[contact-form]

]]> http://www.metisnation.ca/index.php/news/metis-nation-2012-economic-development-forum-winnipeg/feed 0 http://www.metisnation.ca/index.php/news/president-chartier-presented-with-diamond-jubilee-medal http://www.metisnation.ca/index.php/news/president-chartier-presented-with-diamond-jubilee-medal#comments Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:19:39 +0000 metis http://www.metisnation.ca/?p=1159 Continue reading →]]> On Monday, February 6, 2012, Métis National Council President Clément Chartier was presented with the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal for his leadership as President of the Métis National Council and advocating for Métis and Indigenous rights.  During a private ceremony at Rideau Hall, His Excellency the Right Honourable David Johnston the Governor General of Canada was accompanied by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in presenting President Chartier, and 59 other deserving Canadians with the medal at the inaugural presentation on behalf of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

“It is an honour to have been selected to receive the Diamond Jubilee Medal,” said President Chartier. “This medal recognizes the achievements and dedication to building a better Canada – to be recognized for pushing the Métis rights agenda forward is very special, but there is much work yet to do on this issue.”

The event marked the 60^th anniversary of Queen Elizabeth II’s accession to the Throne and will be presented to 60,000 distinguished Canadians during the next 12 months.

The 2012 APS will collect information on First Nations people living  off-reserve, Métis and Inuit aged 6 years and over. The questionnaire has been designed to ask distinct questions of different age groups. For example, children in elementary school are asked different questions than those attending high school, including questions about bullying and racism.

The APS is a sample survey, meaning not everyone will be asked to participate.  Approximately 50,000 First Nations, Métis and Inuit people have been included in the sample. The sample was drawn from households that responded to the 2011 National Household Survey who identified as an Aboriginal person and/or indicated Aboriginal ancestry. If you are among the persons selected in the sample, you will be asked whether you identify as First Nations, Métis or Inuit as the questionnaire applies only to those who self-identify. So it is important to identify as Métis if you are Métis.

The survey will be conducted between February 6, 2012 and the end of June 2012. If you have been selected in the survey sample, a Statistics Canada representative will be contacting you over the phone during this period. In remote communities and in the North, Statistics Canada will also be conducting personal interviews in the person’s home. The questionnaire will take approximately one hour to complete. Results will then be processed and released in the fall of 2013.

The APS is being carried out under the Statistics Act, which means personal information and responses must be kept strictly confidential.  For more information about the APS, please follow the link below:

www.statcan.gc.ca/aps

The R. v. Hirsekorn case was initiated as a test case as a part of the Métis Nation’s “hunt for justice.” This “hunt for justice” was launched in response to the Stelmach Government’s cancellation of a province-wide Interim Métis Harvesting Agreement (“IMHA”) that was negotiated between the MNA and the Klein Government in 2004. Since the cancellation of the IMHA in July 2007, Alberta Métis have taken to the courts in order to ensure the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Powley is meaningfully implemented in Alberta.

“We are extremely pleased that the Alberta Court of Appeal rejected the Alberta Government’s arguments to deny leave to appeal and that the Court has agreed to hear this important case for all Alberta Métis. In her Reasons for Judgment, Justice Hunt clearly recognizes that this is a case about fulfilling the promise of section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 to Alberta Métis. We wholeheartedly agree with this conclusion,” said Audrey Poitras, MNA President.

Legal counsel for the MNA and Mr. Hirsekorn will now be finalizing the appeal for a hearing before a full panel of the Alberta Court of Appeal. A hearing date has not yet been set, but it is hoped that the appeal will be heard in the Court of Appeal’s upcoming Spring 2012 session.

Documents

Application for Leave of Appeal (Jan. 23, 2012)

MNA Media Advisory (Jan. 23, 2012)

Visit the MNA’s website at www.albertametis.com

For additional information or interviews contact Joanne Gunville at:

Métis Nation of Alberta
T: 780-455-2200

The IBA includes provisions on how the Métis community will benefit from the development of the Detour Lake project and throughout the life of the mine, including employment and business opportunities, training and education initiatives and financial participation in the project. The IBA also establishes a Métis scholarship and bursary program at College Boreal and Northern College. Further details about the scholarships criteria will be released in partnership with the colleges in their student handbooks. The IBA reflects Detour Gold’s commitment to protecting the environment and wildlife, and supporting the community’s social and cultural practices in a spirit of continued cooperation.

Gerald Panneton, President and CEO of Detour Gold, stated, “We are very pleased with our working relationship with the MNO and to have this agreement in place. It is exciting that they have partnered with us to create the Métis scholarships and bursaries at the colleges that will provide educational financial support to Métis youth for the next two decades.”

MNO’s President, Gary Lipinski, commented, “This IBA is the first-of-its-kind between a mining company and a Métis community. It represents a significant step forward in relations between the mining industry and Ontario Métis. We applaud Detour Gold’s leadership in working collaboratively with the Métis community on environmental issues and ensuring it will benefit from the Detour Lake project.”

Marcel Lafrance, Chair of the MNO Regional Consultation Committee for the James Bay-Abitibi/Temiscamingue areas, highlighted, “This IBA could not have been achieved without the support and engagement of the Métis community as well as cooperation amongst the Community Councils in the region. We look forward to continuing to work with Detour Gold for the benefit of our citizens and the future success of our youth.”

About Detour Gold

Detour Gold is a Canadian gold exploration and development company whose primary focus is to advance the development of its Detour Lake gold project, located in northeastern Ontario, towards production. Detour Gold’s shares trade on the Toronto Stock Exchange under the trading symbol DGC.

About the MNO

The MNO represents Métis citizens and communities throughout Ontario.  For more information about the MNO visit www.metisnation.org.

Forward-Looking Information
This news release contains certain forward-looking information as defined in applicable securities laws (referred to herein as “forward-looking statements”). Specifically, this news release contains forward-looking statements regarding the development of the Detour Lake project and the positive economic and educational benefits that the project will provide to the Métis community. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which are beyond Detour Gold’s ability to predict or control and may cause Detour Gold’s actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any of its future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by forward-looking statements. These risks, uncertainties and other factors include, but are not limited to, gold price volatility, changes in debt and equity markets, the uncertainties involved in interpreting geological data, increases in costs, environmental compliance and changes in environmental legislation and regulation, interest rate and exchange rate fluctuations, general economic conditions and other risks involved in the gold exploration and development industry, as well as those risk factors discussed in the section entitled “Description of Business – Risk Factors” in Detour Gold’s July 27, 2011 short form prospectus and in the continuous disclosure documents filed by Detour Gold on and available at www.sedar.com. Such forward-looking statements are also based on a number of assumptions which may prove to be incorrect, including, but not limited to, assumptions about the following: the availability of financing for exploration and development activities; the estimated timeline for the development of the Detour Lake gold project; the supply and demand for, and the level and volatility of the price of, gold; the results of the feasibility study and the assumptions on which the feasibility study is based; the accuracy of reserve and resource estimates and the assumptions on which the reserve and resource estimates are based; the receipt of necessary permits; market competition; ongoing relations with employees and impacted communities; and general business and economic conditions. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Detour Gold undertakes no obligation to update publicly or otherwise revise any forward-looking statements contained herein whether as a result of new information or future events or otherwise, except as may be required by law. Certain information contained in this news release may be deemed “forward looking”. All statements in this news release, other than statements of historical fact, that address events or developments that Detour Gold or Trade Winds expect to occur, are “forward-looking statements”. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which are beyond Detour Gold’s or Trade Winds’ ability to predict or control and may cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by forward-looking statements.

In a keynote address, President Chartier outlined why a constitution was needed and a process for achieving it. ‘The Territorial Integrity of the Métis Nation’ focused on  the Manitoba Metis Federation’s land claim lawsuit which was heard in the Supreme Court of Canada on December 13.  ’The Boundaries of the Métis Nation’, and a ‘Strategy for Restoring a Land Base’ included the commitment to this objective as a foundation of the constitution.

*President Chartier’s Keynote Address is included below.

A series of panels examined the priorities of Métis Nation governments – in the areas of language and culture preservation and promotion, child and family health services and supports, education and training, and economic development -  and how these could be included in a constitution. Throughout the workshop there was open discussion between the panelists and delegates.

In  ’A Constitution for the 21^st Century’, delegates examined a series of graphics illustrating the current structure of the MNC and Governing Members and how this may be impacted by the adoption of a constitution. Delegates also reviewed a series of worksheets identifying the key questions to be addressed as we move towards the 2013 Constitution Convention and adopting a Métis Nation Constitution.

*All of the presentations are posted in the ‘Constitutional Reform Portal’, which can be accessed through the Métis Nation Gateway at: www.metisportals.ca

Delegates also heard from two other special speakers during the Workshop, Former Minster of Aboriginal Affairs and Office of the Federal Interlocutor for Métis, and good friend of the Métis Nation, Chuck Strahl was asked to offer his thoughts on the importance of the Métis Nation developing a Constitution and some suggestions that should be considered to ensure success.  The second special speaker was the President of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Peru (CONAIP) Hugo Tacuri who delivered a keynote speech on International Indigenous Rights.

__________________________________________________________________________

METIS NATION CONSTITUTION WORKSHOP

Keynote Address by President Chartier
December 11-12, 2011
Ottawa, Ontario

The purpose of this workshop is to begin the work on a Métis Nation Constitution.

It has been a longstanding goal of the Métis Nation to adopt a national constitution.

The most recent expression of this interest was the Resolution on Governance adopted at the MNC’s 2010 General Assembly, included in your binder under Tab 2.

That resolution set this workshop as an important step in consultations leading to a draft constitution that could be considered and adopted by a Constitution Convention in October 2013.

If adopted by the Convention, the document would then be sent forward to the General Assembly in December of that year for ratification.

While we have discussed the need for a constitution for a long time, I believe we have arrived at a juncture in our history when it is time to act on it.

In two days, the thirty year court battle of the MMF to fulfill the promise of lands to the Métis under the Manitoba Act 1870 will reach the Supreme Court of Canada.

This case will alter the way in which the federal government views the rights of the Métis as the Manitoba Court of Appeal has already upheld certain legal principles that will have significant implications going forward.

A victory by the MMF will set the stage for the negotiation of a contemporary land claims agreement which includes self-government.

We will need our own constitution to define the nature of the government that will exercise powers under that agreement.

The same holds true for self-government arrangements in future Métis land claims settlements in other parts of our homeland that will be spurred on by a MMF victory.

Separate from the court action, the MNC is working with the federal government under the Métis Nation Protocol to negotiate accords that would introduce government-to-government financing of our governing bodies and the transfer of authority over federal programs to our institutions.

These accords would form the basis of a   self-government agreement for the Métis Nation that could be put into effect through federal legislation, a Canada- Métis Nation Relations Act, under the federal Inherent Right Policy.

Under the Inherent Right Policy, an internal constitution is required before this kind of self-government agreement can be concluded.

It is not just for the purpose of negotiating self-government agreements that I believe we need a constitution.

As a distinct people and nation, with the right to self-determination, we should be governing ourselves under own laws drawn from our own constitution rather than the bylaws of non-profit societies.

This would strengthen our status and credibility as governments rather than interest groups when we sit at the table with federal and provincial first ministers and ministers and assert our national interests.

When we deal with private industry on major projects having tremendous impact on our traditional territory.

When we address the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and other international institutions engaged in the promotion of Indigenous peoples’ rights.

When we cooperate with other Indigenous peoples worldwide in areas of common interest.

In other words, a constitution will demonstrate the political will and nationhood of the Métis people on the national and international stage.

That we haven’t been able to adopt a constitution to date should not be viewed as a deterrent to future success.

The Canadian constitution in 1867 did little more than set out the federal and provincial institutions of government and the division of powers between the two levels of government.

It was not until patriation of the Constitution in 1982 that Canada acquired the ability to amend its own constitution, which was accompanied by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the all-important Rights of the Aboriginal Peoples.

We have a much stronger starting point.

I believe, that by 2013, we could accomplish much in a constitution even if the delegates to the Constitution Convention chose a document leaving the current structure of our governance system largely intact and with an amending formula that would permit future changes.

But I also believe we can go far beyond that, which will be our challenge during the next two years.

A constitution can serve as a vision or mission statement of a nation.

As such, it can express the fundamental beliefs, values and goals of a people.

Some of these core beliefs, I believe, are foundations of our nationhood and stand a good chance of being adopted by the Constitution Convention.

Four of these core beliefs or foundations stand out in my mind although more are sure to be proposed in the coming months.

The first is the need to restore a land base for the Métis Nation and future generations and to ensure that Métis people and their governments are fully involved in the ratification of any agreements affecting these lands.

We will soon hear from three lawyers who are at the forefront in the courts in trying to restore the lands and resources of the Métis Nation.

Jean Teillet will speak to the boundaries of the Métis Nation homeland.

Tom Berger, who has represented the MMF in their epic land claim battle almost from the start and will be arguing the case before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, will then provide us with an overview of the case.

Jason Madden will then speak to the potential implications of a successful decision in the MMF case and where we go from here in our strategy to restore a land base.

The MMF argument in MMF vs. Canada and Manitoba is included in your kit under Tab 3 and is followed by the intervener arguments from MNC, MNO and MNA.

A second foundation is the National Definition that identifies who we are and is the foundation of our citizenship system.

The National Definition was adopted by the 2002 MNC General Assembly and   incorporated into the bylaws or constitution of each MNC Governing Member.

Meeting the National Definition is a requirement for citizenship registration and for voting in the elections of Governing Members.

True, we have not yet completed the national acceptance process and establishing a Métis Nation Registry, something the MNC and the registry officials of the Governing Members are working toward in their ongoing efforts to harmonize the five citizenship registries.

This work on a national acceptance process may or may not be completed by the time of the Constitution Convention in 2013.

But even if it’s not, we could, and I believe should, entrench the National Definition in the constitution as an expression of who we are as a distinct people and nation and the basis of our citizenship code.

The constitution could also commit the citizens and governments of the Métis Nation to continue working toward the national registry, if that has not yet been achieved.

A third foundation for constitutional consideration is the need to preserve and promote the culture and language of the Métis Nation which will be addressed by a panel this afternoon.

A fourth foundation is our commitment to democratic accountability.

This commitment is already established in the province-wide one-person one-vote ballot box system of elections for the leaders of our Governing Members and the ballot box elections within the regions of each province for the other members of provincial councils and boards.

According to the existing MNC bylaws, membership in the MNC is conditional on a Governing Member adhering to the principle and practice of direct elections of leaders.

In 2002, the MNC General Assembly adopted a resolution calling for the direct one-person one-vote ballot box election of national president.

Whether and how this system of direct election should be extended to the MNC president will be the subject of discussion at this workshop and over the next two years.

Tomorrow we will look at how a direct election system for the president compares to the current system and the questions that will have to be addressed before 2013.

By the time of the Convention, if consensus is not reached on all aspects of a direct election system for president, the constitution can, at the very least, entrench the commitment to democratic accountability reflected in the electoral practices of Governing Members and MNC bylaws, and express the resolve of  the Métis Nation to work toward a directly elected president, perhaps by a certain date.

The constitution, as a vision and mission statement, can also address the aspirations and priorities of Metis Nation citizens for their governments.

We will hear from a number of Governing Member presidents and ministers on the importance of specific social and economic programs and services in the overall health, security and prosperity of Metis Nation citizens and whether or how a constitution should promote laws and initiatives toward their advancement.

The constitution should also address the rights and freedoms of citizens of the Métis Nation in their dealings with their own governments and with each other.

We will hear from panelists on the treatment of individual rights and freedoms in the constitution and the equal protection and advancement of female and male Métis.

Many of the building blocks for constitutional reform which I have just identified, are included in a power-point under Tab 7.

Also, under Tab 8 there are extracts from a draft constitution we have been using for illustration purposes.

This is not an official document and has not been approved by any Métis Nation government.

It’s purpose is to provide delegates with a feel for the structure of a constitution and the type of language used in the expression of its ideas, including some of those I just put forward.

As we move into the consideration of the institutions and powers in a constitution tomorrow, I believe, again, that there is already significant consensus on some key issues that will assist the Constitution Convention in its deliberations.

Over the years, the MNC and its Governing Members have worked out a division of roles and responsibilities that works reasonably well.

The MNC is  responsible for representing the Métis people at the national and international levels,  intergovernmental negotiations and agreements, and policy development leading to new or enhanced programs and services.

The Governing Members are responsible for representation at the provincial level,  the administration of core governance  operations and institutions  such as citizenship registries and elections,  and the delivery of programs and services .

This should cetainly help when we consider the formal division of powers within a national constiution.

The direct election of a national president by Métis Nation citizens rather than the General Assembly raises a number of important questions with respect to his or her accountability and powers that will have to be considered.

The role of the General Assembly, which could become a National Assembly, will also have to be considered along with the possibility of a Senate and a dispute resolution body or tribunal.

The formula for the representation of the Governing Members  in the General Assembly and the  formula for ratifying and amending the constitution will command considerable attention, I am sure.

Under the existing MNC bylaws, as we all know, each of the Governing Members from the Prairies or Founding Members has 15 voting delegates while BC and Ontario each has five.

As well, any amendment to the MNC bylaws requires the unanimous consent of the Founding Members.

Whether these rules will be transferred to a constitution for the purposes of representation in the National Assembly and amending the constitution will have to be determined.

The graphics in your kit under Tab 10 are a tool portraying many of these issues and will help guide tomorrow’s discussions.

At 11:45 this morning, we will commence a special ceremony and luncheon commemorating the services and sacrifices of our Métis Nation veterans of the Korean War, which lasted from June 25, 1950 to July 27, 1953.

I am pleased and honored that we will be joined by a number of the veterans who will be receiving plaques in recognition of their service.

Tonight, we will be holding a Christmas Party at this location so that we will have a chance to visit and socialize.

There we will be joined by the Hon. Chuck Strahl, the former Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Federal Interlocutor for Métis, who is also a distinguished recipient of the Order of the Métis Nation, who will address us tomorrow morning with some of his thoughts on our constitutional challenge.

Our special guest  at  tomorrow’s keynote luncheon will be  our good friend Hugo Tacuri, President of CONAIP, the national Indigenous Peoples movement from Peru.

This summer the MNC and CONAIP concluded a friendship and cooperation treaty included in your binder under Tab 9, an indication of the growing reach of the Métis Nation in international affairs and further proof of why we as a nation should be entering into such treaties under the authority of our own constitution.

In closing, let me state again that the time has come to move on a constitution and not just to help position us to negotiate self-government agreements.

A Métis Nation Constitution will serve as a vessel for our values, our principles, our vision, as well as defining  how we wish to govern ourselves in the 21^st century.

If we don’t take seriously this ultimate expression of our nationhood and self-government, who will?

How better to celebrate the 30^th anniversary of the founding of the Métis National Council in 1983 when our nation was at risk and our leaders stepped up to once again defend our right to exist as a nation and people!

Métis citizens entered the Supreme Court of Canada to be a part of history as the rights of the Manitoba Metis and therefore Métis from across the Homeland were on to be discussed.  The courtroom itself was filled, the overflow room, too, was filled – and off-site, Métis citizens gathered in a meeting room where two big screens webcasted the appeal live.

This case, was launched in 1981 by the MMF asserting that Canada did not fulfill its constitutional obligations agreed upon by the Riel government as part of Manitoba’s entry into Confederation and today the Métis got their day in Canada’s highest court.

The Métis Nation legal team, which is lead by Thomas Berger, Q.C. and Jim Aldridge, Q.C. presented strong evidence including letters and copies of statements from Canada’s highest officials including former Prime Minister John A. MacDonald.  (Please see below for the major points that were presented to the Judges).

It will be several months until the MMF is back at the Supreme Court of Canada to hear the Judges remarks, but after today the Métis Nation is confident that the next steps will be positive.

THE CASE FOR THE MANITOBA METIS

• The case involves two historical leaders, Sir John A. Macdonald and Louis Riel, and the promise of land for the Metis people.

• It goes back to 1869-70 and the negotiations between the government of Canada and the Provisional Government established by the Metis of the Red River Settlement, headed by Riel.

• In 1870 the Red River Settlement had 12,000 people; 10,000 were Metis. Seven thousand of them were children.

• Promises by the federal government contained in the Manitoba Act of 1870 were supposed to confirm the possession of land held by the Metis settlers along the Red and Assiniboine Rivers.

• The Federal Government also assumed the responsibility to appropriate 1.4 million acres and to distribute it among the 7,000 Metis children.

• It was on the strength of these and other promises that the Metis laid down their arms and agreed that Manitoba should enter Canada.

• The Metis established at the trial of the case that the distribution of 1.4 million acres to the 7,000 Metis children was delayed for a decade and more. Indeed almost a thousand children received no land at all.

• The Metis lands were traditionally held by extended families along the Red, Assiniboine and other rivers. But no provision was made for the children’s lands to be contiguous or clustered together. Instead, Ottawa ordered the land to be distributed by lottery in each parish. The result was that each child’s land might be 10, 20, 30 or 40 miles from their parents and their siblings.

• The Metis rely on what Sir John A. Macdonald and his colleague, Sir George-Etienne Cartier told the House when piloting the legislation through Parliament.

• Macdonald told the House of Commons on May 2, 1870 that the grant of 1.4 million acres was “for purposes of settlement by their children.” On May 4, he said “No land would be reserved for the benefit of white speculators, the land being only given for the actual purpose of settlement.”

• A year later, Sir George-Etienne Cartier told the House on April 13, 1871 that “Until the children came of age, the government was the guardian of the land, and no speculators would be suffered to get hold of it.”

• The Liberal government of Alexander Mackenzie, in office from 1873 to 1878, took the same position: Sir Richard Scott, Secretary of State, told the Senate on March 14, 1877: “The Government was the guardian of these people, and it was their duty to see that they were protected in their rights to their properties.”

• The trial judge and the Manitoba Court of Appeal held that these provisions of the Manitoba Act were intended to provide a “head start” for the Metis against the influx of new settlers.

• But in the meantime a great influx of settlers from Ontario had entered the new province. They received their land without delay. There was no “head start” for the Metis. In fact they did not get to the start line for ten years or more.

• Paragraph 200 in the MMF Factum sums up the situation. “By the time the grants were finally issued in the names of the children the Metis had been in Macdonald’s phrase, “swamped by the influx of settlers”. The Metis had become marginalized and were now, to a great extent, a landless minority. It may be that half the Metis population had left Manitoba by 1881.”

Argument of MMF Case

The Manitoba Metis Federation, in showing that there was an inexcusable delay in implementing the original promises, argues that there was a breach of fiduciary obligation by Canada, which left the Metis a marginalized minority in the province. The breach by Canada was a breach of a constitutional obligation.

1. The Manitoba government then passed a series of laws which the MMF alleges were designed to ensure the children’s grants passed from Metis ownership to non-Metis ownership. The MMF contends that these laws were unconstitutional.

1. The MMF will argue that since the federal government had a constitutional obligation to the Metis and their children that it failed to fulfill, the Supreme Court of Canada, notwithstanding the passage of time, can rule on the question, since it involves the rightful place of the Metis within the constitutional system.

History of Case

The MMF lost in the Manitoba courts. The trial judge and the Manitoba Court of Appeal held that there had been no breach of fiduciary obligation, even though both held the purpose of the grant of 1.4 million acres was to give the Metis families and their children “a head start.” The Supreme Court of Canada earlier this year agreed to hear their appeal.