontaine expressed his concern over the sense of frustration that seems to exist among First Nation leaders and the growing resolve to support a June 29th blockade," a memo states.

The growing unrest, of course, cannot be resolved through greater coordination of security and government forces. First Nation frustration with this strategy will only continue to mount.

Crown Reward-Punishment System Divides Leaders and People

If coordinated action gets the goods, special attention must be paid to the government’s particular interest in "splinter" groups.

Under Canada’s colonial system, the struggle for Indigenous sovereignty, self-determination, Aboriginal and Treaty rights has historically been undermined by First Nations who cooperated with the Crown government turning in those members of First Nations who were resisting the Crown’s colonial system.

Over time this evolved into the Crown dividing First Nations into the "progressive" Indian Bands and the backward or "traditional" Indian Bands. Through its various Indian Affairs departments the federal government developed an approach to reward the "progressive' Indians and punish the "traditional" Indians.

This federal reward-punishment approach still exists, although the "Indian Agents" have been replaced by Band Councils who now do the job of delivering Crown programs and services to their community members. Funding for Band Councils and other First Nation organizations’ is tightly controlled by the federal government’s bureaucracy through a system of legislation, policies, terms and conditions.

The First Nations Chiefs and Leaders who become more known and prominent are largely the individuals who have been trained and supported by federal bureaucrats. These individuals become known for their seeming ability to get federal funding for First Nations’ projects.

However, many of these individuals depend on federal support to advance their political careers. This is the reward system at work. Those Chiefs and Leaders who do not cooperate with the federal government often have their funding requests ignored or given less precedence. In some circumstances the federal government will even support "splinter" groups to take out the offending Chief or Leader. A current prominent example of this is the Algonquins of Barriere Lake in Western Quebec, but this also occurred historically at the Six Nations Grand River Territory.

The INAC and RCMP documents make it clear that while the Canadian State Security Apparatus is concerned by "splinter" groups, they are also apprehensive even when dealing with the current Aboriginal establishment. The reports indicate a belief that Chiefs and Leaders from Indian Act Band Councils and First Nation establishment organizations like AFN and their Provincial/Territorial Organizations have the potential to become Aboriginal "extremists."

What the INAC and RCMP briefings show is that there needs to be unity on the ground with coordinated political actions between First Nations Peoples in order to protect, defend and advance First Nation pre-existing sovereignty, and First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty rights to lands and resources. Divide and conquer tactics can only be met with new strategies of alliance-building, and by bringing the leadership back down to the land.

Russell Diabo is a member of the Mohawk Nation at Kahnawake, Quebec, and a policy advisor. Shiri Pasternak is a Toronto-based writer, researcher and organizer. An earlier version of this article appeared in the Mediacoop.ca and the First Nations Strategic Bulletin.

Barriere Lake riot police

In BC, Pipes Spell Double Trouble

Moira Peters — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:01:27 +0000

KSL gas pipeline is low profile, high threat

VANCOUVER—The struggle against the proposed Enbridge pipeline, which has galvanized First Nations throughout northern BC and earned popular support from people across the country, has become one of the highest profile Indigenous and environmental issues in Canada. Concerns are mounting that in Enbridge's shadow, other energy projects are slipping under the radar—with potentially explosive consequences.

The Kitimat Summit Lake (KSL) gas pipeline, also called the Pacific Trails Pipeline, is of emerging concern to Wet'suwet'en land defenders and local residents. If built, this pipeline would connect to an existing Westcoast Energy Pipeline at Summit Lake, near the geographical centre of BC, and cut west to Kitimat.

“The general location of the pipeline was the first phase of BC’s new and controversial Energy Corridor discussions; other phases...included the Enbridge oil pipeline from Alberta’s tar sands to Kitimat, which many First Nations strongly opposed in early 2011,” reads a recent report prepared by the BC Tap Water Alliance about the KSL pipeline proposal.

At the western end of the proposed pipeline would sit a brand new Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) port, which is being built by a handful of former Duke Energy insiders on Haisla reserve land at Bish Cove, an area described in media reports as pristine beachfront. First planned as a pipeline to supply the tar sands with natural gas, the project has since been modified to provide an export channel for the emerging shale gas bonanza in northeastern BC and Alberta.

“In 2004, for all of the energy processes in North America, we didn’t have enough gas,” said Will Koop of the BC Tap Water Alliance. “Now they want to export this gas, they want to change the direction of the import gas proposal from Kitimat to the tar sands and reverse it,” Koop told The Dominion.

The proposed KSL pipeline would be almost 500 kilometres in length and 91 centimetres in diameter; it would also be flanked by an 18-metre right-of-way on each side. The project has quietly received approval from both the federal and provincial governments, and is awaiting the final nod from the National Energy Board, the federal agency that oversees oil and gas projects in Canada.

“Nobody showed up for the first open house in Houston—three people I think—so they cancelled all the other open houses. There was never another open house on the KSL pipeline,” said Glenda Ferris, a long time environmentalist who lives in the Buck Creek Valley near Houston BC. “There was never even a news article about this pipeline in the local papers...They did this all under the table,” she said.

In February 2011, Vancouver-based Pacific Northern Gas sold its stake in the KSL project to the Houston-based Apache Corporation and EOG Resources (formerly Enron).

Ferris is not alone in feeling left in the dark about the plans to build the KSL pipeline.

In early April 2011, Freda Huson, a spokesperson for the Unist'hot'en Clan of the Wet'suwet'en, received a letter from Pacific Trails Pipeline, indicating that the company planned to put drilling pads on the site of her family’s camp. A week later, Huson visited the location, the company having neglected to seek permission or prior consent from her clan as traditional land owners.

On the site, Huson noted fluorescent ribbons inscribed with the words “Pacific Trails Pipelines” hanging from tree branches, marking the path the pipeline would follow. Enraged, Huson took down the ribbons, and returned the next day with members of her family to build a makeshift fence around the area.

These days, Huson is entertaining the idea of moving into a cabin on-site so that she can keep a closer eye on what is happening on the land she says her family has depended on for trapping and fishing for hundreds of years.

“I received a telephone call and they said they were wanting to meet with us, because we told them they were not coming in, and we would block them,” said Huson, referring to her last interaction with one of the pipeline companies.

Unlike in the case of the Enbridge pipeline, elected officials from the 14 First Nations along the KSL pipeline path have already agreed to the project. Some have received incentives, including employment for band members, for agreeing to the project. The Haisla Nation did not respond to a request for an interview before press time.

The cumulative impacts of the infrastructure connected to the KSL pipeline will be enormous, and range from LNG terminal and storage areas near the coast to the massive shale gas projects in northeastern BC, which are slated to use a significant portion of the energy generated by the proposed Site-C dam. A recent study from Cornell University indicates that natural gas extracted from shale through a process known as hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) may actually release more carbon emissions in the long run than coal or oil.

Oil and gas pipelines running side by side also make a dangerous combination.

East of the Morice River, lying to the west of the town of Smithers, BC, a significant distance separates the proposed route of the Enbridge oil pipeline and that of KSL. However, closer to the river as well as to the west, the proposed pipelines would run side by side.

“When they go up the Morice and through the coast mountains to Kitimat, they’re right on top of each other,” said Ferris. “The basic probability of failure is an explosion, why would you ever allow an oil pipeline to be built next to the KSL pipeline?"

“I’ve never seen Enbridge acknowledge the KSL pipeline,” she said, “and what hazard the KSL pipeline is going to pose to an oil pipeline.”

Enbridge did not return this reporter’s request for an interview before press time.

Dawn Paley is a journalist in Vancouver.

Treeline

From Ski Hills to the Summit

dru — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:09:22 +0000

Indigenous activists challenge Canada’s claims to traditional lands

VANCOUVER—“Recovery and New Beginnings” is the slogan Canada will be pushing at the G20 summit in Toronto, but for many Indigenous people, what’s going on inside the meeting represents more of the same.

Activists like Arthur Manuel of the Secwepemc Nation think the impacts of a Canada-hosted summit are clear.

“The G8/G20 impacts Indigenous people because Canada, who’s hosting the session, is actually claiming they have 100 per cent exclusive power, jurisdiction, authority over Aboriginal and treaty territories, and that’s totally wrong,” he said.

Manuel and others will be working to ensure that the illegitimacy of the G20, and the Canadian government’s ongoing denial of Indigenous sovereignty, take centre stage during the meetings.

What is Defenders of the Land?

In a declaration entitled, “Tell the world the truth about Canada’s record on Indigenous rights!”, the Defenders of the Land, a network of Indigenous communities and activists, is appealing for a “cross-Canada day of non-violent action” on June 24, timed to coincide with the opening of the G20 summit in Toronto.

According to the declaration, actions could include “blockades, occupations, rallies, or economic disruptions, in addition to spiritual ceremonies and community gatherings, all of which maximize respect for life and our rights as Indigenous Peoples.”

First Nations signed on include the Algonquins of Barriere Lake in Quebec, the Ardoch Algonquin and Big Trout Lake in Ontario, and the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, which represents eight communities in the central interior of British Columbia.

They aim to draw attention to what they say is the Canadian government’s “continued policy...to terminate Indian Peoples by removing our land and resource base and denying us the right to self-determination.”

Canada, alongside New Zealand, Australia and the United States, were the only countries to vote against the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2007. Australia reversed its position last year and was recently followed by New Zealand, which declared its support at the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in New York on April 19. The next day, Washington’s UN Ambassador Susan Rice announced the United States would review its opposition.

In his Speech from the Throne in March, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper indicated the Conservative Government might give “qualified recognition” to the UN Declaration, which critics argue would drastically limit its full implementation.

During the national day of action, Defenders of the Land will demand the Canadian government adopt and implement the UN Declaration, recognize Indigenous land rights, stop criminalizing Indigenous human rights activists, and investigate and take action to end the murder and disappearance of hundreds of Indigenous women (582 since 1974, by the latest count of the Native Women’s Association of Canada).

—Martin Lukacs

From climate change to Indigenous rights, the government of Canada lags far behind.

The G8 is a power play by participating countries, said Ben Powless, a Mohawk from Six Nations who works with the Indigenous Environmental Network. “It’s an effort to try and get out of their international obligations in terms of the [United Nations] and in terms of their own actual moral and legal responsibilities to the people most impacted by their decisions.”

Manuel and Powless are part of a push to bring Indigenous resistance to the international, macroeconomic level. Both are involved with Defenders of the Land, a national-level organization that attempts to bring together a national response to Indigenous struggles that are often isolated and fragmented.

“The AFN [Assembly of First Nations] has already tried to deal with all these issues, and so have all the provincial, territorial and tribal organizations,” said Manuel. “They’ve all written their letters, they’ve all had their resolutions, but the government doesn’t respond to it. The Defenders is just another added level of reaction that is coming from a body that isn’t really controlled through any sort of government-type funding,” he said.

The AFN and the territorial and tribal organizations receive yearly core and project funding from the federal government.

“But I don’t think Defenders in itself is adequate. I think the real answer is the local people have to get involved, local people have to take action on the ground and force the federal government and the provincial government to change basic fundamental policy,” said Manuel.

This push for bottom-up action is a concerted, purposeful response to the top-down, undemocratic powers exercised by the G20.

“Right now all of the major economic decisions are top-down; that’s what the G8/G20 is all about,” said Manuel. “All the top dogs get together, and they make decisions in private meetings. And the decisions float down—which is wrong. One of the things about Aboriginal treaty rights is that it’s a very bottom-up kind of approach, especially vis-a-vis the G20.”

Manuel emphasized that non-Native support for Indigenous struggle is not only possible, but also an effective way to push back against corporate power.

“The real thing for Canadian people to realize is that Indigenous people are really the only ones who have a legitimate interest in pushing back government and pushing back industry, and you can tell that just by the court decisions that Indian people have won,” he said. “If Canadians can understand that, that’s how they can counterbalance big companies: by supporting Indigenous people, and the recognition of Aboriginal treaty rights—as opposed to just leaving it up to the government. If you leave it up to the government then you’re endorsing the top-down approach.”

While 2010 is the second time Canada has hosted the Winter Olympics and the G8 in a single year, it is the first time anti-capitalist and anti-colonial movements will converge on both events.

For those who were part of the anti-Olympics convergence in Vancouver, the G8/G20 protests in Ontario mark the next step forward.

“The step forward I want to take from anti-Olympics organizing is from here to Toronto,” said Lyn Highway, a community organizer in Vancouver. “Convergences are places where Indigenous resistance can connect with other anti-capitalist resistance.”

For Highway, being able to work on an autonomous action and also plug into legal and media infrastructure set up as part of the convergence, was one of the key successes of the anti-Olympics convergence.

“The anti-globalization movement never really mobilized Native people in North America, although there were large numbers involved in Mexico and South America,” said Gord Hill, an artist from the Kwakwaka’wakw nation involved in anti-Olympics organizing. But he thinks many Native people were encouraged by the expressions of resistance during the Games in Vancouver.

“No movement has ever succeeded without using a diversity of tactics, which arises from the involvement of diverse social movements, and this is a strength that should be promoted,” said Hill. “Expressions of resistance in non-Native movements shows a fighting spirit, a warrior spirit,” he said.

A day of action on Indigenous rights, called by the Defenders of the Land, will take place June 24 in Toronto.

An Indigenous counter-summit planned for Toronto evolved out of an Indigenous summit in Hokkaido, Japan, which took place during the G8 summit there in 2008.

The decision to focus on the G8 in 2008 was a telling moment in the international Indigenous movement, said Powless, because it brought together those people living in G8 countries who are directly impacted by economic and colonial policies.

The four-day gathering at Toyako, Hokkaido, in Ainu territory, included Ainu performances and cultural events, as well as open- and closed-door meetings, all of which took place alongside public events surrounding the G8 summit. “It did a good job of opening up the spotlight in terms of Indigenous issues there, and gave a fairly prominent voice to a lot of the Indigenous representatives who were able to attend,” said Powless.

In addition to the actions of June 24, Indigenous people will be active around the G20 in labour unions, anarchist collectives, and national and youth organizations.

Dawn Paley is a journalist based in Vancouver. She is a member of the editorial collective of the Vancouver Media Co-op.

This story was published in The Dominion's special issue on the G8 and G20 summits in Ontario. We will continue to publish independent, investigative news about the G8 and G20 throughout the month of June.

For up-to-the-minute G8/G20 news from the streets of Toronto, visit the Toronto Media Co-op.

Grassy Narrows River Run 3

NAFTA Tribunal recognizes sacred place of Quechan Tribe – denies Glamis Gold's claim in full

Sandra — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:09:20 +0000

IMG_1642.JPG

[Photo (2008) by Sandra Cuffe of an old Glamis mining claim stake in an area of traditional Quechan territory that is an ancient sacred trail between two sacred mountains.]

[Repost: http://www.indianlaw.org/node/424]

June 9, 2009

Fort Yuma, CALIFORNIA/ARIZONA -- Today, the NAFTA Tribunal in the Glamis Gold dispute against the United States released its long-awaited decision.

The Tribunal found that the State of California's and the United States' actions in regulating hard rock mining on public lands did NOT violate provisions of NAFTA.

"We were the first tribe to have our briefs accepted in a NAFTA claim dispute" stated Mike Jackson, Sr., President, Quechan Nation. "The award shows that the Tribunal understood that the Indian Pass area is a sacred area to the Quechan people, worthy of protection from hard rock mining. After battling the mining company for nearly fifteen years, it is good to have this decided. We encourage Glamis (now GoldCorp) to take immediate steps to put the matter behind all of us."

Such steps could include GoldCorp not appealing the decision and abandoning or otherwise relinquishing its mining claims so that the existing withdrawal of the area from new mining claims would absorb the area proposed for the mine. Glamis must also pay two-thirds of all proceeding costs.

Controversy rocks lead-up to 2010 Olympics

Van Ferrier — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 19:08:27 +0000

With more than a full year before the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics begin, the games have already encountered stiff opposition. A range of groups have expressed their disagreement with the way that the Olympics are being run on Canada's west coast. Their concerns include: environmental destruction, the rights of low or no income residents, lack of transparency and consultation in decision making, and development on indigenous land that has never been surrendered to Canada.

Not With Bullets or Machetes

Moira Peters — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 06:27:30 +0000

Popular resistance to Xalala Dam finds international law on its side

COPAL’AA, GUATEMALA–In a remote village bordering the Chixoy River in northern Guatemala, scores of people gather outside a wooden meeting hall. Mayan men, women and children face a video camera to demonstrate their resistance against the construction of the Xalala Dam, a mega-project promoted by the Guatemalan government which would flood an estimated minimum of 18 Indigenous villages and drastically affect many more.

The message, in the words of community activist Elena Hernández*, is clear: “I want to tell the businesses, the rich from other countries, the transnational corporations to respect our lands. We, the women, will defend our land.”

This resistance hasn’t gone unnoticed. In November, nine international corporations failed to bid on the hydroelectric project, despite estimates that the dam would generate annual profits totaling between US$100 million and US$150 million, according to Guatemala’s National Institute of Electrification (INDE).

Instead of an offer, Brazilian business conglomerate Odebrecht directed a letter to the Guatemalan government detailing its reluctance to invest. Luiz Sergio de O Ferreira, Odebrecht’s representative in Guatemala, stated in the letter that the corporation would not participate in the project due to the central government’s failure to manage local community opposition, as well as the change in the company’s financial liquidity, caused by the global economic situation.

For Mayan communities fighting for their right to control the natural resources on their land, the bidding failure was considered an achievement.

Nevertheless, the government retains its unyielding stance that the dam will be constructed, with or without immediate investment from international companies.

If it were built, Xalala would be the second-largest hydroelectric dam in the country, producing an estimated 181 megawatts of energy annually.

According to government calculations, with this energy Guatemala could forgo the use of nearly 2.1 million barrels of petroleum derivatives, avoid the annual emission of 240 tons of contaminated substances and eliminate the 100-megawatt energy deficit currently facing the county.

These statistics led the INDE to define the project as “economically viable, socially equitable and environmentally sustainable.”

If the project were to go ahead, most of the energy would likely be used to fuel more resource extraction, like mining, and be sold for export.

But according to community leader Jeremiaz Chuy*, the project is neither clean nor economical: "[The dam] is not clean because it stagnates water and kills aquatic life, contaminates water sources that people live off of and floods large extensions of forest where many animals live," he says. "And it’s not cheap when you take into account all the fertile lands and food sources that are lost. If the government calculated all of this, as well as the cost of fairly relocating all the affected families, they would find it a very expensive project."

Many of the villages that form the Association of Communities for Development and in Defense of Territory and National Resources (ACODET), are accessible only by canoe or via long, muddy jungle paths. Their inhabitants harvest corn and beans, as well as some specialty crops like coffee and cardamom on small plots of land, which they work as a family. Some of the communities are located directly adjacent to the river, which allows them to transport their crops, catch fish for their families and have regular access to clean water.

Even though the government hasn’t provided many of these communities with roads, electricity, running water or schools, it certainly hasn’t lost sight of them. The government of Alvaro Colom, like that of his predecessors, is more than aware of the economic possibilities of the region.

National and international eyes have long been focused on the oil reserves under the soil, the electricity-producing potential of the Chixoy River and the rich terrain, which could be used for producing crops for biofuels.

Today, there is a complex negotiation at work between the government and the economic elite to exploit these resources. But according to the communities in resistance, these plans don’t consider the Maya people's plight.

Throughout Guatemala there is a growing movement to propose alternatives to mega-projects, like community- or municipality-run, small-scale hydroelectric dams to meet local energy needs.

Nonetheless, mega-dams are being promoted as the panacea that will supply regional needs, the needs of a rapidly growing mining- and resource-extraction industry, and make Guatemala a net exporter of energy as part of Plan Mesoamerica, formerly known as the Puebla-Panama Plan.

Worries about the effects of energy mega-projects led 144 communities in the Ixcán region to hold a community referendum in April 2007. The referendum was about the proposed Xalala Dam and oil exploration in the area.

Of the 21,155 participants, 89.7 per cent rejected the project, according to official data provided by then-municipal Mayor Marcos Ramirez.

Indigenous communities are legally guaranteed the right to consultation processes by the Guatemalan Constitution and Convention 169 of the International Labour Organization. But the Constitutional Court of Guatemala recently declared that these consultas are “legal, but not binding.”

Activists aren’t so easily discouraged. “This time we are here not with bullets or machetes,” proclaims community activist Pablo Garcia*. “We are here with the laws we know can defend us.” This tactic represents an important step for a region that suffered from high levels of state-sponsored repression during Guatemala's brutal armed conflict that resulted in the death of more than 200,000, primarily Indigenous, people.

The international community seems to agree. Recently the United Nations Committee to End Racism and Discrimination (CERD) directed a letter to President Colom asking for an official response to claims presented by a human rights group regarding three key cases dealing with natural resources in Guatemala, including the Xalala Dam.

In their letter, CERD likened the Guatemalan government's lack of respect for the communities' popular referendum and their promotion of harmful mega-projects in Indigenous regions to institutional racism.

The Xalala Dam project was conceived in the 1970s, during the 36-year armed conflict. In the early 1980s, the now-infamous Chixoy Dam was constructed with the backing of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

In order to construct the Chixoy Dam, the Guatemalan army massacred 444 of the 791 Indigenous residents of the village of Río Negro. Survivors and their families have yet to receive any compensation for the damages inflicted by the state to clear the way for the Chixoy Dam.

To this day, affected towns have received little of the development promised to the region by the INDE and the principal funders when the project was getting off the ground. The residents of Río Negro were relocated to a town eight hours from their farmland and most are unable to pay for access to the water and electricity they were promised. Communities that would be affected by the proposed Xalala Dam fear a similar outcome.

In November, when community members denied land access to INDE engineers looking to conduct final geographic studies, INDE representatives returned in a low-flying helicopter. In a region that is heavily scarred by the armed conflict, this action provoked fear and frustration.

Further concern surfaced when President Colom announced in December that the military base located in the Ixcan’s municipal seat would be strengthened in order to recover territories that have been occupied by drug traffickers in the region.

Additionally, new military bases will be installed around the Northern Transversal Strip, where there are plans to put in a highway connecting Mexico with Guatemala’s Atlantic Coast.

According to Colom, “We are working so that Xalala will be constructed as Chixoy was. We have an offer for financing, and it will pay for itself.”

Community members worry that this statement indicates a remilitarization of the region. Colom's statement also alludes to the possibility the dam will go forward as a public-private partnership.

It is expected that the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) will play a role in funding the Xalala Dam, which requires an initial investment of $350 to $400 million, according to Alberto Cohen, President of INDE.

As a promoter of Plan Mesoamerica-related projects and so-called clean energy alternatives, the IDB has openly stated its eagerness to fund hydroelectric initiatives in Guatemala.

Community leaders worry that government institutions will begin to divide the resistance by offering strings-attached development projects to the region. In a region where the 2008 United Nations Human Development Report indicated a poverty rate of 84.7 per cent, organizers worry that the people could easily be bought.

“We don’t need compensation. Our struggle, our organization, doesn’t have a price. The money that they could give us wouldn’t last forever. God willing, we will have the courage to not accept preconditioned development projects,” stated Hernandez.

Last December, the Guatemalan government contracted the National Electricity Commission of Mexico to begin carrying out feasibility studies for the dam. The future of the project is uncertain, but the resistance to this and other mega-projects is strong.

More than 30 other municipalities throughout Guatemala have exercised their right to territorial sovereignty and carried out referendums that reject various forms of resource extraction and energy projects on their lands.

“Article 169 of the ILO and the Universal Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples are two machetes we can use to defend our rights, but we have to know how to use them!" says Gonzalo Diaz* of the Catholic Church’s social branch. "Someone who doesn’t know how to use a machete ends up cutting himself.”

*Names have been altered upon request of interviewees.

Carrie Comer is currently working for the Network in Solidarity with the People of Guatemala and is based in Guatemala City.

Xalala Dam consulta kids

Xalala Dam consulta line

What is Equity

Paula LaPierre — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 18:41:16 +0000

Land & Jail Part II

Moira Peters — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 10:45:19 +0000

Canada's incarceration strategy

NANAIMO, BRITISH COLUMBIA–Armed Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) entered the Six Nations Territory of Douglas Creek in Caledonia, Ontario – about 20 kilometres east of Hamilton - on September 19 of this year. According to witnesses, the OPP jumped a resident, “beat him down,” and arrested him while threatening other residents not to interfere.

The Crown, after repeated arrests and jailings, reached a deal with the defense on September 29 to have activist Shawn Brant plead guilty to involvement in two blockades in Desoronto, Ontario, in April 2007. The Crown agreed to drop all but three of the mischief charges, with Brant to receive a sentence of time already served pretrial, a 90-day conditional sentence, and one year of probation.

Brant cited familial considerations behind his agreement with the Crown. However, OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino still faces scrutiny over his controversial threats to Brant. Ontario New Democrat MP Peter Kormos chided Fantino for his “pugnacious and bellicose” remarks and his “Rambo-style policing.”

Brant challenged Fantino afterwards: “Commissioner Fantino has always said he couldn’t comment because [the case is] before the courts. Well, now it’s settled, and it's time the public hears from Mr. Fantino.”

****

Incarceration of First Nations people has been the long-standing strategy for Canadian authorities.

The Supreme Court of Canada stated on April 23, 1999, in R v. Gladue: “If overreliance on incarceration is a problem with the general population, it is of much greater concern in the sentencing of aboriginal Canadians.”

R v. Gladue referred to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples which held that the “crushing failure” of justice meted out to Original Peoples was due to “the fundamentally different world views of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people” and that it “emphasize[d] the importance of an understanding of history.”

In the vein of this recommendation, it is important to note that culturally insensitive and racist proclamations have long been a part of the Canadian criminal justice and political establishment’s make-up. Meanwhile, provincial authorities continue the use of aggressive strategies in disputes with Original Peoples. At Barriere Lake First Nation, in October of this year, the Quebec police used tear gas and “pain compliance” techniques against peaceful demonstrators, including elders and children, said witnesses.

Canada’s first prime minister, John A Macdonald, exposed an animus toward the Métis in writings to his London agent: “These impulsive half-breeds have got spoilt by their emeute," he wrote, "and must be kept down by a strong hand until they are swamped by the influx of settlers.”

The controversial deputy superintendent general of Indian Affairs, Duncan Campbell Scott, testified before a Special Committee of the House of Commons examining the Indian Act amendments of 1920:

I want to get rid of the Indian problem.
...
Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill.

In 1991, the Kanienkehaka community of Kanesatake was at odds with the township of Oka, ON over the township’s proposal for a golf course expansion and condo development on land claimed by the Kanienkehaka. The Sûreté du Québec, Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), and the Royal 22nd Regiment were brought in to break up the Kanienkehaka blockade.

Racism was heightened by the Oka Crisis. Warrior Publications informed of “white mobs” burning and hanging effigies of Kanienkehaka warriors from lamp posts.

In 1995, a group of Original Peoples had gathered to hold the previously banned Sundance ceremony at Ts’peten (Gustafsen Lake) in central British Columbia. There the celebrants were accosted by ranch hands and told to vacate the land. This led to a major standoff over the unceded Secwepemc land of the Canoe Creek First Nation.

Prior to the mobilization of the RCMP at Ts’peten, Bruce Clark, legal counsel for the Ts’peten Defenders (as the defenders of indigenous title were called), informed the RCMP that action against the Sundancers would be illegal according to international and constitutional law.

Clark reminded the RCMP of their duty “to respect and to defend the rule of law” that he insisted was "clear and plain.”

Clark applied logic to remediate the crimes committed against the Original Peoples: “Legal justice requires that the rights usurped be restored, and that reasonable compensation be made for past transgressions. Territory should be restored where it has been illegally taken away. And the existing aboriginal right to govern upon that territory should be respected.”

Fifteen of the 18 Sundancers at Ts’peten were found guilty, including Secwepemc Elder Wolverine (William Jones Ignace), who was found guilty of mischief to property and other crimes.

Wolverine contended that ranch “owner” Lyall James was a squatter on indigenous land.

“It’s the real criminals who are in control here. The judges," he said. "The lawyers. The politicians. And in the enforcement arm, the RCMP and its agencies. These are the real criminals because they're covering up the theft of native land.”

Clark stated that the treaty process is designed to “extinguish the Indians’ natural law, international law and constitutional law right of jurisdiction that otherwise is not supposed to be ‘molested or disturbed’ by domestic crown governments, their courts or their police.” Clark implicated the judiciary in the “theft of jurisdiction” and cover up of genocide. An RCMP management team video depicted Ryan relaying orders from Superintendent Len Olfert: "Kill this Clark and smear the prick and everyone with him," and, "Clark is a goddamned snake."

The Law Society of Upper Canada v. Bruce Clark acknowledged on June 19, 1996, that “the ‘genocide’ of which Mr. Clark speaks is real” and inescapable. Despite this, Clark was disbarred in 1999 for being “ungovernable.”

Clark does not flinch from indicting many of his peers in the genocide. He contends that the judiciary is running the “perfect scam,” “the absolute quintessence of crime personified” by preventing an impartial third party from ruling on the genocide perpetrated on the Original Peoples in Canada. Wrote Clark, “The moment you get third party adjudication, it’s game over for these criminals.”

Kim Petersen is the Original Peoples Editor for The Dominion.

For more on Canada's strategy of incarceration, see "Land & Jail: Ipperwash, official racism, and the future of Ontario," also by Kim Petersen.

Six Nations Cops

LAST RESORT: Natives Stand Up

Lia Tarachansky — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 18:30:14 +0000

Canadian government plays divide and conquer with Algonquin indigenous peoples over logging

Video Description: The indigenous Algonquin community of Barriere Lake has been fighting with the provincial government of Quebec and the federal government of Canada for nearly twenty years over their land. Blockades they have set up in the late 1980s stopped illegal logging on their land and led them to sign a Trilateral Agreement with the two governments. Today, the community claims the agreement and all others that followed have not been honored, while logging companies plan to resume operations. In an effort to exert pressure on the government and the logging industry, the community has set up several blockades in protest. In response, the community's spokespeople and leaders have been arrested. Benjamin Nottoway, Barriere Lake's customary chief has been arrested at the last blockade and sentenced to two months in jail.

PHOTO: Solidarity Blockade Slows Spirit Train

Lia Tarachansky — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 02:46:34 +0000

By Lia Tarachansky and Jesse Freeston

Vaughan, ON- On Thanksgiving Sunday, October 12th, 2008 roughly two dozen protesters blockaded the Canadian Pacific Rail just north of Toronto.

The blockade began at 5:30 p.m. and ended just after 8:00 p.m. Winnie Small, 20, attached herself to the rails in order to delay removal by police.

Alex Hundert, police liaison for the varied group of protesters, negotiated with the local police service, which was taken by surprise by the bridge blockade.

The group, consisting of Anti-War @ Laurier organizers, native organizers from the Six Nations reservation by Caledonia, and various individuals, was allowed to leave the blockade without arrests or conflict.

According to the police, who were in communications with CP rail on site, the blockade caused millions of dollars of economic damage and delayed trains all along the rail line.

Please stay tuned for The Real News Network video report later this week

Blockaders Set up lock down

Winnie Small, 20, locked down to the tracks with a "v" shaped metal bar

"No Olympics on Stolen Native Land" banner laid out by protesters

Chiefs of Ontario intervene for Barriere Lake

Lia Tarachansky — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 01:41:30 +0000

Rt Hon Stephen Harper.Barrier Lake.October 10 08.jpg

Chiefs of Ontario intervene on behalf of Barriere Lake Algonquins.

Please see attached

Video: Algonquin Blockade Attacked by Police

Lia Tarachansky — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:43:55 +0000

NOTE: NORMAN MATCHEWAN, SPOKESPERSON FOR THE BARRIERE LAKE ALGONQUINS WAS PUBLISHED TODAY IN THE MONTREAL GAZETTE!

CP Spirit Train will roll into Cooksville GO Station on Thanksgiving weekend

Lia Tarachansky — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:21:36 +0000

handcuffs_thumb.jpg

TORONTO, Oct. 8, 2008 /CNW/ - On Monday, October 13, the Canadian Pacific Spirit Train will bring Olympic spirit to the Cooksville GO Station and surrounding community with a free festival from 1:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

Six-time Juno award winner Colin James headlines the event, while Olympic and Paralympic athletes bring the excitement of the games to this traveling outdoor festival promoting the Vancouver 2010 Games.

GO Transit is proud to have the Cooksville GO Station in Mississauga as the location for this festival stop. "We are happy to work with Canadian Pacific and help encourage national pride for the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games," said GO Transit Managing Director Gary McNeil.

This free, all day event has something for the entire family to enjoy from musical performances to interacting with Olympic and Paralympic athletes. Visitors can also enjoy many activities and explore various exhibits. The Kids' Zone will offer workshops where families and kids can build their own mini Olympic wooden Inukshuks in honour of the Vancouver Olympic emblem. Other activities include trying out sledge hockey, a challenging Paralympic sport, or creating a video postcard message for Canadian athletes at the video booth.

For more information on the CP Spirit Train village, please visit
www.cpspirittrain.com for up-to-date event details, including concert and performance schedules, and an in-depth look at CP's historical involvement with the Olympics.

Algonquins Hospitalized After Police Attack

Lia Tarachansky — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 19:11:12 +0000

ABL police.jpg

UPDATE: An Algonquin man is hospitalized the morning after Quebec police shot him in the chest with a tear-gas cannister. A disabled teenage girl was also treated with oxygen in the local Health Clinic. Twenty two children under eight and two babies were caught in the tear gas shot by the police.

To view photos

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Tuesday, October, 7, 2008

Canada and Quebec use riot police, tear gas, and "pain compliance" on peaceful Algonquin families to avoid negotiations: 'pain compliance' perfect description of Conservative's aboriginal policy, say community spokespeople

Kitiganik/Rapid Lake, Algonquin Territory / - Yesterday afternoon, the Conservative government and Quebec used riot police, tear gas, and "pain compliance" techniques to end a peaceful blockade erected by Algonquin families from Barriere Lake, rather than negotiate, as requested by the community. The blockade on Highway 117 in Northern Quebec began at 6:00am Monday, with nearly a hundred community members of all ages and their supporters promising to remain until Canada's Conservative government and Quebec honoured signed agreements and Barriere Lake's leadership customs. Around 4pm, nearly sixty Quebec officers and riot police encircled families after a meal and without warning launched tear gas canisters, one of which hit a child in the chest.