Canada: Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Since the early 1990s, the Gitanyow had watched five companies obtain forest licences, make solemn promises to replant the trees, hack down the timber – and then go broke, doing little or nothing to replant. ...

The Gitanyow, as with most native bands in B.C., have been negotiating for years, beginning talks with the federal government in 1980 and the province in 1994. In the meantime, they and other bands are claiming jurisdiction over huge chunks of B.C., virtually the entire province, sparking legal proceedings in which courts have consistently ruled in their favour. ...

For the moment, all that's at stake is the small matter of the Crown's control of the forestry industry. But the executives of any company looking to build a mine, resort, power project or road should feel a chill from this line in the judgment: “The goal of reconciliation necessarily imports recognition of aboriginal rights to limited resources on claimed territory, and the importance of sustaining those resources while claims are pending. If they are destroyed, there is nothing left to reconcile.”

***

Court sends a chill through the woods

PATRICK BRETHOUR

Globe and Mail Update

August 28, 2008 at 6:00 AM EDT

British Columbia's forestry industry is about to find out who is really in charge of deciding what trees can be cut, and where. Hint: It isn't the Ministry of Forests.

The Gitanyow First Nation has won a big legal victory in its six-year quest to exert control over forest licences being granted in what it sees as its territory – 1.7 million hectares in the province's northwest. The decision from the B.C. Supreme Court is very clear that the Gitanyow don't have a veto on forestry on those lands. Yup, no veto, none at all – just the ability to scupper the decisions of the Forestry Ministry if they clash with the positions of the band.

The Gitanyow decision is the latest in a string of legal victories for aboriginal bands seeking to assert their authority over “traditional territory” – generally speaking, a big swath of land only part of which would ever be formally handed over in a treaty negotiation. That day is unlikely to come any time soon: The Gitanyow, as with most native bands in B.C., have been negotiating for years, beginning talks with the federal government in 1980 and the province in 1994. In the meantime, they and other bands are claiming jurisdiction over huge chunks of B.C., virtually the entire province, sparking legal proceedings in which courts have consistently ruled in their favour.

Such is the case with the Gitanyow, who watched with growing frustration over decades as forestry firms clear-cut timber on the bands' traditional territory. Since the early 1990s, the Gitanyow had watched five companies obtain forest licences, make solemn promises to replant the trees, hack down the timber – and then go broke, doing little or nothing to replant. Frustration turned to a lawsuit in 2002, culminating in a new case last year, after a regional director for the Forestry Ministry issued a batch of new licences, despite the Gitanyow's objections.

There had been extensive talks, good-faith negotiations, and even a signed agreement that defined how the province and Gitanyow would work together on forestry issues until such time that a treaty could be negotiated. The court nevertheless ruled that the province fell short in its duty to meaningfully consult the Gitanyow and reasonably accommodate their concerns. Translation: It's not enough to listen to aboriginal objections; they must be acted on.

It's hard to see how the ministry's regional director could have acted otherwise, considering what the Gitanyow were demanding. The band wanted recognition of its title, half of the stumpage fees and other forestry revenue from the area, subordination of the tree-licence process to the forestry management agreement and a requirement that forestry companies pay hefty deposits to pay for replanting. Those are the kinds of demands at the heart of treaty negotiations, and some would require a wholesale rewriting of forestry legislation. All are well beyond the pay grade of a regional director. Addressing those concerns means, in essence, reaching a treaty settlement with the Gitanyow, something the province has tried and failed to do since 1994.

Yet, the court judgment doesn't address this political reality. Instead, the judge seems to say that in the face of a strong claim to aboriginal rights and title, the Crown must make reasonable concessions. No such obligation to make reasonable concessions is placed on aboriginals. No points for guessing how talks will go if one side knows all it has to do is stick to its guns and it will eventually get what it wants in court.

The forestry businesses are mere bystanders, even though the Gitanyow had argued their new licences should be cancelled outright. The court turned down that request, at least for now, and both parties will have to make submissions on what can be done. Perhaps that will mean revenue sharing. Perhaps the court will merely shred tree licences negotiated in good faith.

For the moment, all that's at stake is the small matter of the Crown's control of the forestry industry. But the executives of any company looking to build a mine, resort, power project or road should feel a chill from this line in the judgment: “The goal of reconciliation necessarily imports recognition of aboriginal rights to limited resources on claimed territory, and the importance of sustaining those resources while claims are pending. If they are destroyed, there is nothing left to reconcile.”

Sovereignty of the Haudenosaunee

Six Nations, Brantford: What about the injunction hearing? See ... http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1141026 When will the 'Brantford' court agree to hear the legal presentations for/against a real injunction? The judge said it would be soon ... that was in June! Now he says December!?!? When will the 'Brantford' court deign to consider the "irreparable harm" being done to Six Nations constitutional "Aboriginal and Treaty Rights" by the Brantford City Council's aggressive development of Six Nations land currently under claim?

Will the Brantford City Council "bring in the army" ? OR ... will they "reasonably consult, and adequately accommodate" Six Nations land rights as we are all required to do by Canadian law?

If you are Canadian, the choice is a no-brainer. Unfortunately, so are our governments ... and not in a good way. What it's all about ...

Sovereignty of the Haudenosaunee

Reposted from ...

Friday, May 30, 2008

In March of 1959, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were sent into Six Nations, which until 1924 had been completely self-governed. The police were there to evict "Iroquois" Chiefs and Clan Mothers after traditionalists on the reserve seized control and, for all intents and purposes, declared the reserve separate from Canada.

1960 ~ Indians were declared "Citizens of Canada" to make sure that the Indians wouldn't be able to go to an International Court and bring a charge against the Canadian Government.

...

When an entity, whether a local municipality, province or

Federal government announces to the masses of its citizens

that they are "demanding that the Canadian military be

called in to protect their interests against the Native

people..." they are in fact, declaring war upon our People.

We are sovereign Nations

and when a military action

is called upon us,

it is an act of War.

We do not declare war

upon the government of Canada

or upon any sector thereof.

However, we are not going to be pushed

into Provincial Courts that have no jurisdiction

over our Nations either.

full article...

Sovereignty of the Haudenosaunee

May 28, 2008

Who gave permission for the Dominion of Canada and the

United States to try and strip away the sovereignty of the

Haudenosaunee?

Most people in Canada are truly uninformed when it comes

to understanding why we, as the true First People of this

Continent, are standing our ground so firmly. Many are

simply unaware of the hardships we have endured to arrive

at where we are today. As we stand at the crossroads of

protecting what is rightfully inherent to us, we will

either move forward in a good, healthy and constructive way

or once again, loose our chance for a better tomorrow.

The average Canadian citizen does not clearly understand

the millions, if not billions of dollars owed to just the

On gwa hon weh in Canada alone! Payments for land lease

agreements, mineral rights, and other such monies have

never been paid by the Canadian government or companies

involved. Though legally binding, these payments have been

ignored. Continuing this illegal and immoral behavior

ensures that all of the earnings from land development goes

to the government and to the individual companies while none

goes to the caretakers of this same land.

I want to share some of the history with you that I found

meaningful:

Both Colonies have created illegal government bodies to do

their dirty work of discriminating against the On gwa hon

weh who are the True Title Holders of the Land. The

"The Indian Act, The Tribal Council, B.I.A., Band

Administration, and Indian Affairs," are

unconstitutional and serve as a breach of trust. In 1857,

1869, and 1876, the Indian Act aimed at assimilation

through a "Divide and Conquer Policy." This goes

against everything within the Treaties of the Two Row

Wampum and The Silver Covenant Chain.

The Treaties are the foundation created through respect for

one another's Nation. This unique relationship is meant

to have an everlasting Peace, as it bounds our two separate

societies together as we sail side by side each in our own

vessels, with our own customs and laws for "As long

as the grass grows, the sun shines, and the water

flows." This breach of Treaty Responsibilities and

Obligations is a direct approach of assimilation.

Under International Law ~ Genocide is a Crime.

The Crime against Humanity goes against the United Nations

Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United

Nations General Assembly December 1948 and what came into

effect January 1951. The Convention on the Punishment of the

Crime of Genocide was ratified and became law in 1952 which

states, "a crime against humanity is an act of

persecution (discrimination) on any large scale of murders

against a body of people, and is the highest level of

criminal offense. Discrimination occurs when discriminatory

practices are based on the place in which one's

ancestor's lived."

It was never litigated that our people had to live on

reserves to keep our identity. It was created by Indian

Affairs and the Dominion of Canada, in order to keep us

isolated and under their orders. The Federal and Provincial

governments are out of their jurisdiction where we are

concerned, as "We never surrendered our rights or our

identity to any government. Canada's action against us

is, total Genocide."

Article II

"Any of the following acts committed with intent to

destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical,

race/religious group, as such

a) killing members of a group

b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of

the group'

c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of

life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in

whole or in part.

d) Impoverished measures intended to prevent births

within the group

e) Forcibly transferring children of that group to

another group

f) Involuntary sterilization of Native women

States Chris John, "You have a responsibility as a

citizen of the world to know what your government is up to

and resist (their) unlawful actions. The Crime of Genocide

is covered up. Now it's a double crime."

Through:

a) Genocide

b) Conspiring to Commit Genocide

c) Sending in direct and public agitators to harm us

d) Attempt to commit Genocide with lies

e) Participate in committing to conspire against us

Article IV

Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts

enumerated in Article III shall be punished whether they

are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials

or private individuals.

We, as On gwa hon weh established our land prior to the

Dominion of Canada and the United States stating their

supreme authority over our lands. Our Forefathers laid a

path for us through Treaties because of the need for mutual

understanding and agreements that relate to Peace and

Friendship, Military Alliance, Boundaries and Trade. We

acquired our lands through our Military Alliance, which

guarantees our Sovereignty through the protection of the

Crown, establishing them through Peace. Our lands were

never conquered by outsiders and we never consented to

American or Canadian authority over our Territories, nor

did we place our lands in trust with the United States or

Canada Governments.

Historical Dates--

July 1751 ~ The last Conference with the Five Nations at

Albany. When it comes to consenting, "they are too

sensible of the consequences of it ever in their senses to

consent."

1784 ~ Canada's first race riot occurred in Shelbourne

and Birchtown, Nova Scotia.

In the early 18 and 1900's, white settlers obtained

land through trickery, seizure and force, created by the

Dominion of Canada.

Zygmunt Baum, "Modern genocide is an element of social

engineering, meant to bring out a law and order conforming

to the design of the perfect society." Canada's

solution regarding "Indian Problem" strategy of

social engineering known as assimilation which began with

1857 Act.

Sir Duncan Campbell Scott serving as head of the Department

of Indian Affairs during the development of the residential

school system. "Our objective is to continue until

there is not a single Indian in Canada that have been

absorbed into the body politic, and there is no Indian

problem. Residential schools were designed to take the

Indian out of Indian."

25, June 1969 ~ Announcement of the "Statement of the

Government of Canada on Indian Policy, 1969" (the

"white paper") in the House of Commons by the

Minister Jean Chrentien. The proposed changes included the

repeal of the Indian Act, and at the end to the special

relationship between the federal government and Indian

people. Canadian government introduces but fails the White

Paper. This paper was a further attempt at assimilation

aimed at annihilating 'nation' status of First

Nations.

· Assimilation through mission schools and

bounty's.

In a speech delivered shortly after tabling the White Paper

in Parliament, Trudeau summarized his rational; "We can

go on treating the Indians as having a special status. We

can go on adding bricks of discrimination around the ghetto

in which they live and at the same time perhaps helping them

preserve certain cultural traits and certain ancestral

rights or we can say you're at a crossroads."

Pointing & Gibbons

In March of 1959, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police was

sent into Six Nations, which until 1924 had been completely

self-governed. The police were there to evict

"Iroquois" Chiefs and Clan Mother' after

traditionalists on the reserve seized control and, for all

intents and purposes, declared the reserve separate from

Canada.

1960 ~ Indians were declared "Citizens of Canada"

to make sure that the Indians wouldn't be able to go to

an International Court and bring a charge against the

Canadian Government.

Treaty Rights are clear in early treaties signed with the

young United States government. Tribal Sovereignty has

become a corner stone of American legal practice and at

least on the face in national government procedures.

In concluding these thoughts, I wish to say this...

When an entity, whether a local municipality, province or

Federal government announces to the masses of its citizens

that they are "demanding that the Canadian military be

called in to protect their interests against the Native

people..." they are in fact, declaring war upon our

People. We are sovereign Nations and when a military action

is called upon us, it is an act of War.

We do not declare war upon the government of Canada or upon

any sector thereof. However, we are not going to be pushed

into Provincial Courts that have no jurisdiction over our

Nations either. The time for all Canadian citizens to

truly understand the history and legal positions of the

Native nations here, so long withheld from them by the

political leaderships, is long overdue.

Only in understanding the TRUTHS of these historic

agreements and knowing who we are as a People will there be

progress toward fair and equitable treatment for all people

in Canada. The time for that is so very long over due,

Nya weh-

Always,

Jacqueline House

Cayuga- from Six Nations

Duty to Consult: BC Logging All court rulings in Canada that relate to "duty to consult" with Aboriginal Peoples, like the one reported below, are equally relevant to mining and logging in the north, urban development in the south (e.g., Brantford, Caledonia, Deseronto), or any other new uses of traditional Indigenous land. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080828.wbctree28/BNStory/National/

Natives gain more influence over logging Province failed to adequately accommodate Gitanyow when issuing licences, court rules ROBERT MATAS From Thursday's Globe and Mail August 28, 2008 at 5:48 AM EDT VANCOUVER — Natives will have significantly more clout over forestry in British Columbia after a court ruling that found the provincial government renewed licences granting the right to log in public forests in northern B.C. without meaningful consultation or adequate accommodation of aboriginal interests. The B.C. Forestry Ministry failed to acknowledge the distinctive political features of the Gitanyow First Nation's aboriginal society when issuing the licences, Madam Justice Kathryn Neilson stated in one of her final rulings as a B.C. Supreme Court judge. (Judge Neilson was appointed to the B.C. Court of Appeal earlier this year.) The Forestry Ministry also failed to recognize the aboriginal right to expect the forest would not disappear while disputes over their claim to ownership of the land continue, Judge Nielson stated in a 43-page ruling distributed this week. Consultation did take place between the government and the native band, she stated. "The issue is whether that consultation process was reasonable and whether any resulting accommodation was adequate," Judge Neilson wrote. "The Crown's obligation to reasonably consult is not fulfilled simply by providing a process within which to exchange and discuss information." The ruling is the most recent in a series of court decisions over the past decade that require the federal and provincial governments to consult with natives and accommodate their interests. Vivian Thomas, a Forest Ministry spokeswoman, said yesterday the government was reviewing the implications of the court decision and could not make any further comments. Glen Williams of the Gitanyow First Nation was not available yesterday for comment. The judge has asked for further submissions before ruling on the consequences of her decision. Natives in B.C. have unresolved land claims to almost the entire province. The current court ruling dealt with six 15-year licences issued in February, 2007, that granted the right to log in the Kispiox and Nass regions of the northwestern part of the province in exchange for complying with government forest-management objectives and paying stumpage fees. Judge Neilson stated that issuing the licences was the first step in permitting the removal of a claimed resource in limited supply. The annual allowable cut in the area would be about one million cubic metres of timber, the equivalent of about one million telephone poles. The licences covered almost half of the 16,800 square kilometres of territory claimed by the Gitanyow as their traditional lands.The Gitanyow, with a population of about 700 people, have been in treaty negotiations since 1980, but the process stalled in 1996, Judge Neilson stated. "Nevertheless, there is no question that substantial logging and road building have occurred on those lands and that these activities have had a significant impact on the sustainability of timber resources and on other aspects of Gitanyow tradition and culture." Land was clear-cut and the mature old-growth forests were replanted. But the Gitanyow were denied for many decades the use of large areas of habitat required to support plants, birds, fish and animals that they traditionally had for sustenance and for cultural purposes, the court heard. Unable to draw on the resources to maintain their culture and traditional activities, the native band suffered financial hardship, pain and shame, the Gitanyow told the court. The Gitanyow is organized into eight matrilineal wilps (clans), each with their own territory. Each wilp has a hereditary chief who has authority over the group's land. Judge Neilson found that the government did not accommodate the concern that the wilp system be recognized in the licences. Logging timber in the traditional territory without reference to the wilp boundaries "could result in the effective destruction of individual wilps." Judge Neilson also said that each of the companies that held forestry licences in the area in the previous 15 years had financial difficulties leading to receivership or a government bailout. As a result, some of the companies exceeded logging allowances and failed to fulfill obligations to replant the forest, she said. She also said the government did not adequately address silviculture - issues regarding the maintenance of a healthy forest - adding that the government's position on silviculture liabilities amounted to no more than "trust us." "The honour of the Crown and the importance of the sustainability of the resource to Gitanyow clearly required more."

Six Nations Peace and Friendship Gathering Rocks My World! The Haudenosaunee Men's Fire of Six Nations and their families and friends hosted an awesome gathering of their Canadian and International supporters of Six Nations land reclamation. ... more later ... but I will share this now:

At the final open session an Indigenous man from Mexico, who cannot go home, said through an interpreter: "I am sad because I cannot go back to my land, but when I am with Indigenous Peoples of Canada, I feel I am at home." Here's is the Hamilton Spectator's report of Saturday morning's session. Note that their only concern was the implications for the "land claims", and they reported good information about that. But the weekend was about much much more ... and more on that later ...

Future looks bleak for Six Nations land claims

(They mean chances of our governments doing anything constructive about resolving anything are next to nil.)

Caledonia, April 26, 2008--Natives and townspeople wave flags as they face-off at Argyle Street entrance to former Douglas Creek Estates subdivision.

Bill Montour.

August 24, 2008

BY ERIC McGUINNESS The Hamilton Spectator emcguinness@thespec.com

OHSWEKEN — Bill Montour, elected chief of the Six Nations, sees little chance an impending federal election will do anything to break a land-claims logjam and end the two-year occupation of Douglas Creek Estates in Caledonia or other protests stalling development in Brantford.

He’s also pessimistic that Saskatoon lawyer Tom Molloy, appointed to negotiate for Ontario, will bring about a breakthrough in talks due to resume sometime next month after adjourning in June.

“He’s a process guy; they’re going to create a process that could go on ad infinitum,” Montour told a small, (100+) mostly non-native audience at a weekend Peace and Friendship Gathering in Chiefswood Park.

Montour said the Harper government “can’t have this bubbling cauldron here” going into an election, but all that will happen is, “They will say we’ve got a process here and it will be all right with Canada’s new government (as the Conservatives have called themselves since the last election).”

Leroy (Jock) Hill, a sub-chief representing the traditional Six Nations Confederacy Council in the negotiations, also voiced frustration over lack of resolution of treaty disputes, saying: “It’s getting to the point we can’t sit back no more. They’ve sanctioned enough development and destruction of our property that we can’t tolerate it.”

Dawn Smith, one of the women who first occupied the Caledonia housing construction site, complained that “It’s been over 200 years, almost 300, we’ve been going through this and all we want is what is rightfully ours.”

She told non-native white, black and Asian sympathizers that “it’s with your government we have the fight, not you,” and urged them to “write letters, walk on Ottawa and make them listen to you.”

Smith spoke angrily about legal action against protesters, saying, “There are still men and women with warrants out on them who can’t live with their families,” people “facing trial, jail time and the threat of being arrested every day. That is their reality. We’ve never come in with weapons, we’ve never instigated the fight. You have to remember that. Our frustrations, our anger, our hurt come from deep inside.”

Both Montour and Hill said the elected and Confederacy councils have agreed to remain united in negotiations and, as Hill said, “keep Ottawa against the ropes so they can’t use one against the other.”

Montour said, “I’m totally committed to this, though I have councillors who are not. (He also said "We, the elected Council, are an administrative body." and he deferred to Leroy Hill, representing the HaudenConfederacy.) We cannot let Canada and Ontario keep the rift going.”

905-526-4650

I am sad, because my homeland is violently imposed upon the Indigenous Peoples of Canada. g

Indigenous Struggles in Canada

from "Socialist Voice" skip to main | skip to sidebar

By Any Means Necessary

Friday, 22 August 2008

Roots and Revolutionary Dynamics of Indigenous Struggles in Canada - By Mike Krebs

This article originally comes from Socialist Voice, an internationalist revolutionary socialist publication based in Canada. The posting of the article is part of my ongoing fight to reconcile North American Indigenous struggles for land and sovereignty with the revolutionary Marxist community.

Mike Krebs is an indigenous activist in Vancouver and a contributing editor to Socialist Voice. This article is based on a talk given at the Vancouver Socialist Educational Conference in March 2007. -----

But what’s really important to understand is why indigenous people face these conditions.

-----

A Movement for Land and Self-Determination

The indigenous question is one of the most political issues in Canada today – perhaps the most important. There are indigenous struggles going on in many different levels across Canada. There are struggles over land and resources such as that happening up north with the Tahltan nation, who are opposing the mining developments happening on their territory against their wishes. There is the similar situation with the Six Nations, who are opposing the theft of the Haldimand Tract in southwestern Ontario and the development that is going on there.

There are also indigenous people fighting poverty in indigenous communities both on and off reserve. The mainstream media carry many articles exposing what people do or should already know about, which is the horrible conditions that indigenous people are forced to live under in the Canadian colonial society.

Another major issue that indigenous people are dealing with and fighting, is the way that the lives of indigenous women are devalued in the colonial society, and how this leads to such widespread instances of indigenous women disappearing and being killed. This has been an issue in Vancouver with women going missing from the Downtown Eastside and up north along the Highway of Tears, the highway that runs between Prince Rupert and Prince George. This also happens in cities all across the Prairies, especially in Saskatoon. It is an urgent question.

The indigenous struggle for self-determination is a revolutionary struggle. Yet it receives little recognition from leftist activists, currents, parties, and organizations in Canada.

Many groups talk about indigenous struggles or cover them in their publications, but generally reframe these struggles in a way that does not address their revolutionary content. One example of this is the tendency of some left groups to frame the indigenous struggle in Canada as one of an oppressed minority, without taking up the question of land and the question of indigenous people as nations. This approach unscientifically separates the discrimination that indigenous people face from its material base.

The reality is that indigenous people are repeatedly finding themselves on opposing ends from leftists when it comes to leftist theory and practice.

Living standards of indigenous people in Canada

As a starting place for looking at indigenous struggles in Canada, it is important to outline the current conditions that indigenous people are forced to live under. One of the ways to do this is look at some basic statistics. Here are a few that are taken from a report published by the Canadian Population Health Collective in 2004 called “Improving the Health of Canadians.” This is of course only one way to understand the kind of conditions indigenous people live under, but it gives a general idea:

• More than one-third of indigenous people live in homes that do not meet the most basic government standards of acceptability.
• Average life expectancy for indigenous people is ten years less than the Canadian average.
• Indigenous children die at three times the rate of non-indigenous children, and are more likely to be born with severe birth defects and conditions like fetal alcohol syndrome.
• The suicide rate of indigenous people is six times higher than the Canada-wide average.
• Tuberculosis rates are 16 times higher in indigenous communities than the rest of the population, and HIV and AIDS infection is growing fastest among indigenous people.

We could go on and add to this the high rates of unemployment; the higher rates of being subjected to violence, whether it’s domestic or at the hands of police; the higher rates of incarceration, victimization by sexual assault, child apprehension and the lower level of access to formal education.

None of these statistics should be a surprise to anyone even remotely familiar with the conditions of indigenous people in Canada. These statistics are produced, repeated and exposed over and over again. Indigenous people don’t need to read these numbers to understand our situation, because this is just a basic description of day-to-day life, and this is only touching the surface.

But what’s really important to understand is why indigenous people face these conditions. Without the “why” of things, these statistics are meaningless towards understanding what they are portraying.

The true history of the development of Canada is significant, because the conditions that indigenous people live under today are the result of hundreds of years of the dispossession of indigenous peoples from their lands and resources. They are the result of a genocidal campaign against indigenous people at the hands of Canadian colonialism, and hundreds of years of suppression of the development of indigenous nations.

This process of colonization involved many stages, across Canada and the Americas, and it manifested itself in different ways. Here we are only looking at the general picture.

more ...

http://bermudaradical.blogspot.com/2008/08/roots-and-revolutionary-dynamics-of.html

Federal contamination of Indigenous lands John Hummel has created a usable database of federal contaminated sites by federal riding, and has alerted federal MP's. Excellent work John!!

“It really hit me that so many of the ridings with the most contaminated sites were northern, or rural, or heavily First Nations in population. (MP Cullen)

Dear Friends,

It took a while but, this is is exactly what I had hoped would happen from my press releases and the other emails I sent to 2,500 people including: every MP in Canada, all opposition candidates for each Federal riding where there were 9 or more Federal toxic sites plus, to hundreds of media, Environmental and Social/Justice NGO's Worldwide, hundreds of First Nations, Métis and Inuit leaders, hundreds of 'Grassroots' people and Dr.'s and scientists worldwide. Unity amongst all people is all I am seeking on this issue. Think, for a moment, of the children who might be left with this toxic legacy if we ignore it in our generation! Now, perhaps, this toxic mess in Canada will finally be cleaned up before even more people get sick!

Link to One of Many news articles on this topic in the last few days:

http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_north/lakesdistrictnews/news/27139674.html

For Land and Life,

John H.W. Hummel

Pollution Researcher,

Nelson, B.C.

Canada

Cullen calls for strong action on contaminated sites Published: August 19, 2008 11:00 PM

Skeena-Bulkley Valley MP Nathan Cullen has reacted strongly to the Aug. 13 LD News story detailing that 984 federal contaminated sites are located in his riding, the highest total for federal ridings in B.C., and the second-highest in Canada.

“I’ve been the NDP’s Environment critic in Parliament for four years, and I’ve never even seen this report,” commented Cullen.

“It really hit me that so many of the ridings with the most contaminated sites were northern, or rural, or heavily First Nations in population.

What really struck me was how many sites had no action plan and no site management strategy,” he said.

The Treasury Board database came to the notice of MPs due to the efforts of a toxics researcher in Nelson, B.C.

“It just shows what citizens can do when they’re determined to fight pollution,” said Cullen.

“I think the number of contaminated sites in Skeena-Bulkley Valley may be a little high; I went through and sampled the database, and some sites appear to be duplicated,” he commented.

“But, still, we need the Treasury Board to step up, and any individual owners who are responsible for those contaminated sites.

We need to be more strict, and have better laws. Anyone who contaminates a site ought to have to post bonds to take care of clean-up costs. We need better protection.

There’s two issues: the list itself, and adding to the list. That’s what we don’t want. In order to stop the list of contaminated sites growing, people have to know they’re going to be hit with fines, if they don’t adhere to the laws.”

He said the policy of the federal Conservative government is woefully inadequate. “We release toxins into the environment, and find them in the products we buy, and the government just blinks.”

“Ignorance is not an excuse; especially if it’s willful. There were no laws, and no fines, but that can’t go on. We can no longer pretend there is no cost to pollution.”

“If you have 6,000 metres of contaminated soil, you can’t just put in a front end loader and clean it up in an afternoon. Some of those sites could take years to clean up, and it could take hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions.”

The President of the Treasury Board and the Minister of the Environment should be aware of the report.

“They’re given briefings by their officials,” he said.

Cullen said the NDP caucus intends to put pressure on both ministers to get some action.

“As the party’s Environment critic, I’ve alerted all NDP MPs as to the contaminated sites database. We’re going to meet as a caucus and develop a policy we hope to take to an all-party committee in Parliament.

We need some action across party lines on this. The contaminated sites are a national problem. We need to band together to clean up these sites, and then enact tougher legislation to protect future generations,” he concluded.

A Jewish Canadian Sees Gaza ---"It's Like another Planet"

Physicians for Human Rights -- Israel ... will soon release a report on "medical extortion." Some sick Palestinians are interrogated at the Erez crossing and asked to become informants or collaborators as a condition of permission to leave Gaza for medical treatment.

Gaza's shocking devastation TheSpec.com - Opinions - A Canadian Jew's visit to the territory left him ashamed by what he saw <http://www.thespec.com/default> http://www.thespec.com/printArticle/418302 Harry Shannon The Hamilton Spectator(Aug 14, 2008) I had expected conditions in Gaza to be bad, but I was still shocked at the devastation when I went there in July. Last month my companion and I entered Gaza at the Erez crossing through a modern building reminiscent of an airport terminal. After questioning by the Israeli border police, we left the building and had a kilometre walk to pick up transportation. It was as if we had travelled to another planet. The sandy track is surrounded by the blown-up remnants of Gaza 's former industrial district. Rubble stretching for hundreds of metres lines the route. Even on the main road through Gaza, driving is a slalom course around potholes. The air reeks of burnt oil and stale food from exhaust fumes (cars rely on used cooking oil for fuel.) There are not many cars on the road, anyway. Donkey carts are common. Despite the 35 C temperatures, drivers don't use air conditioning in cars so they can save fuel. Every so often, the smell of sewage fills the air. Lack of treatment facilities means that much of it is dumped raw into the Mediterranean. We went first to a children's hospital on the edge of Gaza City. The hospital director and doctors described the conditions. Of 100 beds, 40 were occupied by children with bacterial meningitis, an extremely serious disease. There's a shortage of basic medicines and supplies, even simple things such as alcohol swabs. The hospital has three ventilators; only one is working. Israel won't let in spare parts for the others. The working machine is for a "hopeless case" who can't be taken off. Meanwhile, patients who could benefit have no working machine. There are many cases of malnutrition -- for example, children nearly a year old weighing 3 kilograms (6.6 pounds). Their families can't afford the special formula they need to improve. Because of lack of equipment and qualified personnel, there is no radiotherapy and limited chemotherapy in Gaza. Treatment for many conditions can only be obtained in Israel. Physicians for Human Rights -- Israel reports that, despite the ceasefire in the last few weeks, emergency medical cases are still refused entry into Israel, where they could have life-saving treatment. PHR has documented many cases of people dying before they are treated. Indeed the proportion of patients denied exit from Gaza for treatment has increased since last year. PHR will soon release a report on "medical extortion." Some sick Palestinians are interrogated at the Erez crossing and asked to become informants or collaborators as a condition of permission to leave Gaza for medical treatment. After leaving the hospital, we travelled to the southern end of Gaza . We stopped at the Rafah crossing, the border with Egypt . It was closed, as it is most of the time. A cluster of people were waiting, hoping against hope that they would be allowed to cross. Egypt is under pressure from both Israel and the U.S. not to open the border, and in any event, they do not want large numbers of refugees to flood in. We drove into the city of Rafah, which has come under bombardment by the Israeli military. A huge number of buildings have been severely damaged or completely destroyed. For street after street, barely any building is untouched. Makeshift shacks of corrugated metal and cloth sheets are now homes for those who have lost their housing. We returned north along the coast road. The beauty of the sea view contrasted sharply with the rest of what we had seen. After passing the Ash-Shati refugee camp, we went by modern hotels. They wait in vain for customers. The Gazan economy, devastated by Israel 's border controls, continues to languish. My sister and her husband are Orthodox Jews living near Tel Aviv. They are outraged at Israel 's behaviour, especially the restrictions on sick patients needing to leave Gaza . My brother-in-law, a former chair of family medicine at Tel Aviv University and a specialist in medical ethics, has complained publicly about this. As a Jew, I, too, am ashamed and disgusted at what is happening. Yes, Israel needs security. But what is happening goes far beyond security needs. Israel 's actions amount to collective punishment, forbidden under international law. I am ashamed that the Harper government has tilted toward unconditional support for Israel against the Palestinians. The current policy is unconscionable, as anyone who visits Gaza can see only too well. Harry Shannon is a professor of clinical epidemiology and bio- statistics at McMaster University , and a member of Independent Jewish Voices. He lives in Dundas.