My initial response
to the successful negotiation of
the Nenqay Demi Accord announced this February was highly positive, because I
viewed the Accord primarily from the perspective of the Chilcotin Supreme Court decision on aboriginal rights and its
application to the long-simmering conflict over the Prosperity Mine. My reasoning was as follows: the fact that a high bar had been set by the
Supreme Court, the Federal Cabinet, and the Environmental Reviews, meant that
the parties would be measured under the Accord by how well they adhered to eight mutually agreed –upon “Pillars of
Reconciliation”. (The Federal Government
would presumably be measured by these criteria as well.) Any economic project that cleared all of
these hurdles, I reasoned, would be something that the vast majority of the
community could agree upon and unite behind. But that was before someone
pointed out to me that the map for the territory being discussed in the Nenqay
Demi Accord was quite different from the
map that had been referred to by the Supreme Court ; and before I had reflected
upon Christy Clark’s motivation in rushing things to a conclusion.
The map for the Accord now includes Quesnel, plus the area west
of the Fraser River up to and including part of Tweedsmuir Park. This takes in land that other bands lay
claim to, and this could cause more
conflict than unity. Sure, no one’s
private property is being expropriated, but
we have an interest in public property, too.
The government should not use land claims as way of getting around
provincial park designation in order to
promote industrial development. And by
choosing a larger, more controversial map, the parties to this Accord are
creating the same problem that was the ‘dark side’ of the Nisga’a and Tsawwassen treaties: that of overlapping tribal claims.
The Ulkatcho, Bella Coola, and Redstone people must not be thrown under the bus
just to placate one First Nation and promote development for the next election.
Accordingly, it is
imperative that lands designated as ‘Category A’, which will be under exclusive Chilcotin control, must meet three conditions: (1) they should not be extended to areas
outside of the territory referred to in
the Supreme Court decision ; (2) they should not extend to lands subject to overlapping claims
by other First Nations; and (3) they
should not fall within the current boundaries of Tweedsmuir Park. Other lands may be designated as ‘Caretaker
areas’ which recognize the Chilcotin people as holding special rights and
responsibilities, but not to the exclusion of other parties. While
much work remains to be done (the precise location of ‘Category A’ and
‘Caretaker’ lands will be negotiated between now and 2020), that to me is the
bottom line, if the Nenqay Accord is to be worthy of broad public support.
Mark Crawford teaches at Athabasca University. He can be reached at markcrawf@gmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment