Premier Stephen McNeil has apologized for a legal brief referring to the Mi’kmaq as conquered peoples, but some feel he needs to back up his words with actions.
On Thursday, McNeil started off his meeting with the Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq Chiefs by apologizing for a brief filed in the court case over Alton Gas that argued the Nova Scotian government’s duty of consultation only applies to “unconquered peoples.” Chief Terry Paul of Membertou First Nation and chief Sidney Peters of Glooscap First Nation said they accept the apology.
But the First Nations band that’s been fighting against the Alton natural gas storage project was left out of that meeting. The Sipekne’katik are not a part of the Assembly of Chiefs.
“I haven’t seen [the apology], so I can’t accept it,” says Cheryl Maloney, a former band councillor for Sipekne’katik.
She feels the premier’s apology should have been directed at the people Shubenacadie and Indian Brook, as those are the communities currently facing the province in court.
“I think the apology was just meant to smooth over the negotiation table with the rest of the chiefs,” says Maloney. “The relationship has to include…the Mi’kmaq that are affected by projects; the Mi’kmaq that use the rivers and the resources.”
Maloney is one of many people who has protested against the Alton Gas project, which will hollow out massive salt caverns to store liquefied natural gas and dump the resulting brine back into the Shubenacadie River.
The Assembly of Mi’kmaq Chiefs expressed support for Alton Gas earlier this year, causing the Sipekne’katik band to issue a press release underscoring that it is not represented by the Assembly and “is the original signatory to the 1752 Peace and Friendship Treaty.”
The Sipekne’katik band also filed an appeal with Nova Scotia’s environment minister saying it was not adequately consulted about the project, which is in violation of its treaty rights.During a three-day hearing last week, provincial lawyer Alex Cameron read a legal brief in court that said the Treaty of 1752 is void and the province had no duty to consult a conquered people.
The province is launching a review to look at how those arguments made it to court in the first place.
Naiomi Metallic—Mi’kmaq lawyer and assistant professor at Dalhousie—is glad the premier expressed his regrets but she’d like to see him take action to back up his words.
On Thursday, the NDP released a statement calling on McNeil to officially withdraw the ‘unconquered’ comments. “The Premier should write to the judge to correct the record,” it reads. Metallic agrees.
“I’d also like [the government] to make sure that this never happens again,” she says. “There’s no need to make those arguments. There’s absolutely no need in 2016.”
Metallic also questions the government’s choice of counsel. Cameron’s 2009 book, Power Without Law, was is largely critical of the Donald Marshall decision. After it was released, the Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq Chiefs requested that Cameron “no longer provide advice to or representation of Nova Scotia in respect of all Mi’kmaq issues.”
“He clearly has a very particular point of view on these issues,” Metallic says of Cameron. “The premier is telling us that’s not their position….so, you know, there should be some action associated with this apology to make it meaningful.”
For Maloney, Cameron’s argument is consistent with the experience the Sipekne’katik band has had in its dealings with the province.
“We’ve been trying to consult in a meaningful way that will engage the people that are affected by these projects,” she says. “The position of the province has been ‘We’ll deal with the KMK [Kwilmu’kw Maw-klusuaqn] chiefs and not the people.’”
Ed: An earlier version of this story stated the band that the brief was targeting was left out of the apology. According to Global News, the premier’s office says chief Michael Sack from Sipekne’katik First Nation was there and direct apology was given to him.
Related Stories
Alton Gas approval called a “direct violation” of First Nations rights
Going against the tide: The fight against Alton Gas
Flawed science, poor consultation the cause for Alton Gas appeal
Colonization over reconciliation in Alton Gas fight
This article appears in Nov 24-30, 2016.
may want to update: https://twitter.com/MariekeWalsh/status/802176078399885312
***that time when you got caught parroting white supremacist myths***
How could Premier and Aboriginal Affairs Minister Stephen McNeil task lawyer Alex Cameron, known for his hostile opinions of Mikmaq rights, with presenting a legal brief on his behalf? Why is the Province fighting the SipekniKatik Band in the first place? In all the treaties between the British and the Mikmaq, the British agreed not to disturb or interfere in Aboriginal fishing, hunting and other lawful activities.
Why is Alton Gas looking for approval from the Province when they should be getting it from the SipekniKatik and Millbrook bands? Mikmaq people never surrendered, ceded or sold Aboriginal title to lands and resources which means that they continue to hold Aboriginal title throughout their traditional territory. These rights are reiterated in the Royal Proclamation of 1763 which says that all land is Aboriginal land until it is ceded by treaty.
The SipekniKatik and Millbrook bands are concerned about the effects of salinity levels on the striped bass in the Shubenacadie River. Alton Gas says it will hold brine discharge to 28 parts per thousand but that might be too much for the striped bass eggs and larvae. Given that there is no study to show otherwise, I wonder what the striped bass might have to say about the extra brine. Or the Atlantic salmon, sturgeon, eels, tomcod who also swim in the river.
Do we have the right to change somebody elses environment?
And what about water? Does water have rights? Or the animals that drink from the water?
Everything is a system and were all part of it.
Alton Gas argues that their research shows minimal impacts but whose impacts are they talking about? Who got to be included in the study and who didnt?
According to earlier reports, the data hasnt even been peer reviewed. If what Alton Gas says is true then why dont they let other scientists see the data they collected? In fact, lets all have a look at the research.
Theres something about this project that smells to me. Im glad the SipekniKatik people are protesting its approval. They are doing what theyve done for 10,000 years protecting land, water and other species. Thats the job the Great Spirit gave them and they should be applauded for standing firm in the face of pressure from Alton Gas, the Province, the Town of Stewiacke and the Assembly of NS Chiefs.
To the guy who still keeps the Dexter(hst) tax grab- Go F Yourself Stephen!
Lisa Tremblay: “Does water have rights?’
Lemme check the Charter…uh…nope…
“Some of those fighting against Alton Gas aren’t swayed by premier’s conquered peoples regrets.” Nothing will appease them, so why bother to worry?
Water doesnt currently have rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but it could. Ecuador incorporated Rights of Nature in its constitution in 2008. In Blue Futures, Maude Barlow (National Chair of the Council of Canadians) argues that water has rights beyond its usefulness to us like the right not to be polluted. According to Barlow, our planet is running out of clean water; by 2030, our demand for it will outstrip our supply by 40%. So maybe we need to think about water as a public trust that governments guard for the benefit of current and future generations.
Water, air and earth should have the right to protection. Without them, where would we be?
I am a former resident of NSHCC and I refuse to accept his apology. I know too much. The NSHCC Inquiry is the biggest fib and fraud pulled on the NS taxayers