HAPPY VALLEY-GOOSE BAY, LABRADOR, NL
The following is a statement issued by Gregory Rich, Grand Chief of the Innu Nation in anticipation of the conclusion of the Muskrat Falls Inquiry in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Labrador NL.
On the penultimate day of the Commission of Inquiry into the Muskrat Falls Project, the NunatuKavut Community Council (NCC) once again attempted to use public process to substantiate their efforts for recognition as an Indigenous “Rights holder” on Innu Nation constitutionally recognized land. Previous attempts by NCC to use public process to claim Indigenous rights on Innu territory related to the Muskrat Falls area occurred at the Joint Review Panel – Lower Churchill Hydro Generation Project in 2011.
NCC submitted to the Commission that it was not consulted by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and Nalcor Energy to the extent that Innu Nation was in the time leading up to project sanction at Muskrat Falls and following construction of the Muskrat Falls project. NCC told the Commission that it believes its consultation with respect to the Project was inadequate.
Muskrat Falls is located on Innu traditional territory, Innu Nation are the constitutionally recognized Aboriginal rights holders to the land. NCC is accorded stakeholder status not Aboriginal or Rights holder status.
Legally, NCC has no legitimate Aboriginal right to the Muskrat Falls area nor a right to expect equal rights to that of Innu Nation or equal consultation by the Province of NL or Nalcor or Canada on current or future resource development agreements.
Innu Nation contends that the level of engagement by NL and Nalcor Energy with NCC regarding the project is a result of the reality of NCC’s legal standing and NCC’s own failure to prove that they are an Indigenous rights holder (whether Metis, Inuit-Metis or Inuit) with any such rights for consultation at the level afforded to Innu Nation.
NCC stated to the Inquiry that protests that it organized and participated in caused project delays and overruns. Innu Nation asserts that it must be recognized that the increased costs and delays related to protests should rightly be attributed to actions taken by NCC.
NCC’s objective participation in the Independent Expert Advisory Committee (IEAC) is also now questionable. NCC voted during the IEAC process for both targeted removal of soils and vegetation and wetland capping, measures not supported by 4 out of 6 western scientists. Only 2 of 6 scientists supported both these measures. Three out of six scientists supported wetland capping. Innu Nation considers NCC’s vote was a political tactic – NCC’s principles were discarded when it accepted the $10 million offered by Nalcor in lieu of wetland capping only.
By contrast, while Innu accepted funds from Nalcor previously earmarked for wetland capping, unlike NCC, Innu Nation has remained steadfast with its position.
Innu Nation participation in the IEAC was based on the need for further scientific study of predicted MeHg levels, an issue Innu Nation takes very seriously.
As NCC and Innu Nation and all other participants had the same access to information through the IEAC, Innu Nation contends that NCC’s pivot on principle shows they were not as concerned with scientific results as they were with gaining political recognition for their involvement.
NCC’s own appointee to the Independent Expert Committee of the IEAC, Mr. Stewart Michelin, stated in a July 29, 2019 interview with CBC Radio, “There were some intelligent people on that committee, and from everything I gathered and everything we talked about…I feel safe in eating fish”. Mr. Michelin’s statement is not consistent with his vote for Targeted Removal of Soils and Vegetation and Wetland Capping during the IEAC process, a vote that ignored available science, science that was not consistent with NCC’s political position.
NCC’s acceptance of the $10m and recent statements by NCC’s expert contrary to NCC’s position on the IEAC is deeply concerning. The spirit and intent of the IEAC was weakened by the actions of the NCC, and NCC has also callously used public process for political recognition.
Innu Nation recognizes that there are some members of NunatuKavut Community Council who are Indigenous but notes that NCC is not an Indigenous rights holder and is not under law a holder of Aboriginal rights.
NCC does not have a recognized lands claim. Misuse of public process with calls for compensation and recognition as a land rights holder is insulting to Innu Nation as it should be to all legitimate Indigenous governments and peoples, including all people in Newfoundland and Labrador whose resources are misdirected to NCC.
Innu Nation calls on the Governments of Canada and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to finalize Innu Nation’s land rights claim and to be prudent with any further funding and support for the NunatuKavut Community Council.
The Innu Nation represents the Innu of Labrador and are the only recognized holders of constitutionally protected Aboriginal Rights in the Muskrat Falls Project Area and the only Indigenous people currently negotiating a treaty in Labrador with Canada and the Province. That recognition as a constitutional Aboriginal Rights holder in this area led to the legally binding Lower Churchill Impacts and Benefits Agreement (“IBA”) signed by Nalcor with the Innu Nation and the Sheshatshiu and Mushuau Innu First Nations in 2011.
