Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools LegacyTruth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)
to Address Residential Schools Legacy
NATV 1240-D02: Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Part 2
March 25th, 2022
1
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
I.
2
Introduction
For over a century, the Indian Residential Schools system brought unimaginable trauma
to the Indigenous peoples throughout Canadian history, and it systematically damaged
Indigenous cultures and disrupted numerous Indigenous families for generations. Many
Indigenous people lost their own languages, cultures, and mental wellbeing. Therefore, the Truth
and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) was officially established in 2008 and began
its work in 2009, according to the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (IRSSA). 1
This Commission would lead Canadians through the painful process of discovering the truth
about the Indian Residential Schools system. It was also intended to set the groundwork for longterm reconciliation across the country.
Not only did the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada refer to Canada’s
treatment of Indigenous peoples as cultural genocide, but it also contributed to the development
of forgiveness and cultural respect for our future by providing an opportunity for those who have
been directly or indirectly impacted by the legacy of the Indian Residential Schools system to
share their stories and experiences. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission spent six years
travelling across Canada, interviewing more than 6,500 witnesses, and hosting seven national
events across the country to engage the Canadian public, educate people about the history and
legacy of the Indian Residential Schools system, and share and honour the experiences of former
students and their families.2
Ry Moran, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission,” Truth and Reconciliation Commission | Historica Canada,
October 16, 2021, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/truth-and-reconciliation-commission.
1
2 Government of Canada, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada,” Government of Canada – Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada, June 11, 2021, https://www.rcaanccirnac.gc.ca/eng/1450124405592/1529106060525.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
II.
3
The History of Residential Schools in Canada
Since the beginning of the 1600s, European settlers have believed that their own
civilization represented the pinnacle of human development and achievement, and therefore they
regarded Indigenous peoples as “ignorant, savage, and-like children-in need of guidance”.3 As a
result, education became the most important tool in the effort to “civilize” Indigenous peoples
and ensure that they were successfully integrated into mainstream white Euro-Canadian culture.
At that time, the authorities preferred residential schools to day schools, since they believed that
the residential schools could accelerate the process of assimilation.4 The Indigenous students
were compelled to speak English or French at residential schools instead of their mother tongues,
and suffered horrendous mistreatment at the hands of residential school staff, including physical,
sexual, emotional, and psychological assault.5 On the other hand, residential schools failed to
provide an adequate education for Indigenous students; instead, the so-called “education” was
primarily focused on teaching Indigenous children to pray and on manual labour in agriculture,
light industry such as carpentry, and domestic duties such as laundry and sewing.6
Eric Hanson, Daniel P. Gamez, and Alexa Manuel, n.d. “The Residential School System”, Indigenous Foundations,
https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/residential-school-system-2020/.
3
4 William Newbigging and Olive Patricia Dickason. Indigenous Peoples within Canada: A Concise History (Don
Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press, 2019), 247.
5
See note 3 above.
6
See note 3 above.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
4
From the opening of the first residential school to the closing of the last residential
school, Canada took charge of Indigenous education for over a century and a half. The Mohawk
Institute in Brantford, Upper Canada (Ontario), run by Anglican Church, was the first school in
Canada’s residential school system.7 Starting January 1st, 1831, the Mohawk Institute began to
admit boys. Then in 1834, it started to admit girls.8 In 1996, Gordon Reserve Indian Residential
School in Punnichy, Saskatchewan was closed and demolished; it, thereby, became the last
residential school in Canada.9 In total, it was reported that over a hundred residential schools
operated in Canada during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, with the goal of separating and
isolating Indigenous children from their homes, families, customs, and cultures, as well as
assimilation into the dominant Euro-Canadian society.10 Residential schools operated in Canada
for more than 160 years and brought Indigenous peoples so many negative effects and
intergenerational traumas.
Although there are no longer any residential schools today, their effects and
consequences continue to be felt by Indigenous people. They have endured unfathomable
intergenerational trauma, including the loss of language, culture, traditional teachings, and
mental/spiritual well-being, which may take generations to heal.11 For example, Indigenous
Tabitha Marshall and David Gallant, October 5, 2021, “Residential Schools in Canada,” Residential Schools in
Canada | Historica Canada, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/residential-schools.
7
8
See note 7 above.
Eric Hanson, Daniel P. Gamez, and Alexa Manuel, n.d. “The Residential School System”, Indigenous Foundations,
https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/residential-school-system-2020/.
9
10
William Newbigging and Olive Patricia Dickason. Indigenous Peoples within Canada: A Concise History (Don
Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press, 2019), 346.
11
See note 9 above.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
5
peoples in Canada face the highest rate of poverty; that is, 25% of Indigenous peoples live in
poverty, and 40% of Indigenous children in Canada live in poverty, as per the statistics.12
Numerous Indigenous children did not receive the education they deserved when they were
young; instead, many of them were discouraged from continuing their education as they
graduated from the residential schools. As a result, a sizable proportion of Indigenous peoples
lack the professional skills and knowledge required for well-paid occupations in this day and
age, and this, to a large extent, resulted in their poverty.
What is worse, Indigenous peoples experience more violent prejudice in contemporary
society. More specifically, Indigenous men in particular are twice as likely as non-Indigenous
men to face violence from authorities or individuals, and Indigenous women are also more likely
to face harassment from authorities, according to the statistics.13 On the other hand, Indigenous
peoples are disproportionately represented in Canada’s criminal justice system as people charged
or convicted of crime, as a result of their childhood mistreatment at residential schools.14 All
these facts indicated that residential schools inflicted unspeakable misery on Indigenous peoples
and those traumas are intergenerational and still ongoing today.
III.
The Establishment of Truth and Reconciliation Commission
Benjamin Ku, December 4, 2021, “Poverty within Aboriginal Communities,” Poverty within Aboriginal
Communities, https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/4534c7496df0451b9be271e7990d0bd6.
12
13
Samantha Loppie, Charlotte Reading and Sarah de Leeuw, Indigenous Experiences with Racism and its Impact
(pdf File, 2020), https://www.nccih.ca/docs/determinants/FS-Racism2-Racism-Impacts-EN.pdf.
Department of Justice, Government of Canada, May 2019, “Indigenous Overrepresentation in the Criminal Justice
System,” JustFacts, https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/jf-pf/2019/may01.html.
14
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
6
The topic of residential schools did not get widespread national attention until 1990,
when Chief Phil Fontaine came forth with his experience of residential school abuse, which
paved the way for other survivors to share their stories.15 In order to redress the legacy of
residential schools and facilitate the process of Canadian reconciliation, the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) was established as a result of a legal settlement
reached between residential school survivors, the Assembly of First Nations, Inuit
representatives, as well as the federal government and church bodies, the parties responsible for
the residential schools’ establishment and operation.16 This legal settlement was known as the
“Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (IRSSA)”, which was intended to
recompense survivors for harms they endured as a result of attending residential schools, and to
promote a more just and equitable future for Indigenous peoples.17
On June 1, 2008, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission formally began its work.18
Schedule N of the IRSSA was its official operating mandate, in which the goals, responsibilities,
exercise of duties and so forth were clearly laid out. This historic Truth and Reconciliation
Commission was “established to contribute to truth, healing and reconciliation”.19 The main
Kim Stanton, “Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission: Settling the Past?”, International Indigenous
Policy Journal, Volume 2, Issue 3, (2011): 2.
15
National Center for Truth and Reconciliation, n.d. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada,” National
Center for Truth and Reconciliation, https://nctr.ca/about/history-of-the-trc/truth-and-reconciliation-commission-ofcanada.
16
Ry Moran, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission,” Truth and Reconciliation Commission | Historica Canada,
October 16, 2021, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/truth-and-reconciliation-commission.
17
Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments, July 28, 2019, “Report of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada (2015)”, Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments, https://caid.ca/DTRC.html.
18
Government of Canada, n.d. “Schedule N – Mandate for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission” (pdf File),
https://www.residentialschoolsettlement.ca/SCHEDULE_N.pdf.
19
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
7
purpose of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was to educate all Canadians about the
abuses that occurred in residential schools. People who were personally affected by the
residential school system were interviewed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which
recorded their testimonies and those of their loved ones and communities. Residential school
students from the First Nations, the Inuit and the Métis communities, as well as their families,
the churches, former residential school employees, government officials and other Canadians
were all invited to tell the truth to the public.20 Moreover, as part of its efforts to raise awareness
and educate the public about the residential school system and its consequences, the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission organized nationwide events in different provinces and regions
across Canada.21
IV.
The Stages of TRC Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
On Wednesday, June 11, 2008, the Prime Minister of Canada, the Right Honourable
Stephen Harper, issued a Statement of Apology on behalf of the Government of Canada to
former students of Indian Residential Schools, in which he confirmed that the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission on Indian Residential Schools was a cornerstone of the Settlement
Agreement. This Commission represented a once-in-a-generation chance to educate the entire
Canadian population about the Indian Residential School system.22 Survivors and their families
had been awaiting this day for decades, most of whom had lived with pain, fear and anger for
National Center for Truth and Reconciliation, n.d. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada,” National
Center for Truth and Reconciliation, https://nctr.ca/about/history-of-the-trc/truth-and-reconciliation-commission-ofcanada.
20
21
See note 20 above.
Government of Canada, June 11, 2008, “Statement of apology to former students of Indian Residential Schools”,
Government of Canada – Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, https://www.rcaanccirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100015644/1571589171655.
22
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
8
most of their lives.23 Consequently, the provincial and territorial governments issued public
apologies for the development of residential schools, the abuses that occurred within them, and
the detrimental consequences caused by the residential schools.24 However, these public
apologies to residential school survivors as well as to their families were insufficient.
Starting from 2009, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission hosted numerous events all
across the country to listen to Canadians who want to share their residential school stories,
whether they were affected by the residential schools or not. The first national event of the Truth
and Reconciliation Commission took place in Winnipeg, Manitoba on June 16, 2010.25 This
event took place at the Forks, which used to be a historic gathering place for Indigenous
people.26 The Truth and Reconciliation Commission claimed that they would hear from as many
of former Indigenous students as they were “logistically and humanly able to”.27 Through years
of efforts, these national events not only helped coordinate the relationship between the
government and Indigenous victims, but also raised awareness and understanding of the tragic
history of residential schools in Canada among Canadians in general.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015, “Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada” (pdf File), https://irsi.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/inlinefiles/Executive_Summary_English_Web.pdf.
23
U of T Libraries, n.d. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission – Apologies”, U of T Libraries,
https://guides.library.utoronto.ca/c.php?g=527189&p=3698521.
24
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, Winter 2010, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada
Newsletter” (pdf File), https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/trc/IR2-1-2010-1-eng.pdf.
25
26
See note 25 above.
27
See note 25 above.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
9
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s overarching objectives were to promote
healing, listening and encouraging reconciliation between Indigenous peoples and nonIndigenous Canadians. Furthermore, it would complete a publicly accessible report for all parties
that includes recommendations for the Government of Canada addressing the residential school
system, experience, and legacy.28 It was reported that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission
released an interim report regarding the issues in May 2015; later in December 2015, it released
its entire six-volume final report addressing this terrible history of Indian Residential Schools
and its saddening legacy.29
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s final report included 94 Calls-to-Action.
These recommendations aimed at redressing the legacy of residential schools and assisting in the
process of Canadian reconciliation.30 There were two parts in Calls to Action. The first part was
Legacy, in which calls-to-action regarding Child Welfare, Education, Language and Culture,
Health and Justice were included. The second part was Reconciliation, in which Canadian
Governments and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Royal
Proclamation and Covenant of Reconciliation, Settlement Agreement Parties and the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Equity for Aboriginal People in the
Legal System, National Council for Reconciliation, Professional Development and Training for
Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments, July 28, 2019, “Report of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada (2015)”, Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments, https://caid.ca/DTRC.html.
28
Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments, July 28, 2019, “Report of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada (2015)”, Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments, https://caid.ca/DTRC.html.
29
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls
to Action” (pdf File), https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/british-columbians-our-governments/indigenouspeople/aboriginal-peoples-documents/calls_to_action_english2.pdf.
30
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
10
Public Servants, Church Apologies and Reconciliation, Education for Reconciliation, Youth
Programs, Museums and Archives, Missing Children and Burial Information, National Centre for
Truth and Reconciliation, Commemoration, Media and Reconciliation, Sports and
Reconciliation, Business and Reconciliation and Newcomers to Canada were mentioned.31 That
being said, numerous aspects of life in Canada have been covered in these 94 Calls-to-Action,
including education, language and culture, health, youth, business and so forth. Therefore, each
and every Canadian could take his or her own part in facilitating healing and encouraging
reconciliation between Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous Canadians. For instance,
business owners should ensure that Indigenous people “have equitable access to jobs, training,
and education opportunities in the corporate sector”.32 Today, we should all be aware of this
regrettable past in Canadian history and understand what intergenerational traumas have
impacted Indigenous peoples and their descendants. Together we are finding a better way to
build a society in which non-Indigenous Canadians and Indigenous peoples could both live a
happy and sustainable life.
In 2015, after the Truth and Reconciliation Commission concluded its five-year mandate,
it had transferred its data and records to the National Center for Truth and Reconciliation
(NCTR), which would keep them safe and secure for the future and permanent use.33 The NCTR
was established through an agreement between the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls
to Action” (pdf File), https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/british-columbians-our-governments/indigenouspeople/aboriginal-peoples-documents/calls_to_action_english2.pdf.
31
32
See note 31 above.
National Center for Truth and Reconciliation, n.d. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada,” National
Center for Truth and Reconciliation, https://nctr.ca/about/history-of-the-trc/truth-and-reconciliation-commission-ofcanada.
33
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
11
University of Manitoba shortly before the conclusion of the TRC’s mandate, and it would
continue the work started by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.34 The
NCTR’s goal was to educate Canadians about the extreme injustices inflicted on First Nations,
Inuit, and Métis peoples as a result of the forced removal of children from their homes to attend
residential schools, as well as the rampant abuse that occurred in those schools, and on the basis
of truth-telling, promote reconciliation and healing.35
V.
Conclusion
Thousands of Indigenous children died due to Canada’s residential school system. Today,
more than 80,000 survivors and their families live throughout Canada, many of whom are still
suffering from intergenerational trauma as a result of their experiences in the residential school
system.36 The Truth and Reconciliation Commission heard from more than 6,500 witnesses,
most of whom survived the experience of living in the residential schools as students.37 This
Commission, like no others, was mandated to inform all Canadians about the notorious
residential school system and its regrettable legacy; it characterized Canada’s treatment of
Indigenous peoples as cultural genocide and it helped create forgiveness and cultural respect for
our future.38
National Center for Truth and Reconciliation, n.d. “About the NCTR,” National Center for Truth and
Reconciliation, https://nctr.ca/about.
34
35
See note 34 above.
Statistics Canada, June 21, 2021, “National Indigenous Peoples Day,” Statistics Canada – The Daily,
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/210621/dq210621a-eng.htm.
36
Government of Canada, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada,” Government of Canada – Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada, June 11, 2021, https://www.rcaanccirnac.gc.ca/eng/1450124405592/1529106060525.
37
National Center for Truth and Reconciliation, n.d. “About the NCTR,” National Center for Truth and
Reconciliation, https://nctr.ca/about.
38
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
12
Although the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s mandate included shaming and
pointing out wrongdoings, this was not the intended outcome; instead, the Commission’s
emphasis on truth determination was meant to establish the groundwork for the critical issue of
reconciliation.39 The Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s investigation and research has been
completed, however, reconciliation has just started, and it will take some time. Getting to the
truth has been tough but getting to reconciliation would be even harder.40 It is a sad reality that a
considerable number of Indigenous people are still being treated differently and unequally
throughout the country and experiencing more violent racism in contemporary society today.
Therefore, the awareness of reconciliation among Canadians should be significantly improved.
Reconciliation, according to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, is a continuous process
of establishing and maintaining respectful relationships, which entails rebuilding damaged trust
through the expression of apologies, the provision of individual and collective compensation, and
the implementation of concrete activities that reflect genuine societal change.41 As a matter of
fact, every Canadian, both long-standing and new, should get involved in the reconciliation
process to make our multicultural society more peaceful, respectful and harmonious.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015, “Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada” (pdf File), https://irsi.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/inlinefiles/Executive_Summary_English_Web.pdf.
39
40
See note 39 above.
41
See note 39 above.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
13
Bibliography
Moran, Ry. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” Truth and Reconciliation Commission |
Historica Canada. October 16, 2021.
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/truth-and-reconciliation-commission.
Accessed March 22, 2022.
Government of Canada. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.” Government of
Canada – Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. June 11, 2021.
https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1450124405592/1529106060525. Accessed March
22, 2022.
Hanson, Eric, Daniel P. Gamez, and Alexa Manuel. n.d. “The Residential School System”.
Indigenous Foundations. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/residential-schoolsystem-2020/. Accessed March 22, 2022.
Newbigging, William, and Olive Patricia Dickason. 2019. Indigenous Peoples within Canada: A
Concise History. Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press.
Marshall, Tabitha and David Gallant. “Residential Schools in Canada.” Residential Schools in
Canada | Historica Canada. October 5, 2021.
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/residential-schools. Accessed March
22, 2022.
Ku, Benjamin, “Poverty within Aboriginal Communities.” Poverty within Aboriginal
Communities. December 4, 2021.
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/4534c7496df0451b9be271e7990d0bd6. Accessed
March 22, 2022.
Loppie, Samantha, Charlotte Reading and Sarah de Leeuw. 2020. Indigenous Experiences with
Racism and its Impact (pdf File). https://www.nccih.ca/docs/determinants/FS-Racism2Racism-Impacts-EN.pdf. Accessed March 22, 2022.
Department of Justice, Government of Canada. “Indigenous Overrepresentation in the Criminal
Justice System.” JustFacts. May 2019. https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/jfpf/2019/may01.html. Accessed March 22, 2022.
National Center for Truth and Reconciliation. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of
Canada.” National Center for Truth and Reconciliation. n.d. https://nctr.ca/about/historyof-the-trc/truth-and-reconciliation-commission-of-canada. Accessed March 22, 2022.
Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments. “Report of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada (2015)”. Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments. July
28, 2019. https://caid.ca/DTRC.html. Accessed March 22, 2022.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Addressing Residential Schools Legacy
14
Government of Canada. n.d. “Schedule N – Mandate for the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission” (pdf File). https://www.residentialschoolsettlement.ca/SCHEDULE_N.pdf.
Accessed March 22, 2022.
Stanton, Kim. “Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission: Settling the Past?”.
International Indigenous Policy Journal. Volume 2, Issue 3, (2011): 2.
Government of Canada. “Statement of Apology to Former Students of Indian Residential
Schools”. Government of Canada – Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement.
June 11, 2008. https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100015644/1571589171655.
Accessed March 22, 2022.
U of T Libraries. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission – Apologies”. U of T Libraries. n.d.
https://guides.library.utoronto.ca/c.php?g=527189&p=3698521. Accessed March 22,
2022.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Winter 2010. “Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada Newsletter” (pdf File).
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/trc/IR2-1-2010-1-eng.pdf.
Accessed March 22, 2022.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. 2015. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission
of Canada: Calls to Action” (pdf File). https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/britishcolumbians-our-governments/indigenous-people/aboriginal-peoplesdocuments/calls_to_action_english2.pdf. Accessed March 22, 2022.
National Center for Truth and Reconciliation. “About the NCTR.” National Center for Truth and
Reconciliation. n.d. https://nctr.ca/about. Accessed March 22, 2022.
Statistics Canada. “National Indigenous Peoples Day.” Statistics Canada – The Daily. June 21,
2021. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/210621/dq210621a-eng.htm.
Accessed March 22, 2022.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. 2015. “Summary of the Final Report of the
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada” (pdf File).
https://irsi.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/inline-files/Executive_Summary_English_Web.pdf.
Accessed March 24, 2022.
Debate between Aboriginal Peoples and the Government: The Contradiction over the
Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Establishment
NATV 1240 Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Part 2
March 25, 2022
Introduction
The disputes over land title in the Indigenous peoples with Canadian government have
long been issues concerning the Aboriginal rights. With the global expansion of westernization
and modernization, postcolonialism and post-naturalism have been used as the basic theories
to explore the future development of Aboriginal lands in Canada. The issues concerning the
usage of Indigenous lands mainly originate from the conflicts over the title to the Indigenous
territory. The complexity of the history makes the issue difficult to be addressed. The historical
issues have complicated historical and political problems. In the case of the Enbridge Northern
Gateway Pipeline, the company built the pipeline to deliver diluted bitumen involving
Indigenous community lands. The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines transports through
British Columbia and Alberta. The Aboriginal title to the land and the negotiations and treaties
with the government have been the core conflict of the issue. The Enbridge Corporation has
applied to construct a pipeline system to deliver diluted bitumen from the Alberta tar sands to
the Pacific coast of British Columbia. This has caused great confrontations with Indigenous
peoples in these lands. For example, the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council and their member fellow
communities have built the authority to prevent this project from passing through their
territories that should remain complete and unceded (McCreary and Milligan, 2014, p. 115).
The jurisdictional conflict between the Indigenous peoples and the local government
caused by the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines can be re-examined by discussing whether
the rights of Indigenous peoples are taken seriously in this conflict. In the construction process
of the project, the interests of the Indigenous peoples living in British Columbian is violated.
But the laws and treaties established in early years of colonial times buried potential problems
for conflicts. The treaties and laws are unequal treatment of Indigenous Peoples. The
relationship between the Canadian government and Indigenous authorities turned out to be
unequal in the end. The project greatly impacted Aboriginal peoples’ title to the land negatively
and the laws and practices have long disputed history. The land penetration is a violation of the
Aboriginal peoples right on the Indigenous land.
The Historical Conflict over the Claim of Indigenous Lands
The Royal Proclamation of 1763 set out the framework for working out territory
disputes. But the original document also laid potential issues. For example, the dispute over
the title of Indigenous lands concerns that in 1763, the king of England’s Royal Proclamation
promised to respect native people’s land rights and recognized that native people had title to
their land. It could only be surrendered or ceded through negotiations with the government, in
which fair price must be paid (Kulchyski, p. 39). This laid out a fundamental regime for
settling land issues. Later, in 1850, two treaties were signed with Anishinabwe peoples to get
access to that territory to obtain logging through negotiation. The treaties are known today as
the Robinson treaties, which became the models for the numbered treaties. (Kulchyski, p. 39).
As land was needed for settlement, railways, or resource development, the government
would meet with aboriginal peoples of that area and negotiate a treaty with them. The eleven
numbered treaties signed between 1870 and 1921 covered a huge area of the country. Treaty
making was a straightforward process, following the forms that had long been used during the
fur trade era. A treaty commission would travel to a particular area and let it be known they
were there to negotiate a treaty. Native people would gather and designate a leader or leaders
to speak for them. Both sides would make long speeches, mostly about how they wanted to live
in peace together. (Kulchyski p.40)
But the treaties are more than these few written pages. These treaties include a spirit, a
spirit of respect, a spirit of peaceful co-existence, a spirit of mutuality, a spirit of fairness, a
spirit of recognition, a spirit so subtle it quietly lays in wait for the day when it may re-emerge
to mend the wounds torn into so much flesh by broken promise after broken promise after
broken promise after broken promise. Someday, the treaties will be more than lies (Kulchyski
p.42).
Treaties also promise education rights, although in the written versions this is limited to
maintenance of a school or the salary of a teacher. In the numbered treaties, aboriginal people
promise to “cede, release, surrender, and yield up” to the Canadian government “all their rights,
titles, and privileges whatsoever, before,” to their lands (Kulchyski, p.43). Because of what
the written treaties say, the government claims that when it provides free medical aid, education,
or social welfare to native peoples, these are not treaty rights. The government can stop doing
so whenever it chooses (Kulchyski, p.43).
In some cases, treaties 8 and 11 in the northwest territories are good examples – native
leaders and elders say they did not intend to trade away their title to the land (Kulchyski, p.45).
For example, in the northwest territories, the native people did not pose much military threat
to the government, so the commissioners were given less leeway over what they could agree
to. The greatest controversy is over title to land. According to the treaties of 8 and 11, the dene
should have been given reserves-but they were never set up. This issue went to court when the
dene tried to block the proposed Mackenzie valley pipeline. During the case, many elders
testified that they heard no mention of land during negotiations. They thought the treaty was a
peace and friendship agreement. But the government official remembered the commissioners
saying that the treaty had no binding on the native land and country. (Kulchyski, p. 47).
Therefore, the issue of land claim has been a historical issue.
In southern Canada, most first nations are content to recognize that land was surrendered.
Throughout the treaty area first nations still have aboriginal title to all the lakes and rivers they
traditionally used and occupied (Kulchyski, p. 48). The case on the title of the land of ojibwa
of northwestern Ontario between the Indigenous nation and the government showed that there
is no clear meaning of what Aboriginal title or rights meant. In the lost case, the native people
lost claim to the land, and the logging is permitted of the government (Kulchyski, p. 52).
The other guiding idea behind Indian policy was that Indians needed to be civilized,
under a non-native definition of civilization (Kulchyski, p.55). The idea of civilizing
Indigenous peoples reflect imperialism of the government controlled by European colonizers.
The idea of imperialism has deeply rooted in policies. The colonial government has always
tried to get a hold of the claim of the Indigenous land. For example, in the early 1990s, the
supreme court of British Columbia ruled against the gitksan-wet’suwet’en peoples’ legal claim
that they still had aboriginal title to their traditional lands. That decision was eventually
overturned by the supreme court of Canada. There is a particular historical issue of Aboriginal
land ownership in British Columbia. (Kulchyski, p.67).
In 1861 governor Douglas began the process of creating reserves for Indians on their
traditional settlements. Following traditions, these were designated as lands held in trust for
Indian people by the crown. So, in British Columbia, reserves were not created as part of the
treaty process, as they were in other western provinces. In 1871, British Columbia became
part of Canada, and the federal government assumed authority for “Indians and lands
reserved for Indians” in accordance with the British North America Act of 1867. However, in
the deal between British Columbia and Canada, the province kept ownership and control of
all crown lands (Kulchyski, p. 69). It means that the British Columbia had earned the control
of all Indigenous lands in the deal that does not belong to them. The Canadian government
and the British Columbia are two different authorities in the Aboriginal land. But the
government could not get the land from the provincial government (Kulchyski, p. 69). As the
separate power, the Canadian government became in no position to protect the Indigenous
land. Moreover, the government was not willing to negotiate for the Indians in the province
(Kulchyski, p. 70).
The final destination of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines and the plans were
announced when a residents vote in April showed 60% of residents opposed the pipeline, one
of the reasons for the passage of the motion against the pipeline (Bowles & MacPhail, 2017).
In this vote, the opposition of the aboriginal people has become the biggest obstacle to the
construction of the pipeline, because the environmental pollution caused by the pipeline
construction process would make the aboriginal people pay amount of environmental costs,
which also makes this construction a world-renowned major controversial item.
The post-naturalistic approach analyzes the conflict between the development of modern
society and the lifestyle of Aboriginal Canadians. Post-naturalism believes that modern society
is centered on chaos and change, which has the following three characteristics: complexity,
contradiction, and chaos (Ziauddin, 2009). These main features of the post-natural era reflect
the changing trend of modern society, which is a challenge to the lifestyle of Aboriginal
Canadians. This theory is well suited to explain the problems faced in Alberta and BC, because
economic development in modern societies often lacks master planning due to the fast pace of
society and often requires concessions from Aboriginal peoples.
Contradictions between Aboriginal Peoples and the Government
Aboriginal peoples have not received equal rights. The differences with the government
have made it difficult to realize Aboriginal autonomy, which further leads to the gap between
Aboriginal peoples and non-Aboriginal citizens. In this case of the pipeline, the rights of
Aboriginal peoples were violated because they did not want the pipeline to be built resulting
the natural damage and legal violation, which led to a conflict over Aboriginal jurisdiction.
Whether the government has the right to ignore the opinions of the Aboriginal peoples is at the
center of the issue. The neglect of Indigenous peoples’ right was the reflection of imperialism.
It is a gradual process that the Indigenous title to the land being deprived of by the Canadian
government. For example, before the Indian Act of 1876, the government’s policy toward
Indians hinged on the ideas of protection and civilization. The idea of protection comes from
the Royal Proclamation of 1763. For example, in 1839, a law was passed in upper Canada to
protect Indian lands from trespassers. This law was amended a year later that the land was
designated as crown land, held in trust for native people and therefore free of taxation. But the
protection evolved into a damaging interference with Indigenous land. For example, in 1850,
a law was passed in upper Canada to ban the sale of alcohol to Indians. In lower Canada, a law
was passed to decide who Indians were in 1850. Although this law was very broad, it meant
the government felt it had the power to say who was, and who was not an Indian (Kulchyski,
p.54). The imperialism is deeply reflected and embedded in these ideas.
The uneven distribution of social resources makes the economic development model of
aboriginal areas completely different from that of modern cities in Canada. Moreover, Due to
lack of resources, it is difficult for indigenous peoples to compete with large enterprises through
economic and enterprise development models. Capital’s oppression of indigenous people’s
rights and interests is also one of the important conflicts in this study. Because the organization
and economic development of the Aboriginal people depend on a more traditional economic
development model, they lack the necessary voice in the construction of the Enbridge Northern
Gateway Pipelines.
The racial discrimination suffered by Aboriginal Canadians during the colonial era has still
had an impact on their lives, which has exacerbated the conflict between Aboriginal Canadians
and other indigenous peoples. The “domestication” of Aboriginal peoples reflects the dual
impact of the infiltration of postcolonialism. Education is not only one of the tools of
colonialism but also the goal of colonialism. The “domestication” of civilization also shows the
contradictions between different civilization systems. The export of bitumen is necessary for
the economic development of the Canadian government and territorial governments; however,
the value of Aboriginal colonial heritage and Aboriginal customs is not formally recognized in
the use of traditional lands. (McCreary, 2014) Although the opinions of the Aboriginal people
have had a huge impact on the construction of the pipeline, the development concept of the
Aboriginal people and the aboriginal character are not recognized. The government may still
be looking forward to the dual economic and cultural naturalization of indigenous peoples.
Conclusion
In conclusion, regarding the construction of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline,
although the aborigines participated in the decision-making process, they were still able to find
the shadow of cultural and economic colonization in the decision-making process. Participate
in decision-making and obtain mediation, instead, the relationship between the government and
the Aboriginal people has become more tense due to differences of opinion. To solve the
problem, the Canadian government invites Aboriginal peoples to participate in policymaking
and endows Aboriginal areas with certain autonomy. Also, in addition to providing resource
support for Aboriginal peoples, education was a good way to improve the conditions of
Aboriginal communities. Current educational resources send some teachers to support
education, and do not formulate compulsory education policies for Aboriginal peoples,
References
Bowles Paul, MacPhail Fiona, “The town that said “No” to the Enbridge Northern Gateway
pipeline: The Kitimat plebiscite of 2014”, The Extractive Industries and Society 4,
pp.15–23. 2017.
McCreary Tyler A, “Pipelines, permits, and protests: Carrier Sekani encounters with the
Enbridge Northern Gateway Project”, cultural geographies,Vol 21(1) pp.115–129,
2014.
Motz, T.A; Currie, C.L., “Racially-motivated housing discrimination experienced by
Indigenous postsecondary students in Canada: impacts on PTSD symptomology and
perceptions of university stress”, Public health (London), Vol.176, pp.59-67, 2019.
Stacey, Richard, “The dilemma of indigenous self-government in Canada: Indigenous rights
and Canadian federalism”, Federal law review, Vol.46 (4), pp.669-688, 2018.
Pihama, Leonie; Lee-Morgan, Jenny. “Colonization, Education, and Indigenous Peoples”,
Handbook of Indigenous Education, pp.19-27, 2019.
Ziauddin Sardar, “Welcome to postnormal times”, first delivered as a City Leaders Lecture, at
City University London, Futures 42 (2010) pp.435–444, 2009.