First Nations gather to meet with Carney over major projects law
The meeting came together quickly and chaotically, with many First Nations leaders noting the rushed process behind the bill. Indigenous leaders were not consulted on the new legislation, which they say runs roughshod over First Nations' rights and jurisdiction. The law grants cabinet the authority to override many environmental laws and regulations to get projects built if they are deemed to be in the national interest.
At the meeting, Carney is scheduled to make a speech in the morning just before 9 a.m., followed by remarks from Assembly of First Nations (AFN) National Chief Cindy Woodhouse. There will be four working sessions throughout the day, pencilled in for 1.5 hours each, on topics like economic participation and the Indigenous advisory council created by the legislation.
An official from the national chief's office said media are not allowed to sit in on the summit. The AFN said it had pushed for media to have full access for the entire event. Media is only allowed to attend Carney's remarks.
The meetings will occur just days after nine First Nations in Ontario launched a legal challenge on the constitutionality of Bill C-5 and are seeking an injunction to block the bill until the court rules on the legal challenge.
Regional Chief of the British Columbia AFN Terry Teegee said at a Wednesday press conference that for the meetings to be a success, there must be a 'solid commitment' from Carney that free, prior and informed consent will be required as part of any development.
'He has to also listen to First Nations leadership — more listening, rather than talking about how they want to proceed forward,' Woodhouse said at the press conference.
'The problem here … is that there are, potentially, going to be projects that are going to be very controversial, and it's those projects that I think the vast majority of chiefs are worried about,' said BC Regional Chief Terry Teegee
She emphasized that some communities are 'ready to go,' while others do not support it. Others are still so busy dealing with issues on the ground that they do not yet know where they land on this polarizing issue, she said. The government needs to listen to leaders and ensure communities receive funding support to get their lawyers and technicians involved in major projects, she added. The government has committed to providing $40 million for capacity-building around consultations for the projects it proposes. There are 634 recognized First Nations bands in Canada.
In some cases, First Nations favourable to Bill C-5 may already have projects in their communities they want advanced, and those are probably already going through the approval process anyway, Teegee said.
'The problem here … is that there are, potentially, going to be projects that are going to be very controversial, and it's those projects that I think the vast majority of chiefs are worried about,' he said.
Teegee noted that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is 'really pushing' for a pipeline to BC's north coast but said, 'We've been down that road, and it's a very difficult situation' to get approval for a project like that that requires approval from many First Nations.
Wet'suwet'en Hereditary Chief Na'Moks and the Coastal GasLink pipeline are emblematic of this issue. The 670-kilometre-long natural gas pipeline is now operational, but years of opposition and blockades plagued the project. Although the company reached agreements with First Nation band councils (including Wet'suwet'en elected chiefs) along the route, hereditary Wet'suwet'en chiefs, including Na'Moks, opposed the project at every turn.
At a press conference Wednesday, Na'Moks told reporters he didn't receive an invitation to the summit until last night when he was already in transit to Ottawa, after deciding he would travel there with or without a formal invitation.
At a press conference on Wednesday, Carney said this summit with First Nations leaders is about 'how this can work, how we work together, [and] what are the priorities.'
This isn't a discussion about specific projects, he added, and when specific projects are on the table, there will be consultations and consultations on the conditions that must be fulfilled for the projects to proceed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
5 hours ago
- National Post
'They were just hell-bent': Mayor battling Ottawa over 'really left' housing mandate
Article content The province of Ontario already mandates three buildings on a residential lot, the bureaucrats told Drew, so what's the big deal about adding four? His rebuttal: 'Then what's the big deal about adding five? I mean, where does it stop? And when do you get to say enough's enough; that we have processes in place that allow us to look at sewer capacity, that allow us to deal with parking, that allow us to deal with garbage control? Article content 'We hope to work with the federal government — who wants to truly be a partner in helping build more housing — without jamming down our throats something residents don't want,' pleads the veteran mayor. Article content To that end, after Carney took power, the mayor sent a letter — as yet, unanswered — to the government, asking for a re-evaluation of this rigid approach to the housing accelerator fund. Article content Drew has previously worked with Gregor Robertson, former mayor of Vancouver and now Carney's point man on housing and infrastructure. He's optimistic Robertson will bring practical insights about the correlation between affordable housing and density to the federal table. I noted that if increased density brought affordability, Vancouver would be cheap by now. Article content 'I think the benefit of having a fresh government,' Drew offers, 'is they can come in and say, 'Listen, we looked at the program … while we appreciate the intention the past government was trying to employ here, we think there's a better way of working with municipalities, allowing them the flexibility to determine how to accomplish the goal. We'll set the goals and then we'll hold them to account.'' Article content Drew's suggestion echoes what I heard Pierre Poilievre say in the last election campaign. But, we agree, there's nothing wrong with the Liberals stealing good ideas from the Conservatives. Article content While the housing accelerator initiative is the focus of Windsor council's attention, Drew's not happy these blanket zoning mandates are being applied to other programs — including federal public transit and housing infrastructure funding available to municipalities. Article content 'And it gets even better,' Drew continues, his tone increasingly agitated. 'Guess who doesn't have to do this? The entire province of Quebec. They have an exemption. They carved out a different pathway … four units as of right was not a requirement in the province of Quebec.' Indeed, Premier Francois Legault trumpeted his $900-million deal with Ottawa as being 'free of conditions.' Article content The economy of Windsor has taken a sharp downturn in the past 18 months. Before Donald Trump's re-election, the Conference Board of Canada predicted Windsor would be the fastest-growing city by GDP of the 24 big cities they studied. 'We had the battery factory well under construction,' Drew reports, 'and we've got the Gordie Howe bridge that is winding up construction and should open officially the first week of December this year. Article content 'But the reality is, there's a lot of fear here,' he shares. 'Our unemployment rate was almost 11 per cent and people are in rainy day mode. People are pinching their pennies … The housing market is very slow and everyone's just in a wait-and-see mode.' Article content Property developers are on standby, he says, waiting to see if the Carney Liberals will cut development charges by 50 per cent at the municipal level (as promised during the election campaign), and whether the feds will offer low-interest loans for multi-storey residential units. Article content
Winnipeg Free Press
6 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump's demand for Washington NFL team name change ignores years of psychological data, experts say
This week, President Donald Trump threatened to hold up a new stadium deal if Washington's NFL team did not restore its name to a racial slur, despite decades of psychological research showing the negative mental health impacts of Native American mascots. The president is demanding a private company change its name to something that researchers have linked to a variety of negative mental health outcomes, particularly for children, said Mark Macarro, president of the National Congress of American Indians. The organization has been pushing back on stereotypes of Native Americans since the 1950s, including Native sports mascots. 'This is a big reminder with this administration that we're going to take some backward steps,' Macarro said. 'We have our studies, we have our receipts, and we can demonstrate that this causes real harm.' More than two decades of research on Native mascots have shown they lead to heightened rates of depression, self-harm, substance abuse and suicidal ideation among Indigenous peoples, and those impacts are the greatest on children. Citing this data, the American Psychological Association has been recommending the retirement of Native mascots since 2001. The president believes that franchises who changed their names to 'pander to the Woke Left' should immediately restore their original names,' White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said in a statement to The Associated Press. 'Thanks to President Trump, the days of political correctness and cancel culture are over,' he said. Some teams change names while others resist Under pressure from decades of activism, the Washington Redskins — a racial slur and arguably the most egregious example — retired the name in 2020, eventually settling on the Commanders. Later that year, the Cleveland Indians changed its name to the Guardians. Two major league teams, the NFL's Kansas City Chiefs and the NHL's Chicago Blackhawks, continue to resist calls to change their names. The Chiefs have banned fans from wearing headdresses or face paint meant to depict Native Americans at games but has resisted prohibiting the use of the 'tomahawk chop', which critics have long called derogatory. More than 1,500 grade schools across the country — a decrease over the past few years — still use Native mascots, according to the National Congress of American Indians, using names like 'Savages' as well as the slur that Trump aims to bring back to the Washington team. Experts say Native mascots reinforce racial bias Native American people, activists, and leaders have been asking for the retirement of Native mascots for generations. Popular arguments defending the mascots have been that they 'honor' Native people or that it simply boiled down to people being 'offended,' said Steph Cross, a professor of psychology and researcher at the University of Oklahoma and a citizen of the Comanche Nation. But now we have decades of data that agrees on the negative mental health impacts, she said. 'Being offended is not even really the problem. That's a symptom,' Cross said. She noted that Native mascots aren't just harmful to Indigenous peoples, they also reinforce racial prejudices among non-Natives, including people who will work directly with Native people like health care professionals and teachers. 'I think about these people who are going to be working with Native children, whether they realize that or not, and how they may unintentionally have these biases,' Cross said. Stephanie Fryberg, a professor at Northwestern University, who is a member of the Tulalip Tribes and one of the country's leading researchers on Native mascots, said, 'The ultimate impact, whether conscious or unconscious, is bias in American society.' Her work has also shown Native mascots increase the risk of real psychological harm, especially for young Native people. 'Honoring Native peoples means ending dehumanization in both imagery and policy,' she said. 'Indian Country needs meaningful investment, respect, and the restoration of federal commitments, not more distractions or excuses for inaction.' Several states pass Native mascot bans In recent years, several states — including Maine, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, and New York — have passed laws or issued directives that ban or require districts to change Native mascots. A law prohibiting them in Illinois stalled this year in the state Senate. The Trump administration has interjected into other efforts to change Native mascots. This month, the U.S. Department of Education launched an investigation into a Long Island public school district working to retire its Native American-themed mascot. 'The Department of Education has been clear with the state of New York: it is neither legal nor right to prohibit Native American mascots and logos while celebrating European and other cultural imagery in schools,' said U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. When it comes to grade schools specifically, the negative impacts on children's mental health is compounded by the fact that U.S. history standards largely ignore Indigenous history and rarely frame Native Americans as modern people, said Sarah Shear, a professor and researcher at the University of Washington. In 2015, she was part of a study that found 87% of schools in the U.S. teach about Native Americans in only a pre-1900 context. That hasn't improved much in the decade since the study, Shear said. Most curriculum also doesn't present the arguments against harmful stereotypes, like Native Mascots. 'Just on the standards documents alone,' Shear said, 'I'm not surprised that Trump and other folks continue to advocate that these mascots are celebratory when they're not.'
National Post
8 hours ago
- National Post
Michael Taube: No, Globe and Mail, Mark Carney isn't the second coming of Brian Mulroney
Mark Carney has been prime minister of Canada since March. He's been called many things by many people in this short time period. It never came to mind that he would be described as a 'progressive conservative' along the lines of Brian Mulroney. Article content This, in a nutshell, is the nonsense that the Globe and Mail's editorial board is currently peddling. Article content Article content 'That Mr. Carney was going to drag the Liberal Party back to the centre after years of an NDP-lite government under Mr. Trudeau was to be expected,' a June 28 Globe editorial noted. 'But more than mannerisms have changed. Since April, the Prime Minister has cut personal income taxes, boosted defence spending dramatically, pledged to cut the cost of the federal bureaucracy, tightened immigration rules, eliminated federal barriers to internal trade, created a framework for breaking the stasis on big national projects and signaled that he will dismiss underperforming top bureaucrats,' they wrote. Article content Article content The Globe's editorial board suggested 'that's an agenda that Brian Mulroney could have endorsed.' Article content Article content This analysis likely raised a few eyebrows, and not just in the Mulroney household. Alas, the editorial writers then flipped their collective wig with this bizarre assessment. 'In fact, it overlaps a good deal with the actual governing record of his Progressive Conservatives. Mr. Carney is a Liberal but, in the early going, he looks to be governing much like a Red Tory — a progressive kind of conservative.' Article content We shouldn't be surprised by the Globe's over-the-top analysis of Carney's leadership. It's become the raison d'être of this once-venerable publication to carry water for this particular prime minister. Article content Nevertheless, let's be serious about our national leader. Carney is certainly a progressive, but he's no 'progressive conservative' in any way, shape or form. Article content Left-leaning progressive conservatives, or Red Tories, generally combine two ideological components: classical conservative sensibilities (espoused by High Tories like philosopher Edmund Burke and former U.K. prime minister Benjamin Disraeli) and socialist-type policies such as government intrusion and developing a social safety net. Article content Article content As Gad Horowitz, a professor emeritus at the University of Toronto, wrote in the May-June 1965 issue of the defunct left-wing magazine Canadian Dimension, 'socialism has more in common with Toryism than with liberalism, for liberalism is possessive individualism, while socialism and Toryism are variants of collectivism.' Article content Article content Modern conservatism has little in common with classical conservatism. The former has largely incorporated classical liberal and libertarian ideals into its main ideology, while maintaining a smattering of social conservative principles related to individuals and families. That's why modern conservatives typically champion small government, lower taxes, free markets, private enterprise, greater individual rights and freedoms and so forth. Article content Carney doesn't fit into these conservative-leaning parameters. His progressive values do fit within the context of the modern Liberal Party of Canada. While he's not exactly the same as Trudeau, I pointed out in a March 16 National Post column that they're 'remarkably similar.' How so? In my estimation, 'they're both left-wing, pro-government intervention, distrust privatization and free markets, favour wealth redistribution, champion radical environmentalist policies, support woke ideology and political correctness — and more.' That's what today's Liberals basically stand for, and Carney's personal and political record fits like a glove.
