 |
UPDATE February, 2001
SNUNEYMUXW TREATY NEGOTIATIONS DRAFT CONSULTATION AGREEMENT-IN-PRINCIPLE
January 30, 2000 Since the article below was written, the British Columbia Government 'picked up its marbles and went home' --- its nose out of joint for being accused of negotiating in bad faith. It's not the first time. Last October
FROM THE EDITOR
BC Treaty Process - Bad Faith Negotiations
or Bad Taste Negotiations?
News and Comment
by Tehaliwaskenhas -Bob Kennedy, Oneida
January 29, 2000
The Universe is Unravelling as it Should
I suspect the government's recent reaction illustrates a combination of 'spoiled brat syndrome' along with some legal beagle concerns, perhaps even wisdom about so-called bad faith. The Gitanyow court decision specifically talked about the necessity of the government negotiating in good faith with aboriginal people. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, the province's reaction to recent allegations may in part stem from such legal sensitivities. Or not. Perhaps it's merely a reflection of the attitude from the all too popular game of 'them-against-us'.
Case in point. The BC Government has made it clear the Nisga'a Treaty is a template for other negotiations with First Nations. Even if First Nations don't like the idea, let's test the good faith aspect of the government's position. Question. If it is a template can we not assume that whatever is in the Nisga'a treaty is also on the table for the other negotiations? Good faith would suggest the answer is simply yes. However, I have been told the BC negotiators have sat down with First Nations and rejected other First Nations demands, even though what they asked for is part of the Nisga'a model. Hmm. Bad faith negotiations? Dictionaries may not define it, but the courts have.
Remember when Pierre Trudeau was Prime Minister? When challenged over some issue he shot back with, "The Universe is Unfolding as it Should", a reference to the philosophical words from the Desiderata. Observing what's going on these days between First Nations and other governments, I am tempted to use poetic license and suggest, "The BC Treaty process is Unravelling, as it Should". Am I wrong? Consider the latest development of key Native leaders, setting aside their political differences, joining together in a consensus statement to fight the government claims policy. You not only read it here, but you can read 'the writing on the wall' too. Click on the photo at the top of the page for more details on the historic consensus agreement by BC First Nation leaders, supported by the AFN.
Turnaround is Fair Play
Snuneymuxw/Nanaimo First Nation's
Strategic Treaty Offer
News and Comment
by Tehaliwaskénhas - Bob Kennedy
January 16, 2000
An announcement and staged media event on Vancouver Island might best be described as one of the clearest examples of First Nation frustration with the British Columbia Treaty process. It also illustrates that despite the master gamesmanship by the provincial and federal governments, they don't have a monopoly on 'managing' the media or issues.
First Nation leaders are also capable of strategies to get out key messages and get the word out about BC's faltering treaty negotiations. Usually, the non-aboriginal governments make announcements, fly trial balloons, test the public waters and basically upstage First Nations by being first out of the gate with their treaty offers to the Indian people.
Not this time. Chief John Wesley, of the Snuneymuxw/Nanaimo First Nation, fresh from recent re-election, called a media conference in advance of the other governments and their plans to present a treaty and self government offer this week. As the expression goes, 'turnaround is fair play'.
Fairness is not something non-native governments get accused of by BC first nations. The Snuneymuxw gathering was deliberately planned for the San Salvador Campground, near the Nanaimo River because it is, "typical of the governments' treaty proposal". The land is one of the properties the governments are offering as treaty settlement land. In the words of the First Nation, "It is pathetically small, contains condemned buildings, is subject to flooding." As well, it will cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars to get back something the First Nation owned in the first place.
The Snuneymuxw First Nation says it is, "ringing alarm bells about recent tactics of government treaty negotiators." Chief John Wesley says three years of progress at the negotiating table has evaporated and the government actions are a serious threat to good faith negotiations. "We have invested millions of dollars in negotiations. We agreed not to go to court so we could try to negotiate resolutions that work for everyone. Now the governments are tossing aside all the progress we have made in the negotiations. Are they trying to force us into direct action or court?", asks Wesley.
What prompted this pro-active approach to public relations is the announcement by the governments they intend to make a public treaty proposal to the First Nation on January 19th. Snuneymuxw representatives got an advance briefing and were shocked at what they saw. Councillor Doug White said, the provincial proposal contains virtually none of the items they tentatively agreed to during the last three years. "We're still committed to negotiations but the governments are making it more and more difficult to justify staying at the table.", he warned.
The media gathering was not just a 'photo op', or smoke and mirrors. The Snuneymuxw laid out their comprehensive treaty offer to the other governments. It includes an offer to share 91%, 453,000 acres of their territory with non-native citizens, along with a guarantee that none of them will be evicted or their land expropriated.
Chief Wesley invited the public and media to try and look at the situation objectively. "Nobody calls the government greedy for trying to keep 99.1% of the territory they stole from us. We are being very generous in only reclaiming 9% of our lands for exclusive ownership.", explained Wesley. If you think about how much land and resources the First Nation lost, the chief is not wrong when he suggests the governments could never print enough money to compensate them.
Their timely proposal includes deliberate public pleasing language,"Snuneymuxw remains committed to ensuring public input into treaty negotiations." There are promises of fair treatment and an inclusive process aimed at non-Snuneymuxw citizens and governments. Many an olive branch has been laid out in this comprehensive offer. For example, in the governance proposal, the First Nation promises, "Non-Snuneymuxw citizens will have input into decisions that significantly and directly affect them." There is obvious wording aimed at avoiding conflict with their neighbours, "Snuneymuxw will agree to harmonized land-use planning and zoning with the city, RDN and Islands Trust provided the local governments agree to cooperate."
However, the Snuneymuxw are very firm in other areas under negotiation, ensuring their principles survive a treaty settlement. The First Nation has clearly laid out some areas in the treaty offer where they will not waver. The Snuneymuxw reject the Nisg'a treaty model that includes extinguishment of rights. As well, they will insist on maintaining their tax exempt status. For the Snuneymuxw leaders this point is easily defended, "Snuneymuxw has already contributed billions of dollars worth of lands and resources to the local and provincial economy."
Councillor White reminds people of what these negotiations mean to his people and what it's really all about. "This treaty is about a future for our grand-children and culture. Of course we need land. We have some of the smallest reserves in Canada: only 263 hectares. We desperately need land for housing. But we also need land for economic development to be self sufficient." But white also pointed out the need to leave some of the land alone for the trees and animals and water, so " there will always be places in our territory where we can keep our culture alive."
Rather than going to court, armed with the Supreme Court's Delgamuukw decision, the Nation wants to stay at the negotiating table to resolve the issues and promises to continue providing opportunities for input from non-native citizens of the area. However, in the summary of their treaty offer is a firm warning,"If treaty negotiations fail, the Snuneymuxw will be forced into the courts where local citizens and governments will have no input into the process".
Friday afternoon and the governments in Victoria and Ottawa were winding down for the weekend while the Snuneymuxw First Nation was all wound up, waiting to hear and watch the media reports, and ready for the next strategic round in their dispute with the 'other' governments.
January 30, 2000 - EDITOR'S POSTSCRIPT: It didn't take the provincial and federal governments long to respond. Because of the accusations of bad faith and unable to swallow their pride, they walked away from negotiations with the Snuneymuxw First Nation. In addition, the Nadleh Whut'en Treaty Office issued a news release alleging bad faith negotiations. The government walked away from those negotiations and the Carrier Sekani treaty table, but has since returned. Like some kind of soap opera, "As The Stomach Turns" --- we'll be back to this B Grade program in just a moment.
Click Here to Read the Summary of the
Snuneymuxw First Nation Treaty Offer
Click Here for Feds/Prov. News Release
Click Here to Read the Federal/Provincial
Governments' Joint Offer
Aboriginal Rights and Implementing Delgamuukw
© All contents are copyright 1998,1999, 2000
by INFOCOM Management-
a Native owned and operated company.
