babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » from far and wide   » nfld, labrador, pei, ns, nb   » NL Gov't vs. Quebec Innu

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: NL Gov't vs. Quebec Innu
skarredmunkey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11117

posted 06 June 2008 01:08 AM      Profile for skarredmunkey     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
http://tinyurl.com/6b2hfh

It seems like this has the potential to get pretty explosive.

NL is quite sensitive about the Labrador boundary as the Quebec government doesn't even recognize it. But, on the other hand if the boundary is traditional Innu land, this appears to be out of NL's and Quebec's jurisdiction, correct?


From: Vancouver Centre | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
bigcitygal
Volunteer Moderator
Babbler # 8938

posted 10 June 2008 02:40 AM      Profile for bigcitygal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
More news on the despicable actions by the NL government.

Globe and Mail

Please note continued use of the key words "occupying land" and "escalating conflict". Also, the continued reference to "cabins". These are homes, that people live in. And aren't the winters a little bit chilly in those parts? If this is what the Innu themselves call their homes, then I will retract this, but otherwise it seems like just one more way to diminish right to the land this small community has.

And check out the comments, which are simply charming. Not.

The fascination of most news sources on the words of Armand Mackenzie re the threat to burn the cabins down (which he withdrew, I assume for PR reasons) has been typical. Last time I checked, it was an act of violence to threaten someone to leave their home, and to fine them, charge them with the cost of demolition.

Shameful, not surprising, and typically Canadian.

If I hear of actions that those of us not in that region can do I will post them.

quote:
The notice gives the owners of the cabins 60 days to provide proof of ownership of the land.

I'm sure we're all breathlessly awaiting the proof from the governments that they "own" the land.

Mackenzie withdraws comments


From: It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent - Q | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 10 June 2008 02:57 AM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
From the OP:
quote:
"Anytime anybody squats on land or asserts rights, we as a government have to deal with that," the premier said.

"Squats"? What an asshole.

This is a disgrace.

ETA:
Premier Danny Williams: premier@gov.nl.ca
Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs: laa@gov.nl.ca
Minister of Northern and Indian Affaris, Chuck Strahl: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com

[ 10 June 2008: Message edited by: Catchfire ]


From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 June 2008 03:25 AM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
“The Innu of Quebec have long-standing use of land on both sides of the Quebec-Labrador border as have all the Innu. It is not acceptable for the province to be threatening fines and jail terms if people don’t leave. At the federal level, all Innu have land claims and the historical and scientific proof cannot be ignored just because land claims have not been settled.”

— NDP Leader Lorraine Michael
Premier’s response to Quebec Innu is unacceptable: NDP leader


Edited to add:

Newfoundland Labrador threatens Innu evictions, Indian Law Resource Center

[ 10 June 2008: Message edited by: writer ]


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 10 June 2008 06:10 AM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There is a further nasty dimension to what the NL government is doing.

In remote areas of Canada people squat unmolested all the time, with permannet structures even.

I once had the RCMP visit me on a complaint of who rightfully owned the structure that was my home then. They explicitly were not concerned that I was occupying crown land with no authorization.

If white people were in those structures the NL government- as they no doubt are scattered all over Labrador- the NL government would be paying no attention.


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
KenS
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1174

posted 10 June 2008 08:39 AM      Profile for KenS     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I want to modify what I said there about the norm for unofficial toleration of squatting in remote areas.

Because it is not only the toleration of white people squatting- the same has been true in my experience for First Nations persons occupying crown land in the same areas.

The NL government is singling out these Innu because there is a land claim issue. Which is a pretty extraordinary thing for a modern government to do, even given the dismal track record in Canada.

And on that basis alone, I have to think there has to be a whole lot of leverage for getting the government to back away from the evictions even without going to court.

On the face of what they say they make it sound like letting people stay there becomes some sort of 'fact on the ground' for land claims.

They allege, or suggest, that these people just moved in after the lands claim became an issue. Leaving aside even the likely simple falseness of that claim... recent facts on the ground have nothing to do with whether or not aboriginal title is established. And it is absurd for the NL government to act that way.

Either there is historical evidence for aboriginal title or there is not. Negotiations and/or court cases decide that. There is no such thing as moving in and establishing a claim for aboriginal title. And the absurdity of the suggestion is patently racist.


From: Minasville, NS | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Catchfire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4019

posted 10 June 2008 09:58 AM      Profile for Catchfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It looks like the gov't's strategy is preemptive eviction to avoid a large settlement later when they build the hydro project. And what's worse, is they are making it look like the Innu are the ones acting pre-emptively by sinisterly living on the land they've subsisted on for centuries.
From: On the heather | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 June 2008 11:24 AM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Nunatsiaq News: March 13, 1997

Innu protestors rain on Brian Tobin's parade

quote:
... In an effort to right old wrongs where most of the profits from the Upper Churchill flow to Quebec, Newfoundland will own two-thirds of the new development.

The Churchill River will be dammed at Gull Island, 100 kilometres east of Happy Valley-Goose Bay and a power complex there will generate most of the additional 3,200 megawatts of power.

The existing generating station at Churchill Falls will be expanded when the Saint Jean and Romaine rivers in Quebec are diverted into the Smallwood Reservoir.

A new transmission infrastructure will carry power to markets, likely in the United States.

The price tag for the whole package is $10 billion.

... But none of it is earmarked for compensation, one of the key demands the Innu are setting as a prerequisite for developing the Lower Churchill.

The Innu want compensation for flooding that destroyed their hunting and burial grounds when the Smallwood Reservoir was created in the 1960s.

... Land claims negotiations have been underway since 1990, and they continue, although the province has refused to establish a side table to discuss compensation for developing the Upper Churchill.

Tobin said he wants the Innu at the table but it wasn't feasible to invite them until he and Bouchard agreed to begin formal negotiations.



From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca