Latest news with #AttawapiskatFirstNation
CBC
20 hours ago
- Entertainment
- CBC
How her job as a community counsellor taught this filmmaker to be a better storyteller
For Jules Arita Koostachin, filmmaking is a way for her to bring together all aspects of who she is: as a writer, a community worker, and an InNiNew IsKwew (Cree woman). That mix of identities, as well as a career shaped by years of listening, teaching, and healing, comes together in her new film, Angela's Shadow. Born in Moose Factory, Ont., and raised between the Cree-speaking Northern Ontario community of Moosonee and Ottawa, Koostachin grew up surrounded by stories — ones passed down by her Cree grandparents and her mother, a residential school survivor. A member of Attawapiskat First Nation, on the ancestral lands of the MoshKeKo, Koostachin carries those histories forward, not just for her community, but through film, sharing them with the nation and the world. That grounding in lived experience and cultural legacy pulses through every frame of Angela's Shadow. " Angela's Shadow is a deeply personal film rooted in Cree matriarchal strength, and to have audiences respond so powerfully was both humbling and affirming," Koostachin says. "It told me that people are ready — and hungry — for stories that honour Indigenous experience through our own lens, with all the beauty, grief, and spiritual complexity that comes with it." Angela's Shadow — which premiered at the 2024 Vancouver International Film Festival — revolves around a young couple, Angela and Henry, who travel north from Ottawa to visit Angela's nanny, Mary. When Angela becomes haunted by a menacing shadow figure, Mary turns to banned Cree ceremonies to protect her and her unborn child. As Angela unearths long-buried truths about her ancestry and the spirit's identity, she's drawn deeper into her own spiritual traditions, confronting her husband's increasingly rigid, purity-obsessed worldview. Angela's Shadow is set primarily in the mid-1930s, a time when Indigenous ceremonies were outlawed in Canada and the residential school system was in full force. The story moves between Ottawa and the remote Cree community of KiiWeeTin, along James Bay. "I chose this setting because it's a pivotal era in our herstory — one where Indigenous families were being torn apart, but women like Angela's nanny Mary found ways to preserve knowledge, medicine, and kinship through quiet resistance," Koostachin says. Before turning to filmmaking, Koostachin worked as a counsellor in social services and taught at colleges and universities in Toronto, Sudbury, and Vancouver. Those roles, she says, helped lay the foundation for her storytelling. Koostachin's work in the social service sector and educational system has deeply shaped the way she approaches filmmaking, particularly with a story like Angela's Shadow. "I've sat with people in their most vulnerable moments, and that's taught me to listen with care, to honour silence, and to understand trauma not just as an individual experience, but as something carried through generations, she says." While teaching, Koostachin witnessed how storytelling could bridge worlds: urban and rural, Indigenous and non-Indigenous. These experiences not only expanded her understanding of how stories move across spaces but also deepened her connection to her own community's histories, languages, and ways of knowing. Koostachin's path into filmmaking was shaped early through her studies in documentary media. In 2010, she completed a master's degree at Toronto Metropolitan University (then called Ryerson University), earning both the Award of Distinction for her thesis and the prestigious Ryerson Gold Medal for highest academic achievement. That academic grounding helped launch a career rooted in storytelling as a form of cultural reclamation. She has since learned to translate lived experience into powerful visual narratives. While in graduate school, she directed her first feature documentary, Remembering Inninimowin — a personal journey of reconnecting with the Cree language. She was later selected as one of six participants for the Creative Women Workshops Association's prestigious Women in the Director's Chair program, where she directed a scene from her award-winning feature script Broken Angel. "Film is visceral," she says. "It lets me layer visuals, sound, silence, and spirit in ways that echo our orality while reaching wide audiences. I'm drawn to its power to hold space for our truths. It's where I can reclaim narrative sovereignty and offer stories that reflect the complexity and beauty of our lived experience." Koostachin deepened her filmmaking practice through doctoral research that centred Indigenous storytelling on its own terms. She earned a PhD in Gender, Race, Sexuality and Social Justice from the University of British Columbia, where her dissertation, MooNaHaTihKaaSiWew: Unearthing Spirit, explored how Indigenous knowledge systems can live within cinematic form — ideas that shape both the structure and spirit of Angela's Shadow. "With Angela's Shadow, I brought all of that — the therapeutic, the academic, the cinematic — into a story that is grounded in an InNiNeWak (Cree) worldview, but universally resonant. She says. "Every frame is informed by lived experience, cultural protocol, and a deep respect for our matriarchs. It's where I can reclaim narrative sovereignty and offer stories that reflect the complexity and beauty of our lived experience," she describes. Koostachin's work has garnered numerous awards over the years, with her most recent honour — the Panorama Audience Award at the 2024 Vancouver International Film Festival for Angela's Shadow — marking a particularly meaningful milestone. For her, the recognition extends far beyond individual acclaim; it's a celebration of the cast, crew, and Cree community who shaped the film, and a tribute to the matriarchs, languages, and generations carried forward through its story. Koostachin invites audiences to watch Angela's Shadow as a vital act of truth-telling, healing, and cultural reclamation. "As a cultural contribution, it challenges dominant narratives and brings forward a Cree worldview that is rarely seen on screen — one that is matriarchal, spiritual, and profoundly relational. It's not just a film; it's a continuation of storywork — a cinematic offering to those still seeking their way home."
Hamilton Spectator
16-07-2025
- Business
- Hamilton Spectator
More legal battles likely as First Nations launch first lawsuit against new federal, provincial laws
As First Nations launch the first constitutional challenge against federal Bill C-5 and Ontario's Bill 5 — sweeping laws to fast-track mines and major infrastructure — legal experts say the governments' refusal to consult has left Indigenous communities with no other option and more court battles are likely ahead. 'They didn't engage with First Nations, they didn't engage with labour unions, and they simply passed bills that don't work for either group — making a lawsuit almost inevitable,' said Luke Hildebrand, a lawyer not involved with the lawsuits. 'I'd be surprised if this is the only one.' Hildebrand said both governments escalated the situation by refusing to consult the very people most affected. He sees the legal challenge as grounded in three core arguments: that both laws violate the constitutional duty to consult, undermine treaty rights, and conflict with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) , which protects the right to free, prior and informed consent. 'This is about unilateralism,' Hildebrand said. 'Instead of sitting down and building something together, they [both governments] said, 'We're doing this — you catch up.' That's the wrong approach.' 'No escape for First Nations' The two laws allow governments at both federal and provincial levels to bypass environmental assessments and permit requirements, clearing the way for major development projects with little or no First Nations involvement. Bill 5 allows the provincial cabinet to create 'special economic zones,' where selected projects and developers could be exempt from environmental regulations and planning laws, undermining First Nations consultation. The government has already signalled its intent to designate the Ring of Fire as a 'special economic zone' under the new law. The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in Ontario Superior Court by nine First Nations, argues both pieces of legislation violate constitutional rights, treaty obligations and Canada's international commitments. The filing argues that the two laws build on one another, compounding their effects. 'Since both are similar in their violative regimes, purposes and effects, there is no escape for First Nations,' the lawsuit reads. 'Our case is not a fight against development,' said Chief Taynar Simpson of Alderville First Nation in a statement. 'It is a fight against dangerous development pushed ahead by factless, thoughtless and reckless decision-making from government ministers behind closed doors with little accountability.' First Nations leaders say the speed at which the bills were passed left them with no time to respond. There was little warning, no meaningful engagement and no opportunity to shape the legislation. 'Rushing headlong into major projects without knowing the costs means the governments are playing a dangerous game with our lands and futures,' said Attawapiskat First Nation Chief Sylvia Koostachin-Metatawabin. She pointed to the Ring of Fire region — a sensitive peatland ecosystem critical to carbon storage — as an area at serious risk. She warned that damage from mining and infrastructure could have catastrophic consequences. 'Our way of life, our children's futures and our shared environment, which is the basis of all life, is not a pawn in some political game,' she said. The federal and provincial governments have defended the legislation as a necessary response to economic uncertainty caused by US tariffs. In an email response, a spokesperson from the federal Privy Council Office said the government is reviewing the court challenge, noting it had 'just received the Notice of Application,' and declined to provide further comment. However, the statement reaffirmed the government's commitment to Indigenous rights under the Constitution and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). It said Bill C-5, the Building Canada Act, includes multiple stages of consultation with Indigenous communities before major projects are approved. Prime Minister Mark Carney is expected to meet with First Nations leaders in the coming days, the statement added. In an email, Ontario Premier Doug Ford's office said it has begun consultations with First Nations to shape regulations for special economic zones. 'We will continue to build consensus with First Nations on shared priorities, including legacy infrastructure, all-season roads and resource development that support long-term prosperity,' Ford's office said. But Hildebrand says the harm has already been done. 'This wasn't about consultation — it was about centralizing power and sidelining not just First Nations, but workers and municipalities too,' he said. Sara Mainville, an Anishinaabe lawyer, said the legal challenge is unusual but valid. She says while constitutional challenges typically follow a specific project approval, this case is different: the laws themselves may be enough to violate Indigenous rights. 'The federal government only gave First Nations seven days to respond to Bill C-5,' Mainville said. 'That's not real consultation. It erased years of relationship-building.' Mainville pointed to the Mikisew Cree Supreme Court decision , which confirms that even legislation — not just project decisions — can trigger constitutional challenges if it strips away protections that would normally require consultation. Mainville said this case might follow the same path Alberta and Ontario used to successfully challenge federal impact assessment law. Both Mainville and Hildebrand believe the lawsuit may delay the very projects the government hoped to fast-track — and more challenges are likely. Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner said the Ford government was warned repeatedly that Bill 5 would end up in court. He said the failure to consult First Nations made legal action inevitable, and even members of the premier's own party raised concerns about the bill's flaws. 'Had the government worked collaboratively from the start, we'd be much further along,' Schreiner said. 'First Nations consent is non-negotiable. Their involvement strengthens both the process and the outcome.' He warned that Ford's actions will delay progress. 'Ford's reckless disregard for Indigenous rights and democratic debate will slow down development because of court challenges and the lack of public support,' he said. Hildebrand said that if the courts strike down the bills, it could restrict the use of fast-track economic zones across Canada and force governments to rethink how major projects are approved. 'If Indigenous nations succeed, it will affirm that economic development can't come at the expense of Indigenous sovereignty, workers' rights or environmental protection,' he said. But he added that real reconciliation must happen through dialogue — not just legal battles. 'Reconciliation doesn't happen in a courtroom — it happens at the nation-to-nation table,' Hildebrand said. 'My hope is that this lawsuit is a wake-up call to both Prime Minister Carney and Premier Ford. But whether they'll answer it is another question.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
BBC News
16-07-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
Canada's PM wants to fast-track 'nation building' – but can he convince indigenous First Nations?
Jeronimo Kataquapit, a member of Ontario's Attawapiskat First Nation, is camped outside The Ring of Fire, a mineral-rich region located in remote northern Ontario. With just a canoe and a tent, the 20-year-old and his family have travelled more than 400 kilometers to protest a provincial law that designated the area a "special economic zone" for move was a precursor to Prime Minister Mark Carney's own first major piece of legislation, which is aimed at fast-tracking major infrastructure projects across the country. Dubbed the One Canadian Economy Act, it has been touted as a "nation-building" law at a time when the country is involved in a costly trade war with the United States. And while it could bring billions of investment into places like the Ring of Fire, it could also undermine indigenous nations' rights to their own land, community members fear."Ever since these laws were passed it's no longer about indigenous consultation, it's about consent," says Kataquapit. "Consent on whether you are allowed to come into our home territories, our livelihoods and build whatever you want. The time for dialogue is over, and now it's time for action." No projects have been selected yet, but the government has hinted at a few items on its wish-list, including a pipeline along the British Columbia coast and a carbon-capture project in Alberta's oil sands. The Ring of Fire, a 5,000 square-kilometre area home to significant deposits of chromite, nickel, copper, gold, zinc, and other minerals, has also been flagged as an area ripe for development in partnership with the federal governmentBut while Carney's legislation was considered by many to be an early victory for the new prime minister, environmental groups have raised concerns that the law, and others like it, provide shortcuts to get through existing environmental processes. Meanwhile, indigenous leaders like Ontario Regional Chief Abram Benedict have argued the law undermines their territorial rights."We have environmental assessments based on indigenous teachings," says Benedict. "We consider everything: air, land, water, medicines and animals. Time and time again we see project development that has not taken indigenous knowledge into consideration, and the project has essentially failed."Consultation with indigenous communities in Canada is not a courtesy, but law. The country's constitution affirms indigenous rights and requires prior and informed consent on actions that affect their land and what these consolations must entail has often been a fraught Fraser, Canada's justice minister, has said First Nations' consultation "stops short of a complete veto" on projects. Meanwhile, critics such as indigenous governance expert Pamela Palmater argue the Supreme Court has made it clear that merely hearing out indigenous communities is not enough."The law is a duty to consult, accommodate concerns, and in many cases get consent," she said last month on the political podcast The talks between the government and indigenous communities break down, it can be documents show that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police spent almost C$50m ($36m, £27m) policing resistance against pipeline projects in British Columbia. While in 2020, a Wet'suwet'en First Nation-led blockade against national railways – a protest against a British Columbia pipeline project - is estimated to have cost hundreds of millions of Canadian dollars a day. Pressure is now building on the prime minister to bring indigenous groups to the has said indigenous leadership is central to building a stronger economy, including through the One Canadian Economy Act and initiatives like the Indigenous Loan Guarantee Program. On Thursday, Carney he will sit down with First Nations leaders and later this month with Inuit and Metis of Assembly First Nations Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak told the BBC that she had requested the upcoming consultations herself. The Assembly of First Nations held a virtual forum with chiefs across Canada last week with Woodhouse Nepinak saying they are "united," and have proposed amendments to the law which they plan to bring up on that might be too late, for some. Chief of Nishnawbe Aski First Nation, Alvin Fiddler, has warned that Carney's law "will not apply in [their] territories". Fiddler has also called for the resignation of Greg Rickford, Ontario's Minister of Indigenous Wednesday, nine First Nations from Ontario launched a constitutional challenge arguing both Ontario's legislation, and Carney's federal law, present a "clear and present danger" to their way of life and rights to self-determination. Kate Kempton, senior legal counsel for the group, criticised the laws for giving the government "unfettered, unrestricted authority to wave a magic wand" and make development projects go forward, despite objections from indigenous even indigenous leaders who are typically pro-development have expressed concern. Alberta Treaty Six Nations Grand Chief Greg Desjarlais, who is part of the Western Indigenous Pipeline Group, said he is disappointed in how Ottawa has handled the "nation building" law so far."It is 2025, First Nations need to be included in consultation, ownership and revenue sharing," he told the some remain hopeful they can work with the Desjarlais (no relation), executive director of the Indigenous Resource Network, who is Metis from Saskatchewan, said that he is optimistic."We want economic development opportunities," said Desjarlais. "We can develop in line with our indigenous community interests, addressing our issues, advancing opportunities, and still very much being stewards of the land."
15-07-2025
- Business
9 Ontario First Nations ask for injunction against Bill 5, say law represents 'clear and present danger'
Nine First Nations in Ontario are asking a court to declare a pair of federal and provincial laws meant to fast-track infrastructure projects unconstitutional and are seeking an injunction that would prevent the governments from using some of the most contentious aspects. The Indigenous communities say in the legal challenge filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice that the federal law known as Bill C-5 and the Ontario law known as Bill 5 both represent a clear and present danger to the First Nations' self-determination rights to ways of life on their territories. While the laws do leave open or commit that there will be some First Nation consultation at the very first stage ... involvement in that decision alone is a smoke and mirrors trick, deflecting attention from all the other ways the laws necessarily diminish the ability of First Nations to engage on the regimes' broader consequences, they write in the court challenge. Bill C-5 allows cabinet to quickly grant federal approvals for big projects deemed to be in the national interest such as mines, ports and pipelines by sidestepping existing laws, while Ontario's bill allows its cabinet to suspend provincial and municipal laws through the creation of so-called special economic zones. The First Nations are asking the court for an injunction prohibiting the federal government from naming national interest projects and prohibition Ontario from implementing special economic zones. Both the federal and Ontario governments have said their laws are tools to counteract the effects of U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs by allowing Canadian development, such as natural resource development, to proceed more quickly. WATCH | Ontario passes controversial mining law: Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? But this is not a battle of development versus no development, the First Nations argue. Rather, they advocate for doing it right by ensuring that necessary information is gathered before proceeding, and rights and protections are respected so the real costs of development do not end up far exceeding their asserted benefit. Fragmentation and delay results from Crown choices and unwieldy bureaucracies, not from First Nations, they write in the court document. "Making changes now in some effort to 'streamline' (or ram through) projects, cannot be at the cost of First Nations, their rights, the Constitution and reconciliation." The First Nations argue the laws are unconstitutional because they violate charter right to life, liberty and security of the person, as well as equality rights. Representatives of both governments have said they will respect the duty to consult Indigenous people, but the nine First Nations argue that rings hollow because the laws authorize the opposite. Chief Sylvia Koostachin-Metatawabin of Attawapiskat First Nation said that their way of life is not a pawn in some political game. Rushing headlong into major projects without knowing the costs, means the governments are playing a dangerous game with our lands and futures, she wrote. Allison Jones (new window) · The Canadian Press
Cision Canada
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Cision Canada
First Nations Launching Major Constitutional Challenge to Kill Bill 5, the Ford Government's Megadevelopment Law and Bill C5, Canada's Megaprojects Law
TORONTO, July 15, 2025 /CNW/ - Several First Nations from Ontario have brought fast track litigation in Superior Court to Kill Bills 5 and C5 on the basis that they severely threaten their rights to self-determine their ways of life on their homeland territories, the environment and fundamental human freedoms. Both of "the 5s" were introduced to push forward massive economic developments without the necessary information to understand and address what could be serious negative impacts, and without including First Nations – whose lands these projects would be built on and take up – in much if any of the decision-making process. The waiver of protective rules and the ignoring of First Nation rights, means that these Bills are unconstitutional and must be struck down. "These laws authorize the Crown governments to approve on a fast track major projects like Ring of Fire mining and pipelines, by short circuiting the need to get critical information about human and environmental safety and impacts and without involving the very peoples whose lands these projects would eat up," says Alderville First Nation Chief Taynar Simpson. "Our case is not a fight against development, it is a fight against dangerous development pushed ahead by factless, thoughtless and reckless decision making from government Ministers behind closed doors with little accountability." "We First Nations are not against development per se. This is not about a battle between development and not," says Chief Todd Cornelius from Oneida Nation of the Thames. "It is about doing things recklessly and doing things right." Both Bill 5 (provincial) and Bill C5 (federal) would authorize major projects without the need for proponents to apply for or get various permits and approvals, such as for environmental assessment, environmental protection, water taking, endangered species protection, cultural heritage assessment and the like. "Rushing headlong into major projects without knowing the costs, means the governments are playing a dangerous game with our lands and futures. In the Ring of Fire area, this could be disastrous. That region is peatlands, which is a globally critical carbon sink that must stay intact if it is to counter climate change. If parts of it are destroyed through mining and infrastructure, this could unravel the whole thing, and that would be catastrophic," says Attawapiskat First Nation Chief Sylvia Koostachin-Metatawabin. "Our way of life, our children's futures, and our shared environment which is the basis of all life, is not a pawn in some political game." "The Crown governments are using the Trump tariffs as an excuse to say that all of this development is suddenly urgent. But these tariffs are not likely to be around forever and may well be gone before anything can be built even on an expedited basis," says Chief Sheri Taylor of Ginoogaming First Nation. "Panicking over the short term is not a reason to sacrifice the very values Canada says it holds dear and long term viability of lands and people. If Canada and Ontario are so worried about threats to Canada from a bullying US President whose administration has been stripping human rights protections, then why are Canada and Ontario supposedly answering those threats with their own laws that bully First Nations and strip human rights and environmental protections here? Would that not make this country the very thing we are trying to avoid being imposed on us?" Chief June Black of Apitipi Anicinapek Nation says, "Bill 5 and Bill C5 are severe setbacks in the relationship between First Peoples of this land from whom far too much has been taken already and who are trying to get some of that back. We have the right to pursue our ways of life on our lands including to be part of the decision making about major developments that would take land and choices away from us. We should be moving toward a shared future and not a dictatorial one." For further information contact: Kate Kempton, Senior Counsel, Woodward and Co. Lawyers LLP Email: [email protected] Phone: 416-571-6775 Lina Santana Email: [email protected]) Phone: 647-472-6838 SOURCE Woodward & Co.
