Latest news with #UNDRIP
Hamilton Spectator
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hamilton Spectator
Update: Squamish Nation considering next steps after B.C. passes Bill 15
On Wednesday night, Bill 15 passed third and final reading in the Legislature by a vote of 47-to-46. New Democrats voted for the legislation, with 41 Conservatives, the two B.C. Greens, including Sea to Sky MLA Jeremy Valeriote, and the three Independents opposing it. The tie was broken by Speaker Raj Chouhan. Next, the bill will go to Lt.-Gov. Wendy Cocchia for royal assent. (The last time royal assent was withheld was in 1920, according to Parliamentary Practice in British Columbia: Fifth Edition .) Regarding the passage of the bill, Sxwixwtn Wilson Williams, spokesperson and council member, said Thursday that Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Úxwumixw (Squamish Nation) leadership are considering next steps. 'Council strongly opposes the provincial government's decision to push Bill 15 forward, despite several calls for the province to withdraw the bill for its threat to the constitutionally protected rights and title of Indigenous Peoples, including the Squamish Nation,' he said. 'As a result, we have now directed staff to undertake a comprehensive political and legal review to inform our next steps,' he added. 'The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which Canada and the province have endorsed, emphasizes the necessity of obtaining free, prior, and informed consent from Indigenous peoples before implementing measures that may affect their lands, territories, and resources. Bill 15 is a step backwards in the province's relationship with Indigenous People. 'Since the introduction of UNDRIP, we have made notable progress in streamlining decision making with all levels of government and industry. However, despite these advancements, we will now be conducting a full analysis of how we will engage in the future.' Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Úxwumixw (Squamish Nation) is taking a strong stand against what it deems a 'significant threat' to the constitutional rights and title of Indigenous Peoples of the provincial government's Bill 15- Infrastructure Projects Act , which is due to pass on Wednesday. In a letter addressed to Bowinn Ma, B.C.'s Minister for Infrastructure, Khelsilem, Nation council chairperson, appealed to the provincial government to immediately withdraw the legislation and to subsequently discuss amendments co-operatively. The Bill 15-Infrastructure Projects Act was first introduced on April 10 last year. It was drafted by the Ministry of Infrastructure with the aim of centralizing planning for major capital projects, such as schools and health care facilities. The bill would give the cabinet powers to fast-track such projects, which it deems significant to the province. The Nation's May 13 letter of appeal lists 'grave concerns' over the marginalization of Indigenous knowledge, centralized powers without accountability or transparency, and an overall lack of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (or FPIC). The Nation's commitment to a 'shared vision' with the province is also elaborated upon, as well as the province's legal and moral obligations, and co-decision making. Significantly, the Nation states that the bill is holistically 'a step backward… [in] a self-governing Nation with deep responsibilities to our lands and waters,' and that it 'is a clear violation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA).' According to the Nation, it had not received a response to its letter as of May 28. The Nation is not alone in its sentiments and disillusionment with the bill. Many other Indigenous organizations and leaders have spoken out against it. For example, an open letter was also presented to the province this week by the First Nations Leadership Council (FNLC) on behalf of the First Nations Summit, the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, and the BC Assembly of First Nations, which said the province was 'walking backwards with a top-down, 'economy first' agenda,' which could have 'irreparable' impacts on many First Nations' relationships. The letter described how the FNLC had convened with the province on May 15 at an All Chiefs Meeting where they communicated their—yet to be acknowledged—opposing stance, and that the wording within the proposition of Bill 15 was misleading and unclear, for example the definition of 'core territories,' and who would determine the whereabouts of a project. Furthermore, the FNLC suggested that the bill's proposal purported to uphold Indigenous rights as an explicit provision, including consent as a prerequisite, and yet was not included in the ultimate legislative wording. 'The honour of the Crown is at stake when the Crown engages with First Nations,' the letter reads, '[it is] part of honourable dealing… more than just semantics. 'This is not a matter for the Crown to decide, and this proposed approach seriously risks prejudicing First Nations because of new or persisting boundary disputes caused by colonial policies and processes. It is a paternalistic and dismissive approach [to core territories] in this context.' For its part, the Ministry of Infrastructure told The Squamish Chief that whilst it is understandable Indigenous People want clarity, the province remains committed to its obligations under DRIPA. In a statement, the ministry said that on March 26 it issued letters offering future, deeper consultations on the bill to all 204 Nations impacted. 'We acknowledge that our engagement process was shorter than we would have liked,' the emailed statement reads, 'but we want to be clear, the bill can't be used to shortcut Indigenous participation … Our government remains committed to reconciliation.' According to the Ministry, the obligation to consult with the First Nations is guaranteed by a section written directly into the bill, as well as the Interpretation Act, which is a separate piece of legislation ensuring that all legislation must be interpreted in a way that aligns with DRIPA. 'We are committed to working collaboratively with partners, and to ensuring projects uphold BC's world-class environmental standards and consultation with First Nations,' the statement continues. Ina Pace is The Squamish Chief's Local Journalism Initiative (LJI) Reporter. This reporting was produced through the LJI, which supports original civic journalism across Canada.
Canada Standard
6 days ago
- Politics
- Canada Standard
First Nations Angered at Being Elbowed Out as Provinces Fast-Track Projects
Donald Trump's 51st State threats may have Canadians advocating for a more #ElbowsUp approach to strengthening the economy, but Indigenous people are concerned they're being elbowed out of the way by some elected leaders. New legislation to fast-track infrastructure projects in British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia has Indigenous organizations questioning the provinces' commitment to reconciliation. They say the push to accelerate project approvals risks violating treaty rights and undermining Canada's 2021 law to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Indigenous people need to be involved early in the process, Ken Coates, program chair for Indigenous governance at Yukon University, told the Aboriginal People's Television Network (APTN). "The government is already sending out the agenda and deciding what the priorities are going to be." Coates added that the federal government's promise to render decisions on major projects within a two-year timeline was unrealistic, given there are "hundreds and hundreds of Indigenous people-First Nations, Metis, Inuit-and they are very different." In this week's Speech from the Throne-written by the Prime Minister's Office and read by King Charles III-Mark Carney's newly-elected government promised faster approvals for major infrastructure as a top priority. The speech also pledged up to $10 billion in loan guarantees for Indigenous communities to gain ownership in large projects. But First Nations leaders warn that unless governments at all levels honour treaties and uphold the UNDRIP principle of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), they risk triggering protests, blockades, and litigation. UNDRIP requires governments to involve Indigenous people in a way that is "free from manipulation or coercion, informed by adequate and timely information, and occur(s) sufficiently prior to a decision so that Indigenous rights and interests can be incorporated or addressed effectively as part of the decision-making process." A wave of unprecedented moves to strip environmental protections, skip Indigenous consent requirements, and give governments more power is uniting Indigenous people across Canada, much the way Trump's threats united Canadians. In Ontario, Premier Doug Ford's Progressive Conservative government is yielding to some First Nation demands by amending its controversial mining bill to include duty to consult provisions throughout, reported The Canadian Press. Bill 5, the Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy Act, is being reviewed and almost certain to pass with the majority government. It revises or repeals a number of other laws, including the Ontario Heritage Act, the Mining Act, and the Endangered Species Act, among others. Prior to news of the coming amendment, Chiefs of Ontario First Nations opposed the bill in a statement and said they wanted it immediately withdrawn so that meaningful consultation with First Nations could begin. APTN News reported the bill creates "special economic zones," exempt from many laws and regulations, a move being viewed by many Indigenous peoples as an attack on First Nations lands, rights, and legal agreements with the Crown. After testifying at the standing committee reviewing the bill, Indigenous representatives spoke to reporters from a lectern with the message "Our rights are not for sale." That language echoed Ford's baseball cap slogan, popularized prior to this year's provincial election, with its message that "Canada is not for sale." "Ontario is trying to legislate us out of the conversation," Chief Shelly Moore-Frappier of the Temagami First Nation said of the original bill. "They are about to learn what happens when a nation has nothing left to lose and everything to defend." The amendment to Bill 5 would create a new category of zones, adding in "special Indigenous economic zones" at the request of First Nations for projects they want fast-tracked. But Indigenous peoples across Canada fear that special economic zones are being considered by other provinces and at the federal level, Chief Alvin Fiddler, Grand Chief of Nishnawbe Aski Nation, told the news conference. He predicted "conflict on the ground," adding that First Nations will do "anything and everything that will make this government listen to us," reported the Toronto Star. In British Columbia, First Nations leaders said proposed legislation to fast-track resource projects would likely lead to "conflict, protests, and litigation" unless the government engaged with First Nations on potential amendments. Bill 15, the Infrastructure Projects Act, was tabled May 1 by Premier David Eby's New Democratic government, which holds a narrow majority in the legislature. The Globe and Mail reported that Eby hoped to pass the bill by the end of the month, promising "none will be built without First Nations' consent-and financial benefits." In a statement, Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs (UBCIC), said the province did not consult or cooperate with First Nations in developing the bill and didn't follow its own rules for aligning with UNDRIP. "While we support the Province taking action to counter Trump's erratic behaviour, such action must be principled, respect First Nations' basic human rights, and be done in consultation and cooperation with First Nations," said Phillip. BC Assembly of First Nations Regional Chief Terry Teegee called the bill "overreaching" in the statement, adding that "it enables the Province to bypass permitting processes and expedite environmental assessment for any project they deem a priority." According to the Globe, Eby "was forced to apologize in person" to the First Nations Leadership Council of the UBCIC. Eby has since said that if First Nations oppose a particular project, his government will look to other proposals. The Nova Scotia Assembly of Mi'kmaw Chiefs told the legislature's natural resources committee this week that Indigenous communities should not be hearing about important developments, including policy or legislative changes proposed for the mining sector, from the evening news, CBC News reported. Chief Tamara Young of Pictou Landing First Nation said her community has serious concerns about recent decisions, including the adoption of legislation lifting the province's ban on hydraulic fracturing and rescinding a prohibition on uranium mining. Bill 6, An Act Respecting Agriculture, Energy and Natural Resources, was tabled February 18 in the Nova Scotia legislature by Premier Tim Houston's Progressive Conservative supermajority government. It became law on March 25 and the First Nations backlash was immediate. The Halifax Examiner reported that a letter signed by Chiefs Carol Potter, Cory Julian, and Tamara Young said it was "unacceptable that this government is fast-tracking the extraction of natural resources that will permanently devalue and damage our unceded lands and adversely impact the exercise of our Section 35 rights." Section 35 of Canada's 1982 Constitution Act protects Aboriginal and treaty rights. Source: The Energy Mix
Hamilton Spectator
16-05-2025
- General
- Hamilton Spectator
Northern local government conference highlights climate action, housing, and reconciliation
The second day of the North Central Local Government Association (NCLGA) conference spotlighted the Nisga'a Nation's pioneering efforts in climate adaptation, sustainable housing, and reconciliation through projects in partnership with the Community Energy Association (CEA). The May 14 plenary session featured a presentation by Gaëtane Carignan, who works in climate leadership and energy retrofits at CEA (a non-profit society), and Kaitlyn Robinson, climate coordinator with the Nisga'a Lisims Government. Participants are undertaking an ambitious housing energy retrofitting initiative in the Nisga'a Nation, aiming to renovate approximately 900 homes across four villages located in northwestern British Columbia. Robinson explains that housing needs in her Nation are extremely urgent, with a large number of homes facing serious structural issues such as mould, electrical failures, foundation damage, roofing and gutter problems, and plumbing deficiencies. In addition, many homes suffer from significant energy efficiency challenges, including air leakage, poor insulation, heat loss, high energy bills, inadequate ventilation, condensation buildup, and aging infrastructure. The high cost of both energy and home renovation further compounds these issues. Together, these conditions put community members at increased climate-related risk, as many homes are just not equipped to adapt to changing environmental conditions. 'This is not just a housing issue, it is a climate issue, a health issue,' said Robinson. The energy retrofitting process follows a coordinated, community-driven approach that brings together homeowners, contractors, and local leaders. It starts with assessing the home's current condition and then uses the Integrated Design Process (IDP) to plan upgrades based on building science and homeowner priorities. The focus is on improving the building envelope first, such as sealing drafts, upgrading insulation, and installing efficient windows, followed by upgrading heating, ventilation, and appliances. Local contractors are trained and held accountable for quality work, while the process also supports Nisga'a employment and mentorship. The presentation also highlighted housing retrofitting as a form of decolonization and a practical way to put the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) into action. Carignan explained that this work is about more than fixing homes. It's about reconnecting with the land and rebuilding relationships with First Nations that were damaged by colonization. It is part of the broader reconciliation process, rooted in Indigenous leadership and vision, and focused on co-creating solutions that address long-standing inequities in housing and energy systems, she said. 'Building relationships is productive,' said Carignan. 'Retrofitting a home is not just about energy use; it's about improving the indoor air quality, extending the life of the home, producing long-term maintenance,' said Robinson. 'After retrofitting, homes are more comfortable and better equipped to handle extreme weather like storms, wildfires, and heat waves. Energy use drops significantly; homes switch to cleaner fuels and greenhouse gas emissions are greatly reduced. Canada and British Columbia have set a net-zero emissions target for 2050. To meet this goal, local governments will need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030, according to the CEA. The association pitches itself to support local governments and Indigenous communities in transitioning to a low-carbon future by identifying sources of greenhouse gas emissions and implementing practical solutions. In the Skeena North region, they emphasize that local governments have a key role to play, as 48 per cent of the emissions they control come from buildings. The remaining chunk of emissions can be addressed through better transportation options and waste management. 'That's why Community Energy Association is interested in working with local governments and the new communities to better both new construction and retrofits,' said Carignan. CEA has hosted various retrofitting workshops and activities across northern B.C., including in communities such as Terrace, Prince George, Kitimat, Fort St. John, Smithers, and more. The work of the Community Energy Association and the Nisga'a Nation received loud applause at the NCLGA conference. NCLGA is a non-profit organization representing more than 240 elected officials in 42 local, regional and First Nations governments spanning from 100 Mile House in the south to the Yukon border in the north and from the Alberta border in the east to Haida Gwaii in the west. The North Coast Regional District, the City of Prince Rupert, and the District of Port Edward co-hosted the 2025 conference from May 12 to 15.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Indigenous leaders at UNPFII underscore the need for genuine consent
This story is published through the Indigenous News Alliance. B. 'Toastie' OysterHigh Country News Biopiracy, women's safety and critical mineral mining were all hot topics at the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues this year, but none of them took up quite as much space as the matter of consent and related rights. Roughly a third of the forum's panel discussions dealt with implementing the U.N. standards of Indigenous rights in nations that sometimes recognize those rights willingly but frequently ignore them. A few of the panels were specifically about the Indigenous right to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) to decisions that impact tribal people or lands. The U.N. listed its standards of Indigenous rights in the 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP) — 46 articles that include the rights to ancestral land and self-determination. Some member nations, like Bolivia, have used this declaration as the basis for national laws. Others, like the United States, have lagged behind in implementing or even recognizing the declaration and the rights it describes. Since the Permanent Forum was established in 2002, said Forum Chair Aluki Kotierk (Inuit), the U.N. has made significant strides — adopting UNDRIP, for example —- but the on-the-ground reality has been slow to change. 'Let us be honest: Progress remains uneven,' Kotierk said, addressing the forum during its opening day. And even that progress, she added, is often merely symbolic. When global Indigenous leaders and other experts broke out into smaller groups to discuss their communities' biggest issues, FPIC was on the table. Here's a look at what some leaders had to say. Albert Barume, United Nations special rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous peoples: At a panel called 'Implementing FPIC Across the Regions,' which was hosted by the Native American Rights Fund, Barume said consent is at the center of Indigenous peoples' rights. But its purpose, he added, is to safeguard other rights. 'Free, prior and informed consent is a mechanism to redress one of the key environmental and historical injustices Indigenous people have been going through for generations,' Barume said: other people deciding things for them. This specific kind of racism violates the right to self-determination, a right Barume called 'pretty self-evident,'along with the right to racial non-discrimination. Substantive rights like these, as well as the rights to land and water, are what FPIC is meant to protect. 'It's like a gatekeeper,' Barume said. 'It's like putting a fence around substantive rights.' Fawn Sharp (Quinalt), former National Council of American Indians president and former vice president of the Quinault Indian Nation: Sharp said in a panel examining 'The Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the Context of Just Transition Economy' that climate change presents an opportunity for the rest of the world to align with Indigenous worldviews. She noted that when it comes to environmental care, Indigenous people are far outperforming others, even with little to no resources. 'Imagine what Indigenous people could do with resources,' she said. 'I see a world transitioning to a trajectory that Indigenous people have been on since the beginning of time,' she added. 'The world is desperate for truth. The world is desperate for solutions that are timeless and proven… Only Indigenous people have that knowledge.'In another panel, Sharp said that after years of unsuccessfully pushing state and federal lawmakers to recognize FPIC, she is now working to implement it in the private sector. Elected officials, while unwilling to support Indigenous rights, she said, are beholden to corporate interests – and companies have fiscal and reputational incentives to respect FPIC. Malih Ole Kaunga (Laikipia Maasai), executive director of IMPACT: Consent has become a buzzword because in practice it remains minimal, Kaunga said, adding that governments and companies typically just want to tick the box and move on: 'They want to demonstrate that it happened.' But he said consent shouldn't stop there. 'You can do an FPIC continuously,' he said with a hint of a smile. Continuous consent would require governments and corporations to check in with Indigenous communities throughout the life of a project, according to the needs of the community. FPIC protocols are too often externally imposed on Indigenous communities, even though every community has its own needs and cultural norms. 'There are certain laws that are practiced — they are not written,' Kaunga said. Ideally, FPIC protocols would spring from individual communities, taking the shape that works best for them, rather than being applied from the outside in a uniform way. He added that Kenyan courts have been progressive in applying FPIC, and that the process is intense and has resulted in halting several development projects. 'Free, prior and informed consent is a minimum,' he said. 'It's embedded in peoples' lives and cultures and identities.' Christine Croc (Q'eqchi Maya), spokesperson for the Maya Leaders Alliance: FPIC protocols are merely instruments, Croc said, and can only be transformative if they are owned and operated by Indigenous people themselves. If the state alone develops FPIC protocols, she added, it undermines Indigenous ways of governance, engagement and decision-making, which can cause irreparable harm. 'States often do not understand Indigenous peoples' rights under international law,' she said. The Maya of Belize developed their own FPIC protocols in 2014 in response to encroachment by extractive industry and the state. The state tried to file its own FPIC protocols with the courts — without consulting the Maya. But its version of protocols had regressed from consent to consultation. Another major challenge, second to state-implemented protocols, arises when Indigenous peoples have weak or eroding governance systems. There is no way Indigenous people can design an effective protocol without having a strong government first, she said. To actually enforce consent requires robust systems for community-investor negotiations, as well as benefit-sharing models. Benefit-sharing could come through Indigenous-owned and -led enterprises that bolster collective well-being, for instance. But developing such systems and models requires strong Indigenous governance. By 2022, Croc's community had finalized protocol negotiations, drawing from a Mayan framework to strengthen Mayan decisionmaking. Because of these long-term grassroots efforts, she said, the community has gained experience not just with implementing consent protocols, but also with financial administration and village-scale solar development. Hernán Eloy Malaver Santi (Sarayaku), president of Pueblo Originerio Kichwa de Sarayaku: Santi said his community's territory is a living body entitled to its own rights. When an oil company encroached on Sarayaku territory, Santi's community disrupted its camps, drove the company out and turned down its bribes and job offers. Santi, who is also a lawyer, spent years in court pushing the government of Ecuador to take responsibility. The court eventually acknowledged state wrongdoing, including letting the oil company abandon over a ton of dangerous explosives on the community's land. But Santi said there is no political will to enforce compliance with the court's judgment. Still, the Sarayaku community now has its own FPIC protocols, which Santi said forbid mining, timber or biopiracy — the misappropriation of genetic resources and traditional knowledge — without consent. The protocols also say that any and all community projects — including health initiatives or housing — will require consultation and consent in advance. 'This protocol is binding, and the state is mandatorily respecting it,' Santi said, via an English interpreter. Seánna Howard, law professor at University of Arizona: It's a common falsehood that FPIC is a barrier to development, Howard said, speaking in a small side room with Croc, Santi and others. But it's more accurately a safeguard against exploitation. Indigenous people often end up developing FPIC protocols defensively, only after litigation with corporations or governments. But Howard explained that adopting protocols before the pressure from an encroaching development starts will send a message to project proponents, letting them know that the people are organized, self-governing, and that they will decide the terms of engagement. Governments and companies might actually welcome this, because clarity around FPIC can help them mitigate reputational harm. 'Protocols should reflect that FPIC is more than a mere formality, more than checking the box,' Howard said, 'that the process needs to be conducted in good faith and includes the right to either give or withhold consent, at every stage of the process.' She said Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean offer a number of models showing how to develop protocols successfully. Daniel Kobei (Ogiek), executive director of the Ogiek Peoples' Development Program: Kobei talked about the importance of domesticating protocol documents to ensure that the community in question understands them in its language and in the context of its own laws. 'We had to sit down as a community, and we learned from the Kichwa people,' Kobei said, which was challenging because their documents were in Spanish. But Kobei's community was able to use these documents as a basis to develop its own. 'This kind of system enabled us,' he said, and while it took some time, it was successful. Now his community has custom culturally appropriate FPIC protocols, which include references to Kenya's Constitution that were added to help make the document more mainstream. Forum Chair Aluki Kotierk (Inuit): 'The global push for the so-called green transition has intensified demand for critical minerals,' she said, 'many of which lie beneath sacred Indigenous lands and territories. We cannot ignore the threat this poses to our way of life.' She called the extraction of these minerals another form of colonialism. 'We are not anti-development, but development must be on our terms, and it must be just,' she said. 'Indigenous people are not merely beneficiaries of development projects,' she said, but should also be seen as partners. Only through this can we achieve justice, respect, and sustainability for all. 'The road is long,' she said. UNDRIP is not a document to be celebrated once a year. It must guide how we treat each other on this earth. 'It is a moral, legal and collective obligation.' 'I urge U.N. entities to embed Indigenous peoples' rights at the core of their work,' Kotierk added. 'Our unity, wisdom and determination are our greatest strength. Let us continue to walk together.'
Cision Canada
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Cision Canada
LEGISLATIVE RECONCILIATION AT THE HEART OF THE RELATIONSHIP TO BE BUILT FROM NATION TO NATION Français
WENDAKE, QC, April 29, 2025 /CNW/ - The Assembly of First Nations Québec-Labrador (AFNQL) would like to congratulate the newly elected Premier, Mr. . In the aftermath of an election campaign in which First Nations issues were relegated to the background, it is appropriate to reiterate the need to continue working towards reconciliation. The AFNQL's priorities as expressed at the start of the campaign remain : Self-determination and sovereignty – Supporting and acknowledging governance, indigenous rights and title, and development by and for First Nations. Reconciliation – Develop concrete legislative and economic reconciliation measures. Implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) – Fully implement the UNDRIP in all federal policies. "I wish to emphasize legislative reconciliation, which I sincerely believe is possible. It will, however, require the establishment of genuine channels for Nation-to-Nation dialogue, based on listening and a mutual desire to work together," says AFNQL Chief Francis Verreault-Paul. By becoming Prime Minister, Mark Carney has become the federal guardian of this transformation in our relationship. This opportunity, however, requires constant commitment, and begins with a focus on these priority issues. The AFNQL is ready to work closely with the new government to ensure that these priorities are addressed. We hope the new administration will be a partner in building a future where First Nations occupy their rightful place.
