Members of the Métis community from across Northwestern Ontario came to Fort Frances last weekend to participate in one of five community roundtable discussions going on across the province.
Gary Lipinski, chair of the Provisional Council of the Métis Nation of Ontario, said he was pleased with the level of participation and the feedback the MNO received during the two-day event.
People from Dryden, Kenora, Sioux Lookout, and Thunder Bay, as well as Rainy River District, gathered at La Place Rendez-Vous to discuss four main issues affecting the Métis community in Canada: the Powley case, the development of a Métis constitution, the definition of the Métis nation, and nuclear fuel waste management.
This was the third in a series of five roundtable discussions taking place across Ontario during January and February. The first two were held in Midland and Hamilton, with the next two will taking place in Timmins and Sudbury.
Some of the moderators at the meeting here included Lipinski, MNO vice-chair France Picotte, MNO executive director Pete Lefebvre, and Sunset Country Métis Council president Lute Calder.
Also on hand were MNO president Tony Belcourt, Métis National Council president Clem Chartier, and local MP Ken Boshcoff.
Following each presentation, participants were given the chance to ask questions and express their views.
The purpose of the discussions was to update the community about Métis issues, to answer their questions, and to gather feedback to present to both the provincial and national assemblies.
“We’ll be tabulating the comments into reports,” Lipinski noted, adding those reports will be presented at a provincial presidents’ assembly Feb. 19-20 and at a meeting of the National Council in Calgary in March.
Lefebvre gave the first presentation on the Powley case. That case, which took 10 years to resolve, is central to the question of Métis rights.
On Oct. 22, 2003, Steve Powley and his son, Roddy, killed a moose outside Thunder Bay and tagged it with a Métis card reading “harvesting my meat for winter.”
A week later, they were charged by conservation officers with hunting moose without a licence and unlawful possession of moose.
The case ended up going all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously on Sept. 19, 2003 that as members of the Sault Ste. Marie Métis community, the Powleys can exercise a Métis right to hunt that is protected by Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
“Every judge agreed, unanimously. Every judge at every level chastised the government,” Lipinski said. “That’s unheard of in the law world not to lose once.”
That Supreme Court ruling paved the way for the Interim Harvesting Agreement between the MNO and the Ministry of Natural Resources, which was reached July 7, 2004.
In it, both sides agreed to a maximum of 1,250 Métis harvester cards to be issued in 2004, with the understanding that a formula would be established in the future.
The MNR also agreed Métis hunters carrying the harvesters’ certificate would not be charged.
Then in October, the MNR unexpectedly announced it only would apply the IHA north of Sudbury.
Lipinski questioned the logic of the provincial government applying what the Supreme Court has deemed a constitutional right in some regions, but not in others.
“If you’re talking about a constitutional right, how can they say that?” he asked.
“The MNR’s approach is once again short-sighted and undermines the constitutional principles outlined by the Supreme Court in Powley and other recent aboriginal rights cases,” said Lefebvre.
“The MNO is hopeful the MNR will eventually uphold the honour of the Crown,” he added. “We continue to honour the agreement, even if the MNR doesn’t.”
No talks currently are going on between the two sides.
But the court’s ruling has implications far beyond hunting rights, Lipinski noted.
“It was never just about hunting and fishing. It’s about the broader recognition of the Métis as equal to First Nations and the Inuit,” he stressed. “It kicked the door open for Métis people.
“How can you only have the right to hunt and fish and not have land rights?” he asked.
While the Supreme Court did not establish a definition of who the Métis are, it did identify three broad factors to identify a Métis rights-holder: self-identification, ancestral connection, and community acceptance.
“Métis refers to distinctive people who develop their own customs and way of life, not just mixed-blood individuals,” said Lefebvre. “What makes you Métis is not your mixed heritage, but your identity.”
Another issue at the roundtable meeting was the question of establishing a Métis constitution.
“Some work has been underway for the last one or two years towards developing a Métis National Council Constitution,” Lipinski said.
“We gave them an overview of what is a constitution and solicited feedback on what should be included in that,” he noted. “A constitution is meaningless if you don’t have grassroots support.”
Participants’ comments will be brought to the MNC meeting in March when the issue of a constitution is raised again, Lipinski added.
Fort Frances Times
Local News from Across the Rainy River District
