ALEXANDER FIRST NATION

CHIEF KURT BURNSTICK WRITTEN BRIEF TO THE SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON ABORIGINAL PEOPLES REGARDING BILL C-97 (Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1) – May 16, 2019: Submitted by email to the Clerk of the Committee at: [email protected]

On behalf of the Elders, Council, and Members of the Alexander First Nation, I submit this written brief to express our concerns, objections and non-consent to Bill C-97 because of the potential impact it has on our sacred Treaty No. 6. Alexander’s Elders and Members are who I represent and speak on behalf of and as such no other organization or interest group can ever presume to speak on their behalf.

For many years now, Alexander has been forced to serve continuous notices of non-consent to ’s legislative reform processes because it is increasingly clear to us that they do not acknowledge and recognize that a Treaty exists between Her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and the Alexander First Nation.

All we have ever wanted is Canada’s commitment for action on our sacred Treaty No. 6 so that collectively we can arrive at the understandings of our adhesion to treaty, to secure recognition of the nature and original spirit and true intent of treaty, so that proper implementation can be realized. However, and I cannot stress this enough, it must be done on strict stand-alone bilateral treaty discussions for Alexander’s Adhesion to Treaty No.6.

I want to make it perfectly clear that Alexander does not presume to speak for any other Treaty First Nation’s Adhesion to Treaty No. 6. At the same time, we do not want any other Treaty First Nation to presume to represent or speak on our behalf relative to recognition and implementation of Treaty. Our Treaty Adhesion confirms that we have always been an independent and sovereign nation having the authority to accept Treaty No. 6 in a manner as understood and told by our Elders from generation to generation. No man or government can ever change or take that away from Alexander.

1 | P a g e

In 1991, our Elders expressed their concerns over the constitutional reform process of that time as placing our Treaty No. 6 in the vulnerable position of domestication by inclusion within your Constitution Act, 1982. While this Constitution is part of the problem, our Elders see it as the catalyst for Canada’s agenda on reconciliation being orchestrated by the principles of assimilation set out in the Liberal governments 1969 White paper. This Bill C-97 approach mirrors too closely to that of the 1969 assimilationist approach.

While the views expressed by Alexander appear to mirror other Nation submissions, this is because we share common issues and concerns on Bill C97 – an omnibus bill that covers everything from monies to amendments to various pieces of legislation. It is obvious that we cannot comment on all of the provisions contained therein. As with other Nations, we will confine our comments on the major issue buried deep in the Bill that concerns my Nation – the splitting of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

The Senate Standing Committee are aware, that on 28 August 2017, Prime Justin Trudeau unilaterally announced the creation of two new entities – the Minister of Indigenous Services and the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations out of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. The two entities were empowered through order-in-councils and are now reflected in Bill C-97 which contains language to create the two departments.

In the twenty-one (21) months since the Prime Minister’s announcement, the responsible Ministers of have not once engaged Alexander in any discussions on the draft legislation. We were not engaged in the process despite the words of the Prime Minister on the 28th of August 2017 when he said: “we will be establishing two new departments: A Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, and a Department of Indigenous Services. These changes are modelled on the recommendations of the Royal Commission and will be finalized in cooperation with Indigenous Peoples”. A serious commitment we thought was a true statement.

The most obvious question then becomes; Where is the cooperation and how is it supposed to take place? If Bill C-97 passes without amendments, the creation of these two departments will be finalized. We were never involved in this process.

2 | P a g e

As the Chief and Council of the Alexander First Nation, we are responsible for the future generations who are the rights holders, including our descendants. Since the Prime Minister’s announcement, we have not received one piece of correspondence inviting our Chief and Council to a meeting to discuss the reorganization of the government or been asked how such a reorganization will have an effect on our rights and our lands. There was complete silence from the government – that is not the actions of a Prime Minister who publicly stated on numerous occasions that the relationship with our Nations is the most important. What does that mean in light of the proposed amendments?

In the same statement, the Prime Minister said: “What we are doing today is also a next step toward ending the Indian Act, but the pace of transition will also require the leadership of Indigenous communities themselves.” While the Prime Minister talks about the leadership being involved – there is no such process. It is lip services to the Treaty Peoples and brings dishonour on the Crown. As the rights holders, you cannot engage organizations that were not part of Treaty making to give consent on our behalf. We have said it on many occasions, but it bears repeating, Alexander will never allow any organization or interest group to make representations or decisions on our Treaty Adhesion on our behalf. It is absolutely ludicrous to think that Canada does not realize or accept that organizations or interest groups did not enter into Treaty with the Crown – unlike our Nation.

There are major constitutional issues involved in these proposed amendments and creation of two new departments. What then becomes the future operation of the British North America Act, 1867, Section 91(24) “Indians and Lands Reserved for Indians”? In 1969, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and Minister Jean Chretien proposed in the ‘infamous white paper’ that 91(24) would be rendered null and void within the British North America Act as Canada moved to incorporate our Peoples and Nations into the fabric of Canada. Our response to Canada: Our Treaties cannot be unilaterally terminated by the Federal government. In fifty years, Canada has continued to create the policies and programs that are attempting to terminate the treaty relationship and thereby creating one service delivery system through the provinces. As Prime Minister Trudeau said in 2017, it will take “our provincial and territorial partners” to make a new relationship. This proposed new relationship does not include our Treaties – the same objective in 1867, 1969 and 2019 – that aims to terminate the Indians.

3 | P a g e

The British North America Act, 1867, Section 91(24) “Indians and Lands Reserved for Indians” must be examined and further discussed to bring certainty to Canada’s assumed administrative responsibility to fulfill Treaty obligations. Of significance is the creation of two ministries presumably operating in accordance with the Constitution Act, 1982, that puts one of the most important understandings of Treaty at serious risk of being lost forever. The land management provision contained in Treaty No. 6 ensures continued protection and management of our lands by the of Canada in a manner as prescribed in accordance with Section 91(24) of Canada’s Constitution Act, 1867. Again, by the passing of Bill C-97 and previous pieces of legislation this Treaty understanding could be affirmed as being changed forever. We do not consent to this change.

Our Treaties made with the Crown are the foundation of the state of Canada – without the Treaties – the state could not exist in our territories. We remind the Senate Standing Committee of the Royal Proclamation of 1763 which sets out the provisions for accessing our territories. Our ancestors agreed to a peace and friendship treaty with the Crown to allow for the peaceful settlement of our territories. We did not give up our territories or our resources. Our Nations entered into Treaty in our own right using our own laws and our own governmental structure. We do not need to negotiate a “self-government” agreement under a policy directive that has been unilaterally drafted and imposed by officials of the government.

In one hundred and fifty-two years, the face of colonization remains the same: get rid of the Indians and impose the colonial rule on our territories. The tactics are the same. Always trying to find willing partners: there were the fur traders, the churches and the whiskey traders – now we have organizations paid for and created by the state to service the purposes of the state (like the Assembly of First Nations, the Land Management Board, the Indian Taxation Advisory Board, the Financial Management Board and many others) all designed to bring our peoples and lands within the state. All these entities are created without our consent. In the legislation, members of parliament are funding and cooperating in the destruction of our Nations.

In March of 2018, Alexander communicated with Minister Bennett on a way to implement our treaties that would bring honour to the Crown. She was not interested. Instead, the government has chosen to draft legislation in secret for twenty-one months. Embedded deep inside an omnibus bill on the budget is the creation of these two new departments to bring legitimacy to the order-in-councils. If the government was committed to implementation of a real relationship with

4 | P a g e our peoples, the bills should have been tabled in the House of Commons after extensive consultation with our Peoples. Separate bills would have allowed us to make comments or suggested amendments, if necessary. In place of a new relationship with Indigenous Peoples, the state has chosen to bury the bills deep within a 400-page plus Bill. No Minister of the Crown sent our Nation a letter or any communication that these changes were going to be in the budget bill. Treaty Peoples had to discover the provisions by reading the legislation. Not an easy read at almost 400 pages.

In this regard, our request to the Members of the Senate is to have the following provisions removed from the Budget Bill prior to its passage. On a daily basis, we as Treaty Peoples continue to have our rights violated. This needs to change. Removal of these provisions sets in place an honourable and respectful process to implement the original spirit and true intent of our Treaty Adhesion as envisioned by our Grandfathers. We want removed from Bill C-97:

1. Subdivision A of Division 25 of Part 4 enacts the Department of Indigenous Services Act, establishing a Department of Indigenous Services and confers on the Minister of Indigenous Services.

2. Subdivision B of Division 25 of Part 4 enacts the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Act, which establishes the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs.

3. Subdivision C of Division 25 of Part 4 makes amendments to other Acts and repeals the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Act.

For years we have stated that Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada and the Alexander First Nation need to address and resolve many unfinished Treaty matters. For greater certainty, Canada assumed the administrative responsibility to fulfill Treaty obligations in 1982, and not to take every action possible to seek manufactured consent to alter, diminish or extinguish our sacred Treaty. Bill C-97 throws the door wide open to do just that.

Respectfully submitted;

Chief Kurt Burnstick

5 | P a g e