SIX NATIONS NEGOTIATIONS

'Deal' really just a framework for more discussion

Gov't: 'Full co-operation' of Six Nations needed

According to a spokesperson for Indian and Northern Affairs, Canada is waiting on Six Nations to complete its responsibilities before flowing funding to the band to help with land negotiations.

At a news conference held Thursday by the Six Nations Confederacy, the group accused Canada of slowing the process of the three-year negotiations by refusing to settle on a facilitator-mediator and not funding the natives at the table for the last six months.

The federal government weighed in on those accusations Friday, saying it's still trying to settle on someone for the important facilitator-mediator job.

"After careful consideration, a response will be forthcoming," promised Patricia Valladao, the senior communications advisor for the ministry.

Valladao declined to comment on the names of any potential candidates but promised the issue is being discussed.

As far as funding goes, the Confederacy said this week that no one working on the negotiation process has been paid for six months and the group has had to lay off three of its five-member staff.

But Valladao said funding requires "the full co-operation and best efforts of all parties."

She said funds would not be forthcoming until the government gets a First Nations work plan and budget.

"It's the Six Nations' responsibility to complete the work plan and budget before any funding can flow for negotiation purposes."

Canada has already provided negotiation funds to Six Nations through the three-year process.

Almost $2 million in federal money has been paid to the natives for negotiation with an equal amount provided by the Ontario government.

The funds stirred controversy in the native community when people learned of several hefty invoices submitted by those working on the negotiations.

The governments tend to maintain a hands-off attitude, leaving it up to the natives to decided how to spend negotiation funds.

Valladao said the governments are currently in discussion with Six Nations to establish this year's funding.

CORRECTION

A story in Friday's Expositor erroneously reported the Haudenosaunee Development Institute held a news conference Thursday when, in fact, it was the Six Nations Confederacy, of which the HDI is a department, that held the meeting.
Confederacy chief Blake Bomberry also was misidentified in the story. The Expositor regrets the error.

Well, the government caving to appoint a facilitator/mediator is significant.

More ...
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_1_0_t&usg=AFQjCNHZxNtSM5D10XENOjPY0HHsse3m6w&sig2=sF5vqGZhWUwyLsKdHMwerg&cid=0&ei=doHRSui8GJ_oMOKOrIwD&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thespec.com%2FNews%2FLocal%2Farticle%2F649880

http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_0_0_t&usg=AFQjCNHk6bqdBVmwmPC_dEConCVx27v16g&sig2=5R4pLBzzimL0P5rLSfUQ0Q&cid=1448308232&ei=doHRSui8GJ_oMOKOrIwD&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbc.ca%2Fcanada%2Fstory%2F2009%2F10%2F09%2Fnatives-caledonia-talks009.html

http://cd989.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=17820

CANADA STALLING on mediation: Six Nations

Natives accuse Ottawa of foot dragging
Won't agree to land-claims mediation: Six Nations

http://www.thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/650491
October 09, 2009
Daniel Nolan
CALEDONIA - The Six Nations Confederacy is accusing Canada of stopping progress in talks to settle land claims because it won’t agree to mediation.

The Confederacy, appointed by the elected-band council in 2006 to conduct negotiations with Ottawa and Ontario, also says commitments by Canada to help fund Six Nations in order to create an “equal bargaining field” has not been forthcoming and it has had to lay off staff and rely on “the goodwill of our people to attempt to maintain a presence at the negotiation table.”

The statements were made by Confederacy representatives today at the conclusion of the latest round of land claim talks, which first began in May 2006 to try to resolve a dispute over the occupation by natives of a Caledonia housing project. It blossomed into other land claims, and saw Ottawa make two offers - $125 million and $26 million - to resolve different claims, but no agreements have been reached.

In the meantime, natives have halted development projects in Brantford and Hagersville because they say they’re being built on unsurrendered Six Nations land.

Ontario supports the idea of bringing in a mediator, but Confederacy spokesman Aaron Detlor said Canada has consistently blocked it. Names of judges have been proposed with no response, he said, and lately the name of Dr. Peggy Blair has been suggested. She is a leading lawyer in aboriginal affairs and completed negotiation skills training at Harvard Law in 1993.

“We need the assistance of a mediator-facilitator,” he said. “We have a fundamental disagreement about one party showing up at negotiations and saying ‘Here is the agreement. Take it or leave it.’ That’s not negotiating. They show up and say, ‘Here’s how we’re going to negotiate a settlement. You’re going to take what we’re going to offer and not ask any questions about it.”

Federal officials left before reporters could speak to them and could not be reached for comment later. A spokesperson for federal Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl could not be reached for comment.

On the issue of financing, Detlor said the Six Nations team has been without any funding for the last six months. He said it has had to let go three people, such as a researcher, and plans to cut two more. They have suggested $1.2 million is adequate to help them with the ongoing negotiations.

“It diminishes (our ability to negotiate) significantly,” Detlor said about the cash shortage. “Ontario has seven or eight people and the feds have seven or eight people. We don’t have the same back office support they have of hundreds of people. We have five people.”

“It’s simply not fair to ask people to put their lives on hold in good-faith negotiations without any ability to feed their families.”

Detlor said talks have not broken off and the three sides are set to meet again next month.

“We’re committed to continuing talks and we’re hoping the federal Crown will see the light of day,” he added.

He wouldn’t say frustration by land claims supporters will lead to more demonstrations, but noted: “Significant business interest in this part of Ontario is on hold until we get a mediator-facilitator. People are not going to come here and invest in this area if we cannot get a simple agreement on a mediator-facilitator.”

'We keep getting blocked'
http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2096313

The Haudenosaunee Development Institute went public with its complaints against the province and the federal government on Thursday, accusing them of delaying negotiations over land claims.

In a hastily arranged news conference after the latest table talk among the institute, Canada and Ontario, three HDI spokesmen announced the governments are balking at all their suggestions for a mediator-facilitator who could help move the process along and are refusing to assist with funding for natives who are engaged in the process.

"We have been working at getting a mediator-facilitator for four months," said spokesman Aaron Detlor, who is also a lawyer. "We keep getting blocked time and time again."

Detlor said the HDI has suggested various names, including Canadian judges, and has been open to input from the governments about who could be brought in to offer impartial advice on moving forward.

The terms of reference for a mediator-facilitator have already been agreed upon, so it's just a matter of selecting a person.

"We've tried to make a process where everyone can be satisfied and we get forced back by a federal crown with a message that's basically 'Our way or the highway'"
Additionally, no one working on the negotiation process has been paid for the last six months and Detlor said the HDI has had to lay off three of its five-member administrative staff , including a researcher, assistant and co-ordinator.

"It diminishes us."

Detlor said each of the governments shows up at the talks with seven or eight highly paid negotiators.

The lawyer also said the HDI is not halting the talks, but is hopeful people will demand their politicians push for more movement.

HDI's Mike Bomberry read a prepared statement saying the natives have lost good faith in the negotiation because of the approach Canada and Ontario have chosen to take, creating an "unfair bargaining field."

With no administrative funding support from Canada, the natives have relied on volunteer assistance at the negotiation table and have had to lay off staff .

"(We) may now be forced to shut down offices at the Oneida Business Park since it cannot aff ord the rent," said Bomberry.

Aboriginal Affairs Minister Brad Duguid, reached at the legislature in Toronto, said his instructions to negotiators have been to be as flexible as possible.

"We're enthusiastic supporters of bringing in a facilitator to try and trigger more progress in the talks," Duguid said.

"We continue to support the Haudenosaunee/Six Nations people and urge the federal government to show as much flexibility as possible to reach a consensus on who that should be."

The minister said he hasn't seen the names suggested as a facilitator, but he sees no reason why a suitable candidate can't be swiftly found.

Representatives from the federal and provincial government did not remain at the Oneida Business Park after talks today to offer comment.

In related negotiations, Brantford was back in court last week regarding its injunction against native protesters and was rewarded with a clarification from Justice Harrison Arrell that says the native protesters are prohibited from stopping work at the 10 development sites named in the original injunction.

The clarification seems aimed at the protests of Floyd and Ruby Montour who recently stopped work on Erie Avenue, along with a handful of supporters.

Meanwhile, Brantford police are investigating comments made on an Internet discussion board about the protesters.

One poster suggested the native protest could be stopped through a violent act and the Montours were asked to discuss their safety with police.

Copyright © 2009 Brantford Expositor

HSN: Talks continue Feb 25

Talks Update, January 28, 2009

Representatives of the Haudenosaunee Six Nations (HSN), Government of Canada, and the Government of Ontario entered the first round of discussions January 28th at the Oneida Business Park. The Wednesday afternoon meeting opened with a preliminary consultation to discuss Canada’s December 12, 2007 $26 million dollar offer to settle historical grievances on the Welland Canal Claim. Haudenosaunee Six Nations principal negotiator Chief Allen MacNaughton responded to the proposed offer by reading the August 29, 2008 counter proposal letter to Canada’s 26 million dollar offer. Canada’s principal negotiator Ronald Doering responded to the Haudenosaunee Six Nations counter proposal communicating Canada feels it represented a fair offer of compensation for the Welland Canada Flooding and they [Canada] remains hopeful that the Haudenosaunee Six Nations will find some basis for moving forward. The Haudenosaunee Six Nations believe that compensation factor(s) for the Welland Canal flooding of 1829 and subsequent loss of the use of the land does not reflect in Canada’s current offer. Six Nations has estimated the true dollar amount of the Welland Canal Claim is more in the range of five hundred million to one billion dollars. The Haudenosaunee Six Nations is prepared to move forward with negotiations, focusing on land and perpetual care and maintenance for Six Nations. All parties agreed to meet on February 25, 2009 at the Oneida Business Park at 10:00 a.m. for a Lands Resolution Table Meeting. Canada will give its position papers on the Nathan Gage Claim and the Hamilton Port Dover Road Bed.

Ah! The Plank Road (bed). This will be interesting. http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/cslc5.htm http://www.hsnnegotiations.com/index.html HAMILTON-PORT DOVER PLANK ROAD (HWY 6) SOUTH ... Port Dover Friday the 13th NORTH ... Hamilton West Harbour - Burlington Heights - High Level Bridge

SIX NATIONS AND BRANTFORD: Wouldn't a partnership be a better way to move forward?

"While maverick city Coun. James Calnan faced a barrage of criticism for breaking ranks over the city's legal action; he was right when he said the city should follow up with some sort of peace overture, instead of just legal confrontation." (Expositor editorial Jan. 7, 2009)

Six Nations has, to my personal knowledge throughout the past 33 years, made direct efforts to educate, inform and work, when possible, with the City of Brantford while respecting and protecting Six Nations land rights. Previous city councils led by mayors Charles Bowen, David Neumann, Karen George, Bob Taylor and Chris Friel have all interacted with us in efforts to move forward through similar turbulent times.

No doubt the present Mayor Mike Hancock, with his 20 years experience on city council, is also aware of these efforts and must continue with such diplomacy. And Six Nations must continue to extend the olive branch in answer to C. Orville Garlow (Expositor Opinion page, Jan. 8, 2009) because fairness and diplomacy are who we are.

Many of the city's previous mayors and councils have been Six Nations' best allies; lobbied for us and with us with no less than 19 federal ministers of Indian Affairs, numerous members of parliament and the provincial legislature in attempts to pressure Canada to resolve Six Nations' outstanding land issues in a fair and just manner.

Going forward with the City of Brantford, there is a way!

With the economy crashing into a recession, there is a great opportunity for business in implementing the Six Nations/City of Brantford Feb. 4, 1997 agreement. Six Nations can partner with investors on lands within the city of Brantford, be it an abandoned business site (to preserve as much farmland as possible) or a new site for business that meet our criteria and approval.

The lands will be held jointly by Six Nations and the developer/investor; exempt from municipal or provincial taxation per the terms of this 1997 agreement, our unique situation and the province's own legislation.

The developer/investor would pay what was saved in taxes to Six Nations to be used to repay the developer/investor the amount they initially paid for the disputed lands.

Upon the investment for the land repaid, the title will be transferred to where it should be, Six Nations.

The businesses would be issued long-term leases with lease payments securing Six Nations' perpetual care and maintenance, honouring the intent of our original agreements we had with our neighbours and the Crown. Certainty for investments would be achieved.

The City would be paid for the services they provide (fire, water, sewer, policing, garbage, etc.). Businesses would thrive having the advantage of commerce in a tax-free zone. Everyone would be working. Employment, training and apprenticeships would be available to everyone.

Six Nations would finally be included in the economy. Canada's legal duty to settle the land rights of the Six Nations People remains intact, but now big business and the City will be our allies, prompting Canada to settle with Six Nations.

The expected federal infrastructure dollars and economic stimulus package being proposed in the federal budget can only help if properly leveraged.

To date, the required investors and developers are excited and the province appears willing to amend the legislative changes arbitrarily implemented in 1997 that might have been an excuse for the City not to honour their part of the Feb. 4, 1997 agreement with Six Nations.

City of Brantford, it's your move.

Or would the City of Brantford rather be known as the place where uncertainty of land title has developers and investors suing the City and going elsewhere. Or Brantford, a place where Jane Doe, John Doe and Persons Unknown are not welcomed and subject to arrest. Or the City of Brantford, a place where Indian Fighting Lawyers and the Army are being sought to handle those pesky Indians.

Brantford, could your image get any worse?

Phil Monture

Six Nations

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1409631&auth=

NATIVE LAND CLAIMS

I disagree with Mr. Andrew Robinson's opinion in his Jan. 24 editorial that we, including councillors, should keep our attention and action focused on a negotiated settlement.

A negotiated settlement is, of course, the key, but Mr. Robinson has failed to consider a critical element in his reasoning -- the length of time it will take to reach a negotiated settlement. Just how long will it take to settle the land claims? Less than 12 months, a few years, or, decades?

The answer is in the following: Mr. Phil Monture, an expert in Six Nations land claims, who provides support to the federal negotiations, and who was instrumental in the City of Brantford/Six Nations 1997 agreement during the Mayor Chris Friel era, has made extra and painstaking notes on his technical work and in-depth knowledge because he says he will not be alive to see the day the land claims are settled.

The citizens of Brantford and the city and its deteriorating reputation and economy cannot wait this long until the land claims are settled. Holding the long breath is unrealistic, especially when peace-evoking solutions are within arms reach.

Danica Vanpopic

Brantford

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1413661&auth=

Six Nations, Canada: Negotiations update Federal government deems $500 million compensation "implausible" and "inflated" http://www.dunnvillechronicle.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1411793 Seven months after talks were suspended, Canada and Six Nations remained far apart in their positions on financial compensation for lands flooded during construction of the Welland Canal. At their Jan. 28 meeting, both parties read statements into the record. Haudenosaunee Confederacy representatives formally presented a position paper mailed to their Canadian counterparts last fall. In it, they rejected the $26 million settlement proposal and tagged the past to present value of 2,500 acres of flooded land at $500 million. They also indicated they were open to discussion on the issue. On behalf of Canada, senior federal negotiator Ron Doering read a statement saying $26 million was fair offer arrived at in good faith. Later he told reporters that the federal government was firm on that sum. Both parties will spend a month considering this week's exchange of positions. According to Six Nations Mohawk Chief Allen MacNaughton, who is on the negotiating team, the Confederacy will discuss Canada's response in council and band council members do their own review. Then the $26 million offer and responses to negotiation principles will be presented at community meetings in Six Nations. Negotiators meet next on Feb. 26 when Doering wanted the parties to set a schedule for meetings up to June. MacNaughton told reporters that many ideas in Doering's statement were "non starters". He was especially disappointed that the federal government does not recognize the Confederacy as a government. As well, chiefs told their federal counterparts that they are very concerned about people being arrested while development continues. This is occurring while provincial, federal and Six Nations representatives try to resolve these issues, MacNaughton noted. When asked if Ontario or Canada would walk away from negotiations if demonstrations acNaughton turned the tables. "The question is will we keep coming to their table as long as there's development," he noted saying this will be seriously considered. According to Doering's reading notes, Canada gave much thought to its response to the Six Nations $500 million value for the Welland Canal claim. He noted that Six Nations used selective application of Canadian legal principles for commercial compensation to arrive at the sum instead of applying principles used in courts to set compensation for aboriginal historic claims. "We believe that your approach leads to an implausible and inflated value and is not a practical basis for settlement," Doering said in the "without prejudice" response paper. He said it was unsupportable to calculate a value back to 1829 based on full compound interest for the entire sum. To reach their compensation level, the federal government relied on actual account patterns and past and present land values in the context of historical and economic information, he added. In their response, Six Nations said they will not relinquish rights or interest in lands for which they receive financial settlements. Doering said Canada's view is the flooded lands were surrendered in 1831, 1834 and 1844. To compromise, the $26 million offer left rights in place but also sought a promise that Six Nations would not act on them, he added. Before Canada provides compensation, it must be certain that further claims or occupations of these lands will not occur, stated Doering. "It is a matter we need to explore further if we are to reach an agreement on any of HSN's historical claims," he stated. Both MacNaughton and Doering realized the relationship between Six Nations and the Crown must be rebuilt. Doering suggested shaping it toward the future while respecting the past. "The nature of the relationship and the respect to us is paramount to be able to move forward with this process," said MacNaughton. In response to Six Nations suggestions for future negotiations, Doering rejected a proposal for new legislation requiring the three parties to negotiate. He also said the specific and comprehensive claims policies do not limit negotiations but also indicated that federal policy or "law applying to Indians" might govern negotiations in some cases. Willing to explore Haudenosaunee jurisdiction over its lands and people, Doering said the lands will not be completely immune in all circumstances from federal or provincial laws. In their statement, the chiefs asked Canada to commit to mediation if the talks fail. In response, Doering said the federal government does not agree to that at this time. Instead the federal government is willing to resort to judicial resolution in the courts as a negotiation alternative. Both federal and Six Nations representatives did agree to reviewing the negotiation process itself. MacNaughton said he wanted to see the main table remain in place. Other side tables or committees might no longer be necessary, noted Doering. He pointed out that Ontario has suggested a land use planning committee but Six Nations has not accepted the proposal. It was suggested by former provincial negotiator Murray Coolican as an alternative to demonstrations and occupations or reclamations of pieces of property. For the new provincial negotiator, Tom Molloy, this was his first meeting. He said it would take several to get to know people and to get up to speed on the issues. Even he was briefed, he said it was a lot different hearing from the parties at the table. Copyright © 2009 Dunnville Chronicle

Six Nations, federal, negotiations resume Jan 28

Federal, provincial and Six Nations negotiators are all expected to be back at the table on Jan. 28 to resume land claims talks, Radio Station CKPC reports.

Talks broke off last June. Since then, Six Nations has rejected a multi-million dollar federal offer to settle a claim related to the development of the Welland Canal. A key part of this month's meeting will be the federal response to Six Nations' rejection of that offer. http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1377517

The feds offered $26m as the value of the flooded Welland Canal lands, scrawled on a piece of paper, slid across the table with no signature and without clear rationale. It is now Six Nations counter offer that is on the table, capped at $500m, with land, compensation for land, and compensation for 'loss of use' of Welland Canal all under discussion.

Six Nations: Update from Grand River by Wilma Green Wednesday, December 03, 2008 11:29 AM The $26 Million offer to settle the Welland claim for the flooding of approx. 2500 acres of Six Nations land, was made on December 12, 2007. Six Nations reacted with a reasonable question. In fact, during subsequent update and consultation sessions, the people asked the same question, "How did they arrive at $26 Million?" Six Nations asked repeatedly for the calculations/formula used to arrive at the offered amount. Finally, on April 16, 2008, four months after the initial request, Senior Federal Negotiator, Ron Doering, sent "Without Prejudice", a seven and a quarter page document entitled, " Understanding the Welland Canal Flooding Offer: Why it is Fair and Reasonable." The purpose, "...to provide further explanation of the factors and considerations that led Canada to its offer of $26 Million to Haudenosaunee Six Nations on December 12, 2007." The document proceeded to outline four possible approaches to compensation. After reading and understanding each approach, how frustrating it was to learn that Canada had not used any of them. Instead, the Government chose to wear its paternalistic glasses when deciding what was a fair and reasonable offer. " ...offers are not the result of simply pulling a dollar figure out of thin air: They are the product of extensive factual and legal analysis of a grievance and a claim, and much, much deliberation by federal officials. At the same time...we are not able to share with you all of the specific factors and considerations that led us to offer HSN $26,000,000 because much of that information is based on legal advice that is privileged and confidential." "...As you know, Canadian law indicates that equitable compensation is based on an assessment that takes many factors into account, rather than on a simple mathematical calculation." Secret may be fine for a family cookie or donut recipe and it seems to have worked well for the Colonel's secret blend of eighteen herbs and spices. However , a settlement explanation kept secret, is about as unreasonable as you can get. Yet, we are expected to believe and trust that it is "fair and reasonable." Mr. Doering's wording is also a bit ironic. The favoured words "fair and reasonable" appear six times in the introduction and the closing and always when referring to the "offer". Throughout the supposed explanation, the word "reasonable" appears eleven times, describing Canada's assuming, presuming, inferring and applying the how and why of their secret formula. The word "fair" is missing. Why? Because their, pay as little as possible formula, is unfair to Six Nations and they know it. FAIR AND REASONABLE would be, to simply look back in time when approxiately 2500 acres of Six Nations land was flooded due to the construction of the Welland Canal Six Nations was never approached or consulted. The Crown made the decision which allowed the flooding of those lands. Indian Affairs stated that Six Nations would receive compensation comparable to all, whose property was damaged (flooded). That compensation was never paid. It seems both fair and reasonable to simply calculate the worth of the land and trace the interest and compund interest rates over 179 years and arrive at the amount. Six Nations, reacting to the lack of a real fact-based response from the government, did just that by engaging, Professor Arthur Hosios, Chair of the Department of Economics at U of T. He has been accepted, by the Canadian courts, as an expert on valuing historic losses. He was retained by the Crown to give expert evidence on a compensation model in the Whitefish Lake matter. Six Nations requested his expertise on the Welland offer. He went back to 1834, when compensation was originally to have been paid. Six Nations research reflects 2,478.3 acres of good land, while the Crown recognizes 1,993.3 acres of mainly swamp which values the land at either $5.50 or $ 4.30 per acre. The professor calculated both sets of figures. How far off the mark is the Crown offer? According to Professor Hosios, compensation for the Welland land flooding is more realistically within the $500 Million to $1 Billion range. The $26 Million was based on assumptions and presumptions by the Crown on what would have happened to the money had Six Nations received the original compensation. Professor Hosios advised that, "The Senior Federal Negotiator states that interest 'may be applied to the whole or to a part of a principle amount,' but without explanation. He or she seems to be relying on the notion that, '...We can never know what actual benefits would have been realized on a sum of money...Money can be saved, it can be spent; it may be invested wisely or conservatively; it may be invested poorly, or not at all....we should consider a whole range of realistic contingencies in arriving at a fair and proportionate amount...' This argument has been put forward to reduce HSN compensation and is, from an economic perspective, basically incorrect." What Six Nations has included, as indicated by the people who expressed their views, is payment of the original compensation with interest calculated and compounded accordingly. What must also be considered is the loss of use of that land for 179 years. The loss of use for such things as hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering medicine, farming and very bluntly, for however Six Nations would have seen fit to use it. Also, payment for future loss of use needs to be addressed as well. The Crown also needs to recognize Six Nations' sacred connection with the earth, "Our Mother." They also need to be reminded that the land was not theirs to include in the Welland Canal development in the first place. When calculating their amount, the Crown chose to plot Six Nations spending habits of the Band Fund. What they do not include is the very real fact that the Crown and its agents, misappropriated the majority of our funds, as holders of the purse strings. When talks were suspended by Six Nations in June, 2008, Allen MacNaughton gave the government negotiators some homework to do. When talks resume, they will be asked to give their understanding of, and attitude toward, the Two Row Wampum and Covenant Chain. What has been missing from the talks, is a firm committment to recognize, respect and uphold the original agreements. Our claims are not, as Mr. Doering likes to call them, "grievances", but repeated intrusions upon our rights. There needs to be an understanding that one side, which is ultimately responsible for the gross injustices and wrongdoings, cannot unilaterally decide what is fair and reasonable settlement by dictating the unreasonable. The Crown refuses to admit wrongdoing, " For the lawyers out there, this is not an admission of liability - it is about the Government of Canada trying today to make things right." Historical evidence shows that wrongdoing was done over and over again. If the government is trying to make things right, then who do they propose did the wrong if it was not the Crown and its agents? They were supposed to be protecting our interests. They failed and knowingly did so, at the expense of our land, money and sovereignty. Many people have mentioned that something does not "feel right" about the current process. It could very well be that we need to hear the admission that YES, the Crown and and its Agents have let Six Nations down. A formal apology would go a long way in easing the negotiation path. The opportunity exists to restore the trust, respect and friendship between the Haudenosaunee and the Crown, that was established over 250 years ago.The expiration date, as our ancestors and theirs agreed upon, has not arrived, for the sun continues to shine, the waters still flow and the grasses are yet growing and green at certain times of the year. From the community meetings and discussion sessions, the common opinion was firstly,, that the offer was not enough. What people spoke very strongly for was: the return of land and financial compensation for loss of use and future loss of use for the flooded lands. The community stressed that there be NO extinguishment of rights to the lands now or in the future. The total suspending of development along the Grand River tract, until land claims are settled, was also echoed many times. Other suggestions and concerns were also raised including: the needs of the community in such areas as fresh, potable water, economic development, education, raising the standards of health care, governance and spirituality. A lot of good things have come from the community meetings and have provided the WCTWG with very definite direction for our Negotiating Team to pursue. An offer, lacking any real explanation, was made by the Crown and it has been refused with explanation, by Haudenosaunee Six Nations, along with a counter proposal for settlement. Now, at long last REAL negotiations can begin. The community will be informed of all future developments and many more decisions will have to be made as the process unfolds. Then, the two words that have appeared in Mr. Doering's submissions, can and should describe the result of the negotiations as being "FAIR AND REASONABLE" to all sides. Think About It.

Settlements "stalled under Strahl" ... ?

Land claims talks could stay stalled under Strahl

Six Nations chief not thrilled with re-appointment

Posted By JOHN PAUL ZRONIK, EXPOSITOR STAFF

Posted 16 hours ago

Six Nations elected Chief Coun. Bill Montour doesn't hold much hope that land claims negotiations with government will move any quicker following Chuck Strahl's re-appointment as federal minister of Indian Affairs.

"I'm not feeling that positive," Montour said following the swearing in of Stephen Harper's new cabinet on Thursday. "It seems like Ontario and Canada are comfortable with creating this (negotiating) process and to keep it going low key, put about a million dollars a year into it and have Six Nations fight over it."

Montour said Strahl has a "distant relationship" with Six Nations, in part due to health problems that limited his ability to meet with native leaders. Strahl, who was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2005, became minister of Indian Affairs in August 2007.

"With all due respect to Minister Strahl -- and he is very ill -- there was a lot of protection around him from his senior staff," Montour said.

The chief questions if Strahl understands the Six Nations community. Following a meeting at the minister's Ottawa office last February, Montour invited Strahl to visit the reserve to see Six Nations needs first hand.

"He said: 'Do I need a protective escort?' I said: 'Why would you need that?'" he recalled. "But that's the mentality. It's just crazy."

Six Nations, Ottawa and Queen's Park have been holding land claims negotiations since May 2006 without resolving a single claim. Montour said the people of his community expect a greater sense of urgency from the federal government when it comes to negotiations.

LIKE JIM PRENTICE

The chief does see hope in the appointment of Jim Prentice as Canada's new Environment Minister. The chief said Six Nations is considering establishing its own environment department that would examine proposed developments on Six Nations land -- and deal with other issues -- and could use the federal government's help.

"Minister Prentice understands First Nations issues," Montour said. "He's well aware of on-the-ground situations in communities across Canada."

Prentice was minister of Indian Affairs from February 2006 to August 2007. He also served for 10 years as a commissioner of the Indian Specific Claims Commission of Canada, which conducts inquiries into land claims disputes, and is recognized as a land claims negotiation expert.

Article ID# 1274046

Six Nations, Canada:

Six Nations reject Ottawa's $26-million offer over Welland Canal flooding http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5ikcq6EpaXMNHZ2Atr50V72UJgj0A

3 hours ago

TORONTO — A $26-million federal offer to compensate Six Nations communities for the flooding of their lands to build the Welland Canal almost two centuries ago is woefully inadequate, the aboriginals said Monday.

In rejecting the offer, the Haudenosaunee Six Nations said Ottawa had provided no rationale for its financial proposal given that independent evaluators had pegged the loss of use of the land at between $500 million and $1.1 billion.

"I'm disappointed with the hard stance that the federal government is taking," Chief Allen MacNaughton said in an interview.

"Their attitude is 'take it or leave it.' That's not negotiating."

In 1829 and 1830, Six Nations lands were flooded when a dam was built across the Grand River in southern Ontario as part of constructing the Welland Canal bypass around the Niagara Falls.

The land around Dunnville, Ont., was worth about $15,000 under an agreement reached in the 1830s, but the money was never paid, and the issue has now become how that translates into current values.

The $26-million offer made in December simply "doesn't reflect what's owed," MacNaughton said.

MacNaughton said Six Nations are prepared to keep negotiating but want $500 million in financial compensation for the historic loss of use of the area.

He said Ottawa must accept that it cannot seize land illegally then unilaterally decide on what is fair compensation.

"We've never surrendered that land and they're assuming they had the authority to just flood it, and we're saying, 'No you didn't'."

This issue is part of a broader land claim dispute involving the Six Nations.

One area of dispute involves a housing development in Caledonia, Ont., which has at times been a violent flashpoint between aboriginals who occupied the site more than two years ago, police and other residents of the town.

Ottawa maintains the aboriginals sold that tract, but the First Nations argue the federal government has never provided any proof of sale.

Aboriginal negotiators held 14 community sessions to discuss the flooding-compensation offer and MacNaughton said the "clear priority" that emerged was to have development on their traditional territory stopped and land returned to them.

Six Nations want to be able to choose which land they receive and Ottawa should buy it and then give it back, he said.

The federal government has said it understands the land issue is of "critical importance" to Six Nations.

However, it also said it would not expropriate private property to settle the land claims, so any acquisitions for return to the aboriginal communities would have to come from willing sellers.

(NOTE: Only 12% of Ontario is privately 'owned'. 88% is still held in 'trust' for Indigenous Peoples, as 'Crown Land', by Crown Treaties.

Calls to the federal government seeking comment were not immediately returned Monday.

MacNaughton said he remained optimistic of finding common ground in talks with both Ottawa and Ontario over the "complex" situation.

"I believe we're at the point where real negotiations can start," he said.

......................

NOTE:

This first piece of land, now flooded, has huge significance as a precedent for many/all other Six Nations 'land claims' against Canada.

The missing element is the government's 'formula' for determining the 'amount', in both replacement of land and compensation for loss of use.

The government is making it as difficult as possible, to try to avoid committing to a formula for resolving land claims. They prefer hard-nosed bargaining and dragging it on forever, with us taxpayers paying their salaries! The federal 'land claims industry's goal is simply to sustain itself - ie, not to resolve anything! Related post: Message from the Haudenosaunee Six Nations Confederacy, May 2008: STOP DEVELOPMENT AND NEGOTIATE! http://grannyrantson.blogspot.com/2008_05_01_archive.html

Six Nations, Canada, ELECTION 2008, Negotiations: LAND CLAIMS WON'T MAKE PROGRESS

On Sunday, the prime minister and the Governor General will meet to dissolve the current Canadian Parliament. This decision means that by the end of October, we could see a new set of faces in the House of Commons and some constituency offices throughout the country.

However, even if there is a dramatic shift in the Canadian House of Commons and even if the current prime minister is replaced by someone from the Opposition, the status quo of the land claims negotiations at the Oneida Business Park on the Six Nations Reserve will remain the same.

In the 141 years since Canada gained its independence from Great Britain, the federal Indian policy in Canada has not changed. It does not matter which of Canada's political parties controls the House of Commons in Ottawa; each successive government inherits what Duncan Campbell Scott called Canada's Indian problem.

The current problem which one of the political parties will inherit in October is the ongoing land claims processes underway in the Haldimand Tract.

These land claims, which the new administration will inherit, are older than the Canadian government which inherited them from England in 1867 and since that time has chosen to ignore.

Since the current round of talks began as a result of the Douglas Creek incident in 2006, neither the prime minister nor his Indian Affairs minister has even bothered to go to Six Nations or Caledonia to ascertain the situation there.

Given the federal government's dismal track record of settling Indian land claims, the taxpayers in this country should not expect the next administration to accomplish anything even resembling a settlement of the Douglas Creek situation even if the Liberals or the New Democrats defeat the Conservatives in October.

The only change which may take place could be in the form of a new head negotiator for Canada which would result in even more taxpayer money and time being spent as the new negotiator learns the ins and outs of his or her place at the table.

Douglas Whitlow Ohsweken

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1187827 Related Posts: Six Nations Canada negotiations to resume Sept 11 http://grannyrantson.blogspot.com/2008/09/six-nations-canada-negotiations-to.html

City action against protesters on hold

Posted By JOHN PAUL ZRONIK, EXPOSITOR STAFF

Posted 1 day ago

The city's legal action against eight Six Nations protesters was adjourned Friday until a judge responsible for hearing the case is chosen.

Due to the complexity of the city's action, Ontario Superior Court Justice G. E. Taylor earlier this week ruled that a single judge should hear all arguments pertaining to the case.

On Friday, Justice Harrison Arrell adjourned the matter until the judge is chosen. The next court date dealing with the matter has yet to be set.

Six Nations, Canada negotiations to resume « on: September 05, 2008, 06:57:56 AM »

---

Posted By KAREN BEST CHRONICLE STAFF WRITER Posted 1 hour ago Negotiations of Six Nations land issues are expected to resume with provincial and federal representatives on Sept. 11. During a Labour Day street blockade involving Six Nations and Caledonia residents, Clyde Powless said his people's fight is not with Caledonia. "Our fight is with the government and will resume at the negotiating table," he said. Earlier in August, Cayuga Sub- Chief Leroy Hill, who is a Confederacy negotiator, said he was eager to get back to the table to see what Canada has uncovered about the Plank Road claim through Caledonia. He said the federal government has not yet proven that chiefs wanted to sell the 10,000 acres in the Haldimand Tract along the road way between Hamilton and Port Dover. According to Six Nations records, chiefs only agreed to lease the land, he stated. For awhile, 21-year leases were paid and then the Crown unilaterally decided to sell land, said Hill. No payments to his people were documented, he added. As well, chiefs protested establishment of Caledonia, he noted. Consultation is also a point of contention. Three Six Nations options for this process were presented at the negotiating table, including the Haudenosaunee Development Institute, established by the Confederacy council to deal with planning issues in the Haldimand Tract, said interim HDI director Hazel Hill. She said disputes over development in Brantford are a direct result of the Crown stalling for two years on its duty to consult. In June, chiefs backed away from negotiations so the Crown could think about Brantford's injunction and bylaws directed at Six Nations people who are protecting land, said Hazel Hill. "The Haudenosaunee are ready to stand in defence of our people," she added. One section of an injunction document indicated that Six Nations did not have any land in Brantford. In 1995, Six Nations band council sued the Canadian and provincial government for financial restitution for 29 claims including several in Brantford. http://www.dunnvillechronicle.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1186142