The Ripple Effect Newsletter
December 2009
Hello....
At a recent Aboriginal Awareness Training Workshop in Edmonton a participant asked, “Do you think our federal government will ever resolve all the outstanding aboriginal issues in Canada and finally bring an end to this seemly endless national social disaster.?”
My short answer was no. It has been my experience over the past 25 years that it will be the private sector that will make the greatest and most positive impact on the lives of the greatest number of aboriginal people in Canada. Maintaining the status quo is simply no longer acceptable or adequate. The following are some examples.
I heard today that RBC Financial Group has donated $50,000.00 to Keyano College in Ft.McMurray. This year, the RBC Aboriginal Student Scholarship Awards program granted 10 deserving students with scholarships, up from eight in 2008. RBC also donated a total of $90,000 to programs serving Aboriginal youth through the RBC After-School Grants Project. RBC's After-School Grant Programs offers a wide-range of activities including organized sports, art classes and computer tutoring-activities that help address the wide-range of what a child needs to develop fully, while bridging the gap between school and home. RBC has supported the After-School Grants Project since 1999 and has donated a total of $19 million in funding to more than 198 organizations across Canada.
In five short years, forty communities, nine regional districts and thirty-eight First Nations communities across 70% of BC have collectively seen 451 projects successfully funded by the Province of BC Northern Development Program. Over the past five years many of the provinces have had a serious change of heart.
The National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation awarded $1 million through a Special Métis Health Career bursary to over 170 Métis students nationwide. Bursaries and scholarships were awarded to over 1300 students in 2008/2009 year. Since 1985 the Foundation through its Education Program has awarded more than $32 million to more than 8,400 First Nations, Inuit and Métis students nationwide. It is my understanding that most of this money has been contributed by dozens of corporations.
Suncor Energy Inc. recently recognized the achievement of a $1 billion goods and services spending milestone with Aboriginal business partners in the Wood Buffalo region. Aboriginal owned and operated businesses have played a vital role in helping Suncor develop the Athabasca oil sands resource.
In Alberta, Canada Safeway recruited 1,419 Aboriginal workers in 2007 and over 780 in 2008.
The Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations recognize that access to lands for mineral exploration is critical to sustaining a healthy mining industry in Canada and are committed to working together to bring greater certainty to land access, permitting and consultation issues affecting mineral exploration in Canada. I have hundreds more similar examples which I could reference.
These are just a few indicators that most of corporate Canada decided a long time ago that an environment of confrontation is not desirable and that collaboration, cooperation, respect and trust will build the kind of society most Canadians want. My sincere congratulations and appreciation goes out to all those making a significant positive contribution towards a solution.
Most Sincerely,
Robert Laboucane
Story 1
Courts won’t take back Shell leases
CAROL CHRISTIAN
Today staff
The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation has lost its bid to have the courts quash four oilsands leases granted by the province to Shell Canada that lie within 20 kilometres of the reserve.
The band had taken the action to protect traditional lands, including burial grounds, from oilsands development. Last December the Athabasca Chipewyan also applied to challenge Alberta’s refusal to consult with the ACFN or any First Nation when lands in their territories are sold to industry for oilsands development.
That action was also part of a case that was dismissed by the courts last Tuesday.
“The judge effectively found that not all of the action, but most of the action, was basically brought out of time so that the limitation period applied,” ACFN counsel Robert Janes said this morning. “Essentially he took the view that the limitation period started to run one day after the decision was made.”
However, he noted that the main issue — whether or not the government should have been consulting with First Nations when granting these tenures — has simply been put off for another fight.
In late 2006 and early 2007, the provincial government sold the four oilsands exploration leases to Shell. The leases fall on land Athabasca Chipewyan band members have used for generations not only for sustinence and as a source for medicinal and sacred herbs, but also for ceremonial purposes as it contains burial sites. The land includes the Richardson backcountry, which Janes says is sacred to the band members.
At the heart of the issue is whether a six-month appeal period was applicable or not to the lease sales. The government says yes, while First Nations say no.
At the hearings in Edmonton held early September, a government witness agreed the First Nation was not notified of the lease sales to Shell.
What the rules of court say, according to Janes, is that if a decision is going to be challenged, it has to be done within six months of the decision being made. The courts have also said that if the government is supposed to tell an affected person about the decision, the clock doesn’t start actually running until that person is told.
“We were never told,” Janes said during the hearings. The hearings’ first two days ended up being about whether the ACFN was too late in bringing its action.
The province maintained — and continues to maintain — the six-month review was completed.
“There are still a number of other contentious issues to be decided in this case. This is one part of the discussions,” Jerry Bellikka, Alberta Energy spokesman, said this morning, adding any appeal would be part of the judicial process. “The case certainly is not over.”
Janes said the judge tied his decision to the Aboriginal Community Link, a Internet system aboriginal communities can sign up for. Though not a member when the leases were granted, ACFN has since signed up.
Even though ACFN wasn’t part of the program, he added the judge said that nevertheless was when the six months started to run.
“The First Nation in fact didn’t even know about it within that six-month period, so of course they couldn’t bring the claim.”
Not blaming the previous chief and council for the delay in signing up to the community link, Janes acknowledged what is now causing grief — and won’t improve relations between the government and First Nations — is the government told the First Nations that there were no consequences to signing up with or opting out of the community link.
“Needless to say it’s a bit if a surprise to the First Nations now to hear that the government takes the view that if you didn’t sign up for it, too bad,” Janes said. “So that’s obviously something that is causing some concern amongst First Nations.”
He said they are looking at their options. One is to go ahead with the part of the claim that wasn’t dismissed. The second option is to appeal.
“That’s something the band is considering,” Janes said, adding costs and the strengths and weaknesses of an appeal will factor into that decision.
A third option would be to wait until another lease is issued and challenge it within the six-month timeframe. That way, Janes pointed out, the government won’t be able to use the technical six-month limitation period as an argument.
Story 2
ROR Power's First Nation Partners Win Federal Funding To Advance Bioenergy Development
Vancouver
Aug. 19, 2009
Run of River Power Inc. ("ROR Power" or "the Company") (TSX-V: ROR) today announced its First Nation partners, the Tsilhqot'in National Government ("TNG"), has been awarded approximately $340,000 in federal funding to develop a bioenergy joint venture proposed for Hanceville, BC.
"Supporting this project is a no-brainer," said Dick Harris, Member of Parliament for Cariboo-Prince George. "Not only will it help to dispose of dead pine trees, but it's also a great economic development project to provide funding for (Tsilhqot'in) communities."
Mr. Harris made the announcement at a ceremony in Williams Lake, BC, where he said the award aims to assist in the development of the Tsilhqot'in Power Project. The Project is being advanced by Tsilhqot'in Power Corporation, a joint venture equally held by TNG and Western Biomass Power Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of ROR Power.
The Project's design calls for electricity production via steam-powered turbines, with fuel consisting of timber damaged by the mountain pine beetle. The plant is to have a rated capacity of 60 megawatts, generating 420 gigawatt hours of electricity per year.
"The production and sale of electricity is a key component of the First Nations' objective of becoming self sufficient," said Joe Alphonse, a TNG Chief. The funding will improve the viability and competitiveness of the joint venture's bioenergy proposal to BC Hydro in the upcoming second phase of the utility's Bioenergy Call, he added.
"The Tsilhqot'in Power Project will play an important role in improving the economic prospects of communities that are reliant on the forest industry," said Jako Krushnisky, President and CEO of ROR Power. "Bioenergy development is also a key component of ROR Power's business development plan and we're very excited about TNG receiving the funding to advance the Project."
The funding is provided by Western Economic Diversification Canada under the Community Economic Diversification Initiative, a component of the federal Mountain Pine Beetle Program.
About Run of River Power Inc.
ROR Power develops renewable, sustainable energy through its portfolio of run-of-river and biomass projects in British Columbia (BC). The Company operates an Eco Logo(C) certified hydroelectric power generation station at Brandywine Creek, near Whistler, BC that generates cash flow under a 20-year contract with BC Hydro. ROR Power is well positioned for profitable growth through the company's high-quality power generation initiatives. ROR Power's total development potential, in excess of 740 MW, represents a significant opportunity to help BC meet its rising demand for clean, sustainable power and achieve energy self sufficiency by 2016.
About Tsilhqot'in Power Corporation
Tsilhqot'in Power Corporation equally owned and managed by TNG and Western Biomass Power Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of ROR Power. TNG was established in 1989 to re-establish a strong aboriginal political structure and assert aboriginal rights and title to the lands the First Nations call Tsilhqot'in. TNG now represents five Tsilhqot'in or Chilcotin Plateau communities. TNG is the legal corporate entity that has entered into a joint venture with Western Biomass on behalf of the Tsilhqot'in communities.
Forward-Looking Statements
Statements in this release which describe Run of River Power Inc.'s intentions, expectations or predictions, or which relate to matters that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements involve unknown risks and uncertainties which may cause the actual results, performances or achievements of Run of River Power Inc. to be materially different from any future results, performances or achievements expressed in or implied by such forward-looking statements. Run of River Power Inc. may update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or changing market and business conditions and will update such forward-looking statements as required pursuant to applicable securities laws.
For further information:
Jako Krushnisky
President and CEO
Tel: (604)946-9232
www.runofriverpower.com
Story 3
Anishinabek developing own child welfare laws
By Glenn Kauth
With one in 10 aboriginal children under the care of child welfare agencies in Canada, the Anishinabek Nation is developing its own laws in a bid to take over services for families in trouble from the province.
‘First and foremost . . . the responsibility of taking care of our children rests with us,’ says Grand Chief Patrick Madahbee.
“The idea is to put in place something that is more culturally relevant to the communities,” says Tracey O’Donnell, legal counsel to the organization representing 42 First Nations in Ontario stretching from Sarnia to Thunder Bay to Ottawa.
Over the coming months, the Anishinabek Nation will be holding consultations across the province on what such a law should entail. The sessions began in Thunder Bay this month and will conclude in Toronto on Nov. 18 and 19.
Officials hope to a create a draft law that will go up for review and input by the 42 member nations next year with a view of getting approval by June. Then, it will be up to each community to implement its own version of the framework, says O’Donnell.
“First and foremost . . . the responsibility of taking care of our children rests with us,” says Patrick Madahbee, the grand council chief of the Anishinabek Nation.
“Removing kids from our communities is not the answer.”
Aboriginal communities have a long history of contact with provincial child welfare authorities, particularly since a 1965 agreement that gave Ontario the power to administer services for status Indians on reserve.
In the meantime, controversy has swirled over past practices that saw many aboriginal children end up with white parents, something native communities have since railed against as an injustice similar to that of residential schools.
“If one looks back historically at how Canadian society has dealt with aboriginal children, there have been huge mistakes that have resulted in lifelong harm,” says Nicholas Bala, an expert in family and children’s law at Queen’s University in Kingston.
As a result, he says, aboriginal communities have over the years taken back control of child welfare services by setting up their own agencies. In the Anishinabek case, the goal is to try to keep kids in troubled families within their own communities rather than sending them elsewhere.
Madahbee wants to see a greater focus on prevention, allowing parents accused of things like neglect to get help and counselling so their kids can stay with them.
It’s unclear how a new law would mesh with existing provincial legislation and agencies, however.
In part, the idea is to create a framework that would allow the Anishinabek member nations to create their own services. But extending that concept to the legal realm would be complicated, Bala points out.
In most cases, new aboriginal agencies established in places like Manitoba operate under provincial legal structures.
In one case, the Spallumcheen Indian Band in British Columbia has run its own system under a bylaw it passed in 1980, but so far that model has been the exception. Doing so required the approval of the federal government, something other First Nations that have attempted to set up their own systems haven’t secured.
Bala notes another issue is jurisdiction. O’Donnell says the Anishinabek Nation will be claiming child welfare is an area of inherent jurisdiction under the aboriginal right to self-government.
“The Anishinabek are First Nations and they have inherent jurisdiction over matters that are integral to the nation. There’s nothing more integral to any nation than its people.”
Professor Brad Morse, an expert in aboriginal law at the University of Ottawa, says in the absence of a self-government agreement, the Anishinabek Nation would have to seek recognition of its own child welfare law from the federal and provincial governments.
But, he adds, given that the whole issue of self-government is unresolved, it’s uncertain what the result of any court action on that question would be.
On one hand, like O’Donnell, he says the Anishinabek Nation would have a case to make that child welfare is essential to its survival and therefore an inherent right. On the other hand, the provincial government could claim it had essentially extinguished aboriginal jurisdiction in that area by occupying it many years ago.
For now, Madahbee says the Anishinabek will try to make changes under the existing provincial law.
“Things have to be taken in steps,” he says, noting he will work with the provincial government on the issue. “If that doesn’t happen, we’re going to be implementing this anyway.”
With child welfare, questions remain about how effective aboriginal-run services have been. Bala says while keeping kids in their communities is laudable, it’s not always ideal in small places where there might not be enough appropriate foster families. Heritage should be one factor in determining the best interests of the child rather than the paramount one, he says.
At the same time, Morse says apprehension rates by aboriginal-run agencies have often been higher than those of provincial bodies. But while that casts a shadow on the whole notion of having separate laws and agencies, Morse argues the issue comes down to a lack of funding for aboriginal services by the federal government.
Nevertheless, Madahbee remains determined to carry out the Anishinabek project. Noting provincial agencies tend to identify aboriginal children in care as “client number so-and-so,” he’s vowing to change the system.
Story 4
Naikun Wind Welcomes Clarity On BC Hydro Clean Power Call
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA
NaiKun Wind Energy Group Inc. (TSX VENTURE:NKW) ("NaiKun Wind") today provided an update to shareholders based on an announcement from BC Hydro regarding the Clean Power Call.
BC Hydro announced that it anticipates awarding Electricity Purchase Agreements for successful Clean Power Call participants in fall of 2009. The provincial utility also said that it will be assessing the status of First Nations consultations to determine whether Clean Power Call participants have conducted adequate consultation with respect to their power sale proposals.
"We're pleased to see that the Clean Power Call is back on track," said Paul Taylor, President and CEO of NaiKun Wind. "The government has been clear and consistent in its support for a strong renewable energy industry in the province and we're encouraged by the certainty re-established by BC Hydro's announcement."
"We look forward to BC Hydro and the provincial government taking action based on their recent announcements on the Clean Power Call," Taylor added.
The increased focus on First Nations relations has particular meaning for NaiKun Wind, as the company recently signed an agreement for the Haida Nation to acquire 40 per cent of the 396 MW project the company currently has under development. This comes in addition to the 50/50 partnership already in place with the Haida Nation and NaiKun Wind covering the subsidiary that will perform operations and maintenance work for the project after construction. NaiKun Wind also has commercial agreements with the Metlakatla and Lax Kw'alaams First Nations covering the transmission component of the project.
BC Hydro initiated the Clean Power Call in June 2008 and the original expectation was that energy purchase agreements would be awarded in the early summer of 2009. The process was delayed after the BC Utilities Commission released its review of BC Hydro's long-term power acquisition plan for the province.
NaiKun Wind Energy Group Inc. (www.naikun.ca) is a British Columbia-based renewable energy company with offices in Vancouver, Masset and Skidegate. The 396MW offshore wind energy project will generate enough energy to provide electricity to 130,000 B.C. homes, help the province reach its goal of becoming electricity self-sufficient by 2016, and play a significant role in combating climate change. The proposed project will also create an estimated 200 jobs during construction and 50 permanent jobs for maintenance and operations. NaiKun Wind is committed to working in partnership with First Nations and collaboratively with stakeholder groups and local communities in the development of its project.
For more information, please contact
NaiKun Wind Energy Group Inc. - Media Enquiries
Doug McClelland
Director, Communications
604-631-4487
or
NaiKun Wind Energy Group Inc. - Investor Relations Enquiries
Peter Murray
Manager, Investor Relations
604-631-4494
www.naikun.ca
Story 5
Human Rights Tribunal begins historic case
OTTAWA, Sept. 14
Today, a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal began hearing a historic case which asserts the federal government is discriminating against thousands of First Nation children in the federal child welfare system. It is the first time a human rights complaint case involving discrimination against First Nations has been filed with the Human Rights Commission. The federal government has applied for a judicial review, which began last Friday, which is challenging the Tribunal's right to hear the case.
The case before the Tribunal, filed by the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) and the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society (FNCFCS) follows a number of reports, including the Auditor General of Canada (2008) and Standing Committee on Public Accounts (2009), which found that the federal government is not funding First Nations child welfare agencies at the same level as provincial services resulting in inequitable services. The reports note that government has known about shortfalls in its child welfare funding for more than nine years, but has made very modest improvements in only three provinces. As a result First Nations children and families on reserve lack the same prevention services offered to other Canadians, case-workers are overburdened, and many agencies operate without basics like computers or safe office buildings, which are sorely needed to improve planning, evaluation and the effectiveness of the services offered to children.
"At its heart, this issue is about caring for the most vulnerable members of our society. Our children deserve the same care afforded to other children in Canada. We hope all parties to work together to address the inequities in the system," said Assembly of First Nations National Chief Shawn Atleo. "We look forward to the fair and independent process offered by an independent Human Rights Tribunal, as a step towards solutions which are urgently needed."
"A year after the apology for the wrongful removal of First Nations children from their families, the federal government is spending thousands of taxpayer dollars to derail the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal from hearing all of the facts instead of using that money to help children on reserves stay safely with their families," said Cindy Blackstock, CEO of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society.
The case was filed with the Human Rights Commission two years ago. The Commission recommended mediation three times. Each time the AFN and FNCFC society accepted, but the government refused. After the Canadian Human Rights Commission put the child welfare discrimination case before a Tribunal, last October, the federal government appealed the Tribunal's right to hear the case to federal court. That appeal began on September 11, 2009.
The Tribunal proceedings are open to the public. Updates on the tribunal will also be available at www.fnwitness.ca.
"Caring Canadians can help - go on line to www.fnwitness.ca and sign up to be a witness to the tribunal saying you will follow the case by attending in person or through the media and make up your own mind about whether the federal government is treating First Nations children fairly. It takes only two minutes and it is free," said Cindy Blackstock.
Currently there are 27,000 First Nation children in care. Approximately 9,000 in First Nations Child and Family services, the remainder in provincial services. The main reason First Nations children come into care is neglect due to poverty.
The Assembly of First Nations is the national organization representing First Nations citizens in Canada.
The First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada is a national non-profit organization providing services to First Nations child welfare organizations.
Backgrounder: First Nations Human Rights Complaint on Child Welfare.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 1950s provinces began to deliver child welfare services on reserves.
In the 1970s thousands of First Nations children were adopted out of their communities, some even outside Canada, severing the children's ties to their communities and culture. To remedy these problems, First Nations demanded greater control and jurisdiction over child welfare. Some First Nations developed their own child welfare agencies.
In 1990, the federal government approved a national First Nations child welfare policy. The policy's goal is to provide culturally sensitive child welfare services comparable to those available to other provincial residents in similar circumstances.
Under the policy, First Nations agencies obtain their mandate from the province and provide child welfare services in accordance with provincial legislation and standards. If the federal government provides inadequate funding, the provinces typically do not top up the funding levels.
Currently First Nations Child welfare agencies receive, on average, 22 percent less funding than provincial agencies. This has resulted in a two-tiered child welfare system where First Nations children on reserves receive less funding and services than other children. Reports documenting inequalities in First Nations child welfare funding and services include: the Wen:de Reports (2005); The AFN Leadership Action Plan on Child Welfare (2006) Auditor General of Canada, (May 2008); Standing Committee on Public Accounts, (2009).
On February 27, 2007, the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) and the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada launched a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The complaint alleges that the Government of Canada had a longstanding pattern of providing less government funding for child welfare services to First Nations children on reserves than is provided to non-Aboriginal children resulting in inequitable services.
In October 2008, the Canadian Human Rights Commission announced the complaint would be heard by a Tribunal.
In November 2008 the federal government filed for a judicial review in Federal Court challenging the Tribunal's right to hear the case.
On September 11, 2009 the judicial review began.
September 14, 2009 the Tribunal hearing began.
First Nations children are drastically over represented in child welfare care. As of May of 2005, the Wen:de study found that 0.67% of non Aboriginal children were in child welfare care in three sample provinces in Canada as compared to 10.23% of status Indian children. Overall there are more First Nations children in child welfare care in Canada than attended residential schools at the peak of the system.
The Canadian Incidence Study on Reported Child Abuse and Neglect (CIS) has found that First Nations children come to the attention of child welfare authorities for different reasons than non Aboriginal children. First Nations are not more likely to experience abuse than non-Aboriginal children. First Nations children are more likely to be reported for neglect which is driven by poverty, poor housing and caregiver substance misuse.
For further information: Robert Simpson, (778) 991-1407; Chantelle Krish, (778) 990-9544
Story 6
Aboriginal Women Lose in Dismissal of McIvor Decision
Ottawa, ON (November 6, 2009)
After over twenty years in a fight for equality, yesterday the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed with costs the case of Sharon Donna McIvor v. Registrar, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. The Native Women’s Association of Canada (NWAC) is disappointed with the decision not to grant leave to appeal to Sharon McIvor, given that the issue of who can or cannot be an Indian is surely one of national importance.
“Ms. McIvor fought for many years for her, her children and her grandchildren’s rights. She has fought for all Aboriginal women and men who deserve the proper rights acquired to them and I congratulate her for her determination,” stated NWAC President Jeannette Corbiere Lavell. “Yesterday’s decision represented an opportunity for the highest court of the land to redress historic and ongoing discrimination against Aboriginal women under the Indian Act. I am especially disappointed that the court has dismissed the appeal with costs. This punishes the litigant for bringing an action. Clearly, I feel the onus should be on the government to come to the table to resolve these policy issues through a process that deals with the issue of citizenship.”
President Corbiere Lavell continued, “This issue is of the utmost importance to Aboriginal women. The loss of status when a First Nations woman married a non-Aboriginal man is one of the primary reasons why NWAC was founded in the 1970s. Bill C-31 was initially seen as a means to bring equality to First Nations women by removing sexual discrimination in the Indian Act; but the reality is that it created more discrimination not only against Aboriginal women but also against their male and female children, grandchildren and all future descendants. It created more division in families, communities and Nations. It introduced further bureaucratic categories of status, non-status, 6 (1) and 6 (2) Indians, cutting off the descendants of women who originally lost their status.”
The federal government is pursuing an amendment to the Indian Act to respond to direction from the B.C. Court of Appeal, with a bill expected to be tabled in the House of Commons in January. The bill will not contain a comprehensive redress for historic discrimination against Aboriginal women and their descendents, contrary to the results Ms. McIvor sought to achieve through her appeal to the Supreme Court.
“I personally went to the Supreme Court of Canada in order to regain my Indian Status. Due to continued gender discrimination some of my own grandchildren do not have Indian Status today. I welcome a process that acknowledges First Nations rights to determine who their citizens are and allow for cases of unknown or unstated paternity. Equality is still a vision we are committed to bringing about,” concluded President Corbiere Lavell.
The Native Women’s Association of Canada is founded on the collective goal to enhance, promote, and foster the social, economic, cultural and political well-being of Aboriginal women within the Aboriginal community and Canadian society. In 2009, as we celebrate our 35th year of service, we are proud to continue to speak as a voice for Aboriginal women.
For more information contact:
Joshua Kirkey, Communications Advisor
Native Women’s Association of Canada
(613) 722-3033 ext. 231, mobile (613) 290-5680
