Sept 29, 2007
Brantford Expositor
As one who initially helped conceive the Six Nations' land development protocol, I would like to speak to its merits and the thoughts behind the idea in the light of recent criticism from developers, mostly, about the protocol and the fees proposed.
The idea came as we saw the enormous cost, for all concerned, of reclaiming a relatively small piece of land in Caledonia. Not only the financial cost but also hours of lost time with our families, lost hours of employment income, fines, jail time and criminal records and loss of personal and friendly relations with the Caledonia folk and the animosity now ingrained.
So why not devise a way to circumvent future conflict by creating a permit process whereby the Six Nations Confederacy would have an opportunity to comment on development of land whose true ownership has yet to be resolved in a fair and equitable resolution process?
This permit process would serve many useful purposes. Developers would be made fully aware of the nature of the history of the land in question and whether Six Nations, not being completely against development, has any concerns regarding archeological, environmental or culturally significant concerns.
The permit fee, just as a fee to any municipality, would be an administrative fee to conduct the required research of the concerns mentioned above. Now Six Nations can act in a proactive manner rather than reacting with all its potential for misunderstanding and conflict.
Developers must understand there is a hugely unresolved land ownership question across Ontario. Municipalities must understand that by providing approvals to develop on such lands they are breaking Canadian law, as stated by the Supreme Court, by not consulting and accommodating First Nations who have interests in the area.
It is not fair or legal, in any law, to reinforce dispossession of such lands by developing on them before just resolution and closure. This will likely require international arbitration or mediation, of course, given that Canada is in a position of conflict of interest in arbitrarily framing the structure for land claims processes and the unrealistic caps on financial awards associated.
Also, if the Six Nations Confederacy puts its stamp of approval on proposed development, there is less chance for "reclamations," especially if the Confederacy boosts its democratic legitimacy by resurrecting the clanship system of democracy.
Consulting with the Confederacy is also the right thing to do as all land transactions and treaties were with the Confederacy and not the Canadian-imposed band government system.
The elected system has already said numerous times it does not have the resources to adequately analyze requests from developers and many go without such analysis.
Perhaps we should apply for Certificates of Pending Litigation across Ontario which could shut down development for decades. Certainly, there should be a moratorium on the sale of any further Crown lands before just resolution.
So let's dispense with the ridiculous accusations of a money grab and mafia-like behaviour because this Haudenosaunee land development permit process is good for everyone involved. It is a proactive measure that will prevent many conflicts in the future.
This new protocol is a good offer to developers and, given the determination of our people as well as the ruling of the Supreme Court regarding the legal requirement to consult and accommodate First Nations, it may be an offer they can't refuse.
Alex Jamieson Jr. Six Nations Territory