Latest news with #CanadianConstitution
Hamilton Spectator
16-06-2025
- Politics
- Hamilton Spectator
Mi'kmaw mourn loss of treaty scholar, activist Kevin Christmas
The voice of a giant of activism and traditional wisdom for his people has gone silent. Membertou's Kevin Christmas died on May 28 after a seven month battle with cancer. Friends and colleagues say the impact of over four decades of his activism and treaty research will be felt for generations to come across the whole country. A treaty scholar, Indigenous advocate and environmental activist, Christmas was also a storyteller who shared knowledge rooted in treaties and sacred prophecies. He was brutally honest – but also amusing – whenever he gave speeches at events all across this country to educate Indigenous and non-indigenous about the betrayal of the Canadian government to its treaty responsibilities. His words were never boring or pedantic, but spoke of the disappointments and struggles of decades – if not centuries – of a contentious relationship Canadian Indigenous have had trying to ensure that treaty rights are acknowledged and practiced. As a young man, Christmas was part of the consultative process when former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau re-patriated the Canadian Constitution in 1982 and dialogue was undertaken with the Indigenous people of the country, including with Membertou First Nation. 'IDLE NO MORE' MOVEMENT In 2012, Christmas was an integral participant, leader and speaker for the 'Idle No More' movement that swept across Mi'kma'ki. The movement began as a protest against the Stephen Harper Conservative government's omnibus Bill C-45, which made changes to over 60 statutes, including the Environmental Protection Act and the Fisheries Act. Indigenous activists and their allies across the country argued that the bill diminished Indigenous rights and made it easier for the government and businesses to proceed with projects without adequate environmental assessment. While the bill passed based on its Criminal Code enhancements, it was not viewed as a total failure by environmentalists as it brought about a national conversation about Indigenous rights and environmental protection, leading to increased awareness and some policy changes. Eskasoni Indigenous rights activist and law graduate Suzanne Patles eulogized Christmas at his recent memorial service. She said he was a very humble man – a brilliant treaty scholar, a generous mentor, respected advisor and cherished friend. 'He was a man who is important to our nation – not only to Membertou but the community abroad,' Patles said. 'Kevin leaves behind a legacy rooted in compassion, strength and unwavering commitment to his people. A proud Mi'kmaq man, he devoted his life to the service of community, nation, and the protection of Mi'kmaw rights in title.' Patles said Christmas had a wisdom that guided many others in times of great change and challenges. His leadership was not only grounded in prophecy and traditional values, but was also deeply attuned to the needs of future generations. 'His work here on Earth reflected his belief in the strength of his people and the importance of Mi'kmaq rights in title,' she said. 'His death is a profound loss not only to his family, but to our entire nation.' 'HE HELD CANADA ACCOUNTABLE' Patles said Christmas, lived and breathed the responsibilities passed down by his ancestors. 'He understood that our treaties weren't relics of the past but living and binding promises of those today and of those in the future. He held Canada accountable for them. With dignity, brilliance and sometimes with a fire in his belly and good laugh.' she said. Patles recounted the times she had the honour of standing alongside Christmas during some of the most difficult battles for the Mi'kmaw during the last couple of decades including resisting fracking and the fight in Halifax to remove the statue of bounty-hunter Edward Cornwallis . She said his country-wide connections made it easier for other Mi'kmaq activists to feel welcome and protected across Canada. 'I ran into people Kevin had helped decades before,' she said. 'If anyone knew governance, it was Kevin. Whether it was Mi'kmaq governance, provincial or federal governance or even corporate governance: he knew it like the back of his hand.' COMMITMENT TO JUSTICE Patles commented that Kevin Christmas' legacy 'is woven into every fabric of our nation.' The late 1980s and early 1990s were a dynamic time for First Nations in Nova Scotia and Christmas was always on the periphery of change: attending the first Treaty Day at the legislature in Halifax in 1986, engaging in treaty rights issues across Atlantic Canada, and contributing to justice and economic development reform. His family says he was steadfast in his support of the fishers and cherished the opportunity to negotiate those early fishing agreements that put boats in the water and developed professional fishers. Christmas was instrumental in developing the National Committee on Treaties at the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), which, though short-lived, left a lasting impact. He also helped establish the Treaty and Aboriginal Rights Research Centre (TARR Centre) in Shubenacadie. In 2013, he joined the Nova Scotia Independent Panel on Hydraulic Fracking, contributing to the moratorium on fracking in Mi'kma'ki. Family and friends commented that Christmas was a fighter and a lover, with one tribute commenting on all the difference he has made in the world. Others memorialized him for his unwavering commitment to justice, his deep knowledge of treaty rights, and his generous spirit. Born in Sydney, he is survived by his wife of 48 years, Wendy (Morrison) Christmas, and their daughter, Lisa Christmas . Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Lawsuit accuses province of failing to protect Saskatchewan River delta, violating treaty obligations
Cumberland House Cree Nation says the provincial government is not protecting the Saskatchewan River system, and now it's time to take the province to court. Lawyers for the First Nation in northeastern Saskatchewan filed a statement of claim Tuesday in Saskatoon Court of King's Bench, alleging the government has failed to uphold its treaty obligations. It names the government of Saskatchewan as the defendant. For generations, the people of Cumberland House Cree Nation have depended on the Saskatchewan River delta, the largest freshwater river delta in North America, stretching 9,700 square kilometres from northeast Saskatchewan into western Manitoba, the lawsuit says. But government-approved activities upstream — such as dams, irrigation and industrial and urban uses — have dramatically reduced the amount of water that reaches the delta, continually degrading the ecosystem, the lawsuit says. That has affected the ability of the people there to exercise their treaty rights to maintain their way of life, Cumberland House Cree Nation Chief Rene Chaboyer said at a Tuesday news conference in Saskatoon. "We feel that our hand is being forced to … move forward into the court of law to seek justice, and today's a very important day in the history of our community, our province, in our country." He and other community members spoke about how the delta has changed over their lifetimes: the water is no longer safe to drink, species of fish have disappeared, moose are migrating elsewhere, birds are changing their migration patterns and muskrats are hard to find, they said. "Back in the day, it was healthy.… Nowadays it's scary," Chaboyer said. Treaty 5 covers an area of about 260,000 square kilometres in parts of what are now Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. It was signed in 1875, with the ancestors of Cumberland House signing on in 1876. The inhabitants agreed to share their land with the newcomers in exchange for promises, including that Cumberland House would be free to continue to hunt, fish, trap and harvest in the treaty territory, the lawsuit says. "The treaties are what allowed the newcomers to come and settle in Saskatchewan, and the treaties were only made because of that promise that Cumberland House Cree Nation could continue to maintain its way of life," Tim Dickson, the First Nation's lawyer, said at Tuesday's news conference. "That treaty promise is part of the foundation of Canada and of Canadian law. It's protected by the Canadian Constitution and it's enforceable in court." WATCH | Massive Saskatchewan irrigation plan threatens wildlife, opponents say: The Saskatchewan River delta is the First Nation's homeland and "essential" to their culture and identity, Dickson said. CBC News has reached out to the Saskatchewan government for its response to the lawsuit. Activities upstream — including hydroelectric dams, water diversion and withdrawal of water for irrigation, industrial uses and drinking water — have starved the delta of its vital sediment and polluted the water, Cumberland House is arguing in its lawsuit. The proposed construction of the $1.15-billion Lake Diefenbaker irrigation megaproject, which the government has committed to beginning this year, is also seen as "a very serious threat," Dickson said. Cumberland House has tried to engage with the province on the project, but "there has been very little engagement from the government," Dickson said. Instead, residents have watched as, year after year, the delta degrades. The loss of the delta would be felt not just by the people who live there, but by everyone, said Cumberland House Cree Nation Coun. Beverly Goulet. At the end of Tuesday's news conference, she responded to a question asked earlier by a journalist about how much compensation the community was seeking. "Instead of worrying about money, because we certainly can't take it with us when we pass … remember the children," Goulet said. "That's who we want to protect, because we've done enough damage to this planet. Like, what are they going to have? What have we done? "So, let's all think about that."
Canada Standard
04-06-2025
- Business
- Canada Standard
What if Alberta really did vote to separate?
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is using sovereignty sentiments in Alberta as a kind of implied threat to get a better deal for the province. In a letter to Mark Carney in the run-up to the recent first ministers conference in Saskatoon, Smith told the prime minister that failure to build additional pipelines for Alberta oil would "send an unwelcome signal to Albertans concerned about Ottawa's commitment to national unity." Accordingly, it's worth asking: what would happen if Alberta did vote to leave? Two historical touch points are the 1995 sovereignty referendum in Quebec and the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom in 2016. In different ways, both examples drive home one inevitable point: in the event of a vote to pursue sovereignty, the future of Alberta would have to be negotiated one painful and uncertain step at a time. Sovereignty is an assertion of independent governmental authority, notably including a monopoly over the legitimate use of force over a defined people and territory. Unlike provinces in a country like Canada, sovereign countries co-operate with each other if - and only if - it's in their interests to do so. Some proponents of separatism have argued that an independent Alberta could rely on international law to secure continued access to tidewater through Canada. The idea seems to form the basis of Smith's assertions that one nation cannot "landlock" another under international law. But that's not the case. What's more, international law - even if it does apply in theory - doesn't always hold in practice. That's because between countries, formal anarchy prevails: no one has the responsibility to enforce international law on their own. If one country breaks international law, it's up to other countries to respond. If that doesn't happen, then it just doesn't happen. Simply put, if Alberta were to leave Canada, it would lose all enforceable rights and protections offered by the Canadian Constitution and enforced by the institutions and courts. In their place, Alberta would get exactly - and only - what it can bargain for. The Quebec independence saga has in many ways clarified and refined the path to potential secession for provinces in Canada, and hints at what can happen in the aftermath of a sovereignty referendum. In the wake of the near miss that was the 1995 referendum - when those wanting to remain in Canada defeated those who voted to separate with the narrowest of margins - Jean Chretien's Liberal government took rapid steps to respond. Plan A focused on actions aimed at addressing Quebec's grievances, not unlike Carney's quest for a national consensus to build an additional pipeline. Another course of action, known as Plan B, defined the path to secession. The federal government asked the Supreme Court of Canada for a clarification on the legality of sovereignty. It then passed the Clarity Act, which enshrined into law Ottawa's understanding of the court's answer. The reference and act both made clear that any secession attempt could be triggered only by a "clear majority" on a "clear question." The act also illuminated the stakes of secession. The preamble of the legislation, for instance, spells out that provincial sovereignty would mean the end of guaranteed Canadian citizenship for departing provincial residents. The act also lays out some of the points to be negotiated in the event of secession, "including the division of assets and liabilities, any changes to the borders of the province, the rights, interests and territorial claims of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada, and the protection of minority rights." Simply put, everything would be on the table if Albertans opted to separate. Brexit provides an example of just how painful that process can be. After voting to leave the European Union, the U.K. found itself bogged down in a difficult negotiation process that continues to this day. Political, economic and trade rights - even including the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland - have all been painfully reconstituted through complex negotiations. Despite the promises made by those who advocated in favour of Brexit, the U.K. will continue to pay in perpetuity for access to the limited EU services it still retains. The U.K. is dealing with these challenges even though it was already a sovereign state. Alberta is not. Everything between a sovereign Alberta and its neighbours would be subject to difficult negotiations, both in the initial days of an independent Albertan state and any subsequent discussions. Once independent, Alberta would be a landlocked, oil-exporting nation. It would be negotiating with Canada - and the United States, its neighbour to the south - over every aspect of its new relationship. Its borders with other provinces and territories would need be negotiated, as would the status of marginalized populations and Indigenous Peoples within Alberta. The status of lands subject to treaty - in other words, most of the province - would have to be negotiated. Indigenous Peoples themselves have already made clear they have no interest in secession and would mount a vigorous defence of Indigenous rights as they exist within Canada. After all, if Canada is divisible, so is Alberta. A new republic has no automatic claims to territory with respect to Indigenous Peoples and treaty lands. Once borders were settled, Alberta would have little leverage and would need a lot of help as a country of about 4.5 million negotiating with neighbours of 35 million in Canada and 350 million in the U.S. Who would be its allies? Nothing would be guaranteed, not Alberta's admission to the United Nations, the establishment of an Albertan currency and exchange rates, national and continental defence, the management of shared borders and citizenship rules or the terms of cross-border trade and investment. Access to Canadian ports would be at Canada's discretion, negotiated on terms Canada considered in its interests. Alberta could no more force a pipeline through Canada than through the United States. Of course, a republic of Alberta would be free to pursue deeper relations with the American republic to its south. The U.S president, however, has already made clear what would be the likely terms for free trade: accession. Here, too, there would be no guarantees. Alberta could just as easily become an American territory, with limited representation, as it could a 51st state. "Puerto Rico North" is as possible as "Alaska South." Gone too would be any claims to share collective goods. Alberta's neighbours would have no incentive, for instance, to help with the inevitable post-oil clean-up, estimated in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Simply put, if Alberta were to vote to leave Canada, it would truly be on its own.
Ottawa Citizen
29-05-2025
- Politics
- Ottawa Citizen
MacDougall: New nation-building acts must happen in the national capital
Watching the King of Canada hold court at the temporary home of the Senate this week felt like history being made. And like history coming back to life. Article content Article content Yes, the scenes of King Charles and Queen Camilla harkened back to previous visits by other royals, most notably the late Queen Elizabeth when she opened Parliament in 1977. But the history it evoked in me wasn't regal; it was of events a few years later in the same setting — namely, Pierre Trudeau's negotiations over the patriation of the Canadian Constitution, which took place in the same building when it served as the Government Conference Centre. Article content Article content The world, the King read in the throne speech, is now a 'more dangerous and uncertain place,' a coded message meant for Donald Trump and his dismantling of world order. But the same could have been said when the elder Trudeau convened the premiers in the wake of the FLQ crisis and the then-robust campaign for Quebec sovereignty. The West was upset, too, with the National Energy Program. Like now, bold action was needed to strengthen national unity and identity. Article content Trudeau's answer was the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and 'full' Canadian sovereignty. And while the resulting 'Night of the Long Knives' led to René Lévesque's refusal to agree to reform, then to another round of separatism moves (following the failed constitutional wrangling at Meech Lake), the constitutional gambit was a big, bold move when big bold moves were required. Article content Article content If Canada is truly experiencing a 'hinge' moment, then big, bold action is required. And that action will need the agreement of the provinces, especially on domestic trade barriers. All the more reason, then, for the new prime minister to pull a 1981 and get the premiers around the table — in Ottawa — to hammer out a deal. Article content The location matters. A nation has a national capital for a reason. Big events need to happen on big — and symbolic — stages. Minor players can also come to life, or be exposed, on said stages. If Danielle Smith thinks Alberta separation is a goer, she should meet with all of her colleagues to make the case as part of a broader conversation, as Lévesque did generations ago. Article content Our politics and political figures have gotten so small recently, it's hard to remember how enormous some provincial voices of old were. There was Lévesque. But there was also Bill Davis, Peter Lougheed, Bill Bennett and Brian Peckford. Even the ministerial ranks were stuffed with bright minds and big personalities: Jean Chrétien, Roy Romanow and Roy McMurtry. It took the collective action of their minds and the prime minister's to achieve the restructuring of Canada's constitutional order.
Ottawa Citizen
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Ottawa Citizen
Explainer: What provincial investigation of the ODSCB means
Article content That possibility hasn't disappeared. In 2018, Nova Scotia dissolved elected school boards. School governance is managed by advisory councils appointed by the provincial government instead of school boards. Article content Why was the OCDSB under supervision before? Under Mike Harris' Conservative government, the province and cash-strapped school boards were battling over who had control of education. In 1998, the province took away school boards' taxation powers. Ottawa always had a strong tax base. That led to the expectation that education extras could always be provided for by raising taxes. The school board spent its last $20 million in reserves in 2001-2002. The following year, it faced trimming $26 million and submitted a deficit budget. The province sent forensic auditor Al Rosen to Ottawa to check the books. Rosen's report blamed trustees for the shortfall, saying they had 'self-inflicted' their own financial pain, and recommended the province appoint a supervisor. In August 2002 Merv Beckstead, the pragmatic and plain-spoken former chief administrative officer for the former Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton and the City of Nepean, was appointed to supervise the OCDSB. He became a lightning rod for parents and opponents of the Harris government. Junior kindergarten, transportation and special education were on the chopping block, but the most emotional discussions were about closing schools. Failing to close schools had resulted in the school board losing millions in grants, Beckstead reflected in a 2003 op-ed he wrote for the Ottawa Citizen. 'Many trustees apparently refuse to acknowledge the instability and uncertainty they have created by failing to make organization changes, in areas for which they have control, to maximize quality operational effectiveness and efficiency, and to maximize funding eligibility,' Beckstead wrote. There were major cuts to other Ontario school boards under supervision. The supervisor of the Toronto District School Board recommended $90 million in savings in a budget that included no money for teacher salary increases. There were reasons to freak out in Ottawa. One consultant's report recommended that the OCDSB close 58 schools over 15 years. That didn't happen. There were court cases, including one in Ottawa, where education activists tried to get Beckstead's appointment overturned, claiming that appointing a supervisor was unfair, unlawful, discriminatory, arbitrary and 'offends to values of democracy inherent in the Canadian Constitution.' They lost. Did anything good come of it for schools? The process forced the province to acknowledge that underfunding of education was an issue. Beckstead had to borrow $13.9 million. A 2002 report by Mordechai Rozanski, president of the University of Guelph, recommended a $1.8 billion cash infusion over the next three years. The province responded with $250 million for special education over two years. Two days after Rozanski's report landed, another $340 million was announced to settle teachers' contracts. Three days later, there was $20 million more for transportation. The OCDSB received $20 million out of the total cash infusion. Are schools currently underfunded? The Ontario government says it has invested more than $29 billion in total education funding for the 2024-25 school year. However, according to analysis by the Ontario Public School Boards Association released earlier in May, there's a funding gap of more than $1 billion. Actual per-pupil funding from the province is increasing a small amount from $13,584 to $13,834, an increase of $250 or 1.8 per cent compared to last year. In 2018, per pupil funding was $12,282.44. Funding increases do no take inflation into account, the analysis said. 'Funding, when adjusted for inflation, now sits at $11,506.03, a gap of $776.41 per student. This is the lowest level of per pupil funding in more than 10 years.' Article content Article content That's not the stated objective, but it will probably help. However, even if the review produces savings, they would be a drop in the bucket compared to what's needed. The cost-cutting is not over yet. Article content OCDSB director of education Pino Buffone told trustees earlier in May that the education ministry had spoken to school board representatives for years about structural issues, including running multiple tracks at the elementary level being 'an impossible reality.' Article content The board is spreading itself too thin and needs to streamline to two program offerings, English and French immersion, Buffone said. Article content 'We need to get smarter with our resources, mobilize them ore effectively,' he told trustees. 'We're not taking any money from this review and putting it in our back pocket. We are remobilizing what we have to serve students better than when we load schools in multiple tracks.' The school board has been 'distracted by a series of other things,' Buffone said. 'We are an organization that has taken away from our core business, and we have strayed.' Article content Article content Article content Minister of Education Paul Calandra has not minced words, saying the province will be 'relentless' in holding school boards accountable. 'We have been clear: Transparency and accountability from Ontario school boards is mandatory,' he said. 'Further actions will be taken if the situation at these school boards does not improve. As the new Minister of Education, I will be looking at every avenue to bring more transparency, consistency and accountability to all school boards across the province.' Article content What does history have to say about the situation? The investigator's report may not lead to supervision and could lead to vindication of the argument that the board is underfunded, said Rob Campbell, who was chair of the Ottawa Carleton Assembly of School Councils when the OCDSB was last under supervision. He was later a two-term trustee. It may depend on the investigator and how the government responds, Campbell said. 'Do they play tough with the school boards? There are a lot of political questions here,' he said. 'The investigator will report, but it's up to the province to decide what next steps to take.' School closures are not on the table this time. In fact, the opposite is true, and there's a moratorium on closing schools. The report may show that inflation and other new expenses have overwhelmed provincial funding, Campbell said. 'Best-case scenario, the report may recommend more money.'
