A shakeup of the status quo can often be the catalyst for forward momentum. And there's no doubt even the smallest degree of momentum would be a huge improvement in the long-running Caledonia land claims dispute.
There's a good chance momentum will be one result of the Six Nations Band Council's plan to restart land claims talks with a new negotiator and a new direction.
The band council has rescinded a 2006 motion that gave responsibility for the talks to the hereditary Six Nations/Haudenosaunee Confederacy. The plan is to hire someone -- a "hired gun" in the words of Chief Bill Montour -- to represent Six Nations.
Perhaps drawing on the recent experience of the Mississaugas of the New Credit, the band council also wants to abandon individual land claims and instead go after a comprehensive settlement on its claim to all the land along the Grand River. That broadness of scope may seem a bit ill-considered, but at least it's clear. And it is a starting point, a springboard for negotiation, not a carved-in-stone demand.
Talks between Six Nations and the federal and provincial governments began four years ago in the wake of the occupation of land in Caledonia and a botched raid by the OPP. Those talks halted last fall after a dispute about whether a third-party mediator was needed.
That's not good for Six Nations members, nor is it good for residents of Caledonia. Achieving a settlement would go a long way toward repairing rifts and easing anxiety on all sides of the dispute.
There is, of course, the strong probability the action by the Six Nations Band Council will lead to more fruitful negotiations and, by extension, settlement in the nearer future. What is clear is that the process involving the hereditary Confederacy has failed to move the issues forward with anything other than glacial speed. Native land claims are notoriously and painstakingly slow; an approach that at least gets things moving is worth a try.
No doubt the band council decision will be controversial on the reserve. It may lead to a split between supporters of the elected council and those who support the hereditary leadership. Some Six Nations members distrust the elected council because they view it as a political construct of colonization. There is a good argument to be made, though, that the band council represents the norm of leadership in the 21st century and may carry more weight with other governments.
Six Nations members, as individuals, must determine for themselves what is in their best interests. Surely some action -- as opposed to none at all -- that presents a greater likelihood of settlement isn't automatically a bad thing.
Six Nations -- in fact, all First Nations -- should not have to wait for generations for land claims to be settled. It is unacceptable to have a process that is so bogged down and a backlog that is so lengthy. This responsible move by the Six Nations Band Council may well end up marking a pivotal shift in the unwieldy, overly complex and completely unsatisfactory process.
Editorials are written by members of the editorial board. They represent the position of the newspaper, not necessarily the individual author.