Advertisement

Saskatchewan Indigenous leaders call for ‘meaningful engagement’ from government

Indigenous leaders and communities continue to stand up to the Saskatchewan government when it comes to protecting the future of exercising their Treaty rights. Global Regina still

Indigenous leaders in Saskatchewan continue to take a stand against the province when it comes to Treaty lands. Earlier this week, Indigenous leaders gathered at the legislative building to renew calls to update to the province’s duty to consult policies. The Saskatchewan Opposition First Nations & Metis Relations Critic called it “lip-service” under the current provincial government and said Indigenous leaders had enough.

“Indigenous leaders are unequivocal: the Sask. Party’s consultations are disrespectful and simply allow the government to check a box saying they’ve consulted folks,” stated Betty Nippi-Albright. “The Meaningful Duty to Consult Act will put us on the path to meaningful engagement and I urge the Sask. Party MLAs to get on board and support it.”

Nippi-Albright was joined by the official opposition Leader Carla Beck along with a delegation of Indigenous leaders from Fishing Lake First Nation, Kawacatoose First Nation, Cote First Nation and the Anishinabe Nation Treaty Authority.

Story continues below advertisement

Nippi-Albright tabled her new Bill 610, The Meaningful Duty to Consult Act, which puts pressure on the Saskatchewan government to engage in consultations with Indigenous communities when it comes to selling off Crown lands.

Click to play video: 'Sask. First Nations leaders call upon province to update consultation policies'
Sask. First Nations leaders call upon province to update consultation policies

Other First Nations in Treaty 4 territory are also taking a stand against what they call “provincial inaction.”

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

Get breaking National news

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.

The File Hills Qu’Appelle Tribal Council (FHQTC) and Pasqua First Nation banded to argue in favour of a federal legislation. According to a release, they are taking a stand against the province before the Supreme Court of Canada in the Impact Assessment Act reference case. They applied for intervener status at the Supreme Court over the act, which deals with First Nation lands and waters.

Story continues below advertisement

“Water management in the Qu’Appelle Valley System is riddled with failed provincial water management policies and mitigation efforts, to the extent that dozens of First Nations have filed Specific Claims relating to flooding, including Pasqua. Pasqua’s flood claim was settled in 2013 for over $20 million,” stated Chief Matthew T. Peigan. “Many First Nations continue to experience negative impacts on the exercise of their rights, including the use and benefit of their reserve lands.”

A University of Saskatchewan (USask) law professor says Carry The Kettle (CTK) Nakoda Nation has started to litigate arguing that selling off of Crown lands is a breach of the Treaty rights.

“There are factual questions about at what point there is too much development that the courts will have to resolve case by case as those arise,” said Benjamin Ralston. “But the duty to consult is really supposed to be ensuring that these rights remain meaningful and that hopefully not every dispute ends up in court.”

Ralston added the CTK Nakoda Nation case could influence how the Saskatchewan government deals with the Duty to Consult with First Nations in the future.

“It’s also quite possible, through political means, that the province of Saskatchewan can come to terms with the idea that they ought to be consulting and accommodating on this without having the courts tell them to do so,” he said. “There’s any number of factual reasons or legal reasons why the lawsuit in the court might … not actually get to a determination on the merits as well.

Advertisement

Sponsored content

AdChoices