Deal? Or No Deal? Explaining Comprehensive Land Claims Negotiation Outcomes in Canada. by Christopher Alcantara A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctorate in Philosophy Graduate Department of Political Science University of Toronto © Copyright by Christopher Alcantara (2008) Library and Archives Bibliothèque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l’édition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-57952-7 Our file Notre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-57952-7 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non- L’auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l’Internet, prêter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non- support microforme, papier, électronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L’auteur conserve la propriété du droit d’auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author’s permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformément à la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privée, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont été enlevés de thesis. cette thèse. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n’y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Dear or No Deal? Explaining Aboriginal Treaty Negotiation Outcomes in Canada. Christopher Alcantara Department of Political Science University of Toronto Doctor of Philosophy 2008 Abstract In 1973, the Canadian government created the federal comprehensive land claims process to negotiate modern treaties with Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Despite 35 years of negotiations, many Aboriginal groups have failed to complete modern treaties. This dissertation explains why some Aboriginal groups have been able to complete modern treaties and why some have not. After examining four sets of negotiations in Newfoundland and Labrador and the Yukon Territory, I argue that scholars need to pay greater attention to the institutional framework governing treaty negotiations and to a number of factors relative to the Aboriginal groups. ii Acknowledgements I am grateful to many individuals and organizations for helping me with this dissertation. First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Graham White, as well as my committee members, Grace Skogstad, and Frances Abele who gave generously of their time and expertise. Indeed, one could not have asked for a better committee. In particular, Graham White was extremely helpful throughout my entire time at the University of Toronto and has my deepest respect for his efforts as a scholar, teacher, administrator and supervisor. Second, I would like to thank Peter Russell and Doug McArthur for serving as my internal and external examiners, respectively. Both gave careful readings of the dissertation, which I greatly appreciated. Third, Anthony Sayers, Don Smith, George Breckenridge, Michael Stein, Simone Chambers, and Tom Flanagan were all helpful at different stages of my PhD career. This dissertation could not have been written without the participation of individuals from the federal government, the Newfoundland and Labrador government, the Yukon territorial government, the Labrador Inuit, the Labrador Innu, the Kwanlin Dün First Nation, and the Kaska Nations. Each interviewee was extremely patient and generous as I tried to learn about and understand the complexities of each of the comprehensive land claims negotiations studied in this thesis. In particular, I greatly appreciated the help from Tim Koepke, Dermot Flynn, Veryan Haysom, Anne King, Ray Hawco, Bob Pelley, Ruby Carter, Dave Porter, Steve Walsh, Hammond Dick, Liard McMillan, Eileen Van Bibber, Scott Serson, Tom Beaudoin, Jim McKenzie and Chesley Anderson, among others. Family members, friends, and colleagues are extremely important in a time consuming project such as this one. My wife, Kerry Lee Hunt, and most recently, my son, iii Kees Rafael Alcantara, have been crucial throughout this process. Rafael and Eden Alcantara, my parents, have also been important to the success of this project. I also want to acknowledge the direct and indirect support of Tony and Carmen Hidalgo, Gerry and Tessie Suarez, and Josefa and Flaviano Sagun. As well, many of my fellow graduate students have been helpful and supportive over the last five years. In particular, I am grateful to my comrades Christopher Cochrane, Jen Nelles, Amardeep “watch out for that white van” Athwal, Vincent Pouliot, and David Chandonnet. Projects such as this one cannot be completed without financial assistance. I would like to thank the Ontario Graduate Scholarship Program, the Institute for Humane Studies, the Liberty Fund, the Northern Scientific Training Program, the School of Graduate Studies at the University of Toronto, and the Labrador Institute for financial and organizational support. Finally, I would like thank Cambridge University Press for granting me permission to use material from my article, “Explaining Aboriginal Treaty Negotiation Outcomes in Canada: The Cases of the Inuit and the Innu in Labrador,” Canadian Journal of Political Science 40:1 (March 2007): 185-207, and Oxford University Press for granting me permission to use material from my article, “To Treaty or Not to Treaty? Aboriginal Peoples and Comprehensive Land Claims Negotiations in Canada,” Publius: Journal of Federalism 38:2 (Spring 2008): 343-369. iv Table of Contents Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………………..ii Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………...iii List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………………vi List of Appendices ………………………………………………………………………...vii Chapter 1: Explaining Comprehensive Land Claims Negotiation Outcomes in Canada …...1 Chapter 2: A History of Aboriginal Treaty Making in Canada …………………………...31 Chapter 3: An Analytical Framework ………………….………………………………….67 Chapter 4: The Innu and Inuit in Labrador ………………………………………………117 Chapter 5: The Kwanlin Dün and the Kaska First Nations in the Yukon Territory ……..176 Chapter 6: To Negotiate a Treaty or Not? …………….………………………………….248 Bibliography ……………………………………………………………………………...271 v List of Tables Table 1.1: Completed Comprehensive Land Claims Agreements since 1973 ……………...6 Table 1.2: On-going Comprehensive Land Claims Negotiations in Canada …………….....7 Table 1.3 Distribution of Government and Aboriginal Officials by Job Description ……..25 Table 1.4 Distribution of Government Officials by Level of Government and Job Description ………………………………………………………………………………...25 Table 1.5 Distribution of Aboriginal Officials by Aboriginal Group and Job Description .25 Table 3.1: Factors Relative to the Aboriginal Groups that Affect Which CLC Negotiation Outcomes are Obtained ……………………………………………………………………94 Table 3.2: Factors that Affect the Speed of CLC Negotiation Outcomes …………………98 vi List of Appendices Appendix 1 – List of Negotiating First Nations in British Columbia ……………………..29 vii Chapter 1: Explaining Comprehensive Land Claims Negotiation Outcomes in Canada Treaties have had a powerful effect on the relationship between Aboriginal and non- Aboriginal peoples in Canada (Asch 1997; Asch, 1984; Borrows, 2002; Cairns, 1999; Harris, 2002; Hicks and White, 2000; Macklem, 2001; Russell, 2000). At a conceptual level, proponents of treaty federalism (defined as “‘Indian consent’ in regard to the manner and form of our co-existence with the Queen’s white children under the Canadian constitutional framework” Bear Robe 1992, 6, 8) have argued that the relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal peoples should only be understood through the treaties that they have signed. Specifically, they suggest treaties ought to affirm that Aboriginal peoples have self-government and sovereignty over all of their traditional lands and treaties should legitimize the Crown’s right to exercise self-government and sovereignty on Canadian soil. In sum, treaties should establish the terms by which Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal peoples co-exist as sovereign nations in Canada (Henderson, 1994; Ladner, 2003). On a more practical level, treaties have been central to disputes over the ownership of some of the most valuable lands in Canada. Prime commercial and residential lands in cities like Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver were once or remain, depending on one’s view, Aboriginal traditional lands. Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal peoples have fought over whether these lands were properly acquired through treaties, or whether such lands should be included in the negotiation of new treaties. Treaties have also played a central role in the control and development of Canada’s