This posting is an excerpt from “Canada’s North: What’s the Plan?” , a Conference Board of Canada publication written by three nationally renowned Canadian scholars: Thomas Berger , Steven A. Kennett and Hayden King.
“Canada’s North: What’s the Plan?” Highlights:
Most of Canada’s natural resources—forests, metals and minerals, hydroelectric sites, oil and natural gas, and untapped resources that can be further developed—are in the North, and a warming climate is making them more accessible. Businesses, Aboriginal communities, and federal, provincial, and territorial governments will all want their share of the benefits of Northern economic development.
Canada’s North: What’s the Plan? draws on the different viewpoints of three nationally renowned scholars to explore the effectiveness of land use planning in Canada’s North from three very distinct perspectives. Their essays are required reading for those seeking to understand this important issue and draw their own conclusions.
Ontario represents the worst type of planning with Indigenous peoples—a seemingly complete disregard for the perspectives and opinions of the people who will be most directly affected by the land use plans. – The Conference Board of Canada Publication – “Canada’s North: What’s the Plan?” (November, 2010)
Exclusionary Planning in Ontario
While Nunavut and Yukon have pursued land use plans through the relatively recent NLCA and UFA, treaties in Northern Ontario are over 100 years old and make no mention of planning commissions. There are also no stipulations for the co-management of surrendered lands in the North, and there is no consensus on roles and responsibilities. In fact, there is little consensus about who actually has authority in Ontario’s North. The Cree and Ojibwe feel that they agreed to share their territories in treaties 3, 5, and 9. Ontario feels that there was explicit surrender and, thus, the Crown has jurisdiction.
This is the unsteady footing from which planning proceeds in the province. Not evolving from the claims-based co-management common in the territories, Ontario’s experience might be described more as crisis-based, as it is a response to numerous high-profile confrontations. However, despite the differences between Nunavut’s and Ontario’s land use planning regimes, there are similarities—primarily, the exclusion of Indigenous peoples from the planning process. In Ontario’s case, the problem does not lie in the execution of plans, but in the drafting.
Ontario has an inauspicious history with First Nations communities in the province. That history has even occasionally resulted in violent conflict with the Haudenosaunee and Algonquin peoples, often over lands and resources. Of course, the province has witnessed the police shooting death of Dudley George at Ipperwash and the ongoing standoff in Caledonia, but most pertinent have been a number of recent conflicts in the North.
Read more