Native co-operation key for future

In the 20th century, the government has entered into treaties with Aboriginal peoples, mainly in northern regions, in response to settlement and mineral discoveries. In 1982, the country underwent significant constitutional change. Section 25 of the Constitution guaranteed that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms would not revoke treaties or other rights from Aboriginals, while Section 35 recognized and affirmed existing treaty rights.

One of the most significant of recent treaties is the Nunavut Final Agreement, which reflects the government’s historic agreements and the 1982 Constitution. The principles of “use” and “occupation,” terms employed in the recent Delgamuuku ruling and others, and the role Aboriginal people had in lands management, are mentioned here. This agreement provides, among other benefits, “certainty and clarity of rights to ownership and use of lands and resources, and of rights for Inuit to participate in decision-making.”

Modern treaties and land-claim settlements help the mining industry by affirming that Aboriginal communities and industry share resources. Clauses in today’s land claim agreements outline terms for mineral development. An example is the requirement for an Impact and Benefit Agreement (IBA). Under the Nunavut Final Agreement, “no Major Development Project [exploitation, but not exploration] may commence until an IBA is finalized.”

What can mining companies and Aboriginal groups do to get on with business? Historical and present-day agreements and pending Supreme Court decisions further recognize an existing aboriginal interest in lands. Agreements — the rule of law — can mean that government and the mining industry must:

– recognize Aboriginal interests in lands;

– negotiate company-community agreements (such as the IBA);

– understand the cultures; and

– maintain the original spirit and intent of relations.

We know that mineral development is not possible without land claims settlements and that Aboriginal support for projects is essential. Many companies are finding that the government often finds it difficult to settle after a discovery. Considering the governmental obligations, established through law, and direct benefits from mineral development in land claim areas, why are they not keen to expedite the land claim process?

In areas such as Voisey’s Bay and Lac de Gras, companies have found that government cannot necessarily be expected to resolve land claims. Therefore, it benefits these companies to form good relationships with Aboriginal communities, as such a relationship gives the company social license to operate.

Aboriginal people are also keen to do business with industry. Not surprisingly, Aboriginal communities are just as anxious to resolve land claims and are frustrated with the progress of such settlements. Aboriginal groups reiterate that they are not claiming land, but that the government is claiming Aboriginal lands. The settlement of land claims will ensure that we are involved in mineral projects. Aboriginal communities are not opposed to development, provided they can work with industry to manage the lands and share in the benefits.

In the next millennium, several factors affecting relationships between industry and Aboriginals will occur. For example:

– industry will continue to develop Aboriginal community relations policies;

– communities will conduct extensive resource planning;

– lending institutions will increasingly be concerned with tenure in reviewing mineral development loans;

– World Bank requirements, such as Directive 4.2, which stipulates development plans for indigenous communities before loan approval, will be more common;

– Supreme Court decisions will continue to favour Aboriginal society and affirm government agreements; and

– land claim negotiations will continue, but only in response to mineral discoveries.

Over the centuries the roles have changed: no longer do Aboriginals participate in mining; rather, mining participates in the Aboriginal community.

I hope I have clarified several points, namely that: Aboriginal peoples have always existed; that they have long-standing (and outstanding) agreements with the federal government; and that they will continue to support Canada’s minerals industry.

— The preceding is the second of two articles examining past and present relationships between Aboriginals and the Canadian government in terms of their effect on the nation’s mining industry. The author is president of The Canadian Aboriginal Minerals Association.