The following letter was sent to the MNBC by Mark Carlson, Kootenay Regional Captain and Chair, BCMANR Captains Assembly
Hello all, after the weekend BCMANR had a conference call Tuesday evening May 15th/2012 to fill in the Captains that were not allowed at the Enbridge meeting on what went on. In attendance: Mark Carlson (Chair, Kootenay Captain), Rob Humpherville (Vancouver Island Captain), Gary Biggar (Lower Mainland Captain), Marlene Beattie (Okanagan Captain), Rene Lucier (North West Capt), Kim Hodgson (Previous Minister & Consultation Project Team member), Bruce Dumont (President MNBC).
This letter is to inform all the Presidents of MNBC of BCMANR’s total lack of support for the Enbridge Deal being signed by our President Bruce Dumont. While we do not think the deal is a very good one that is not the main reason for our concern. Our Consultation Guideline Policy was approved by the Board of Directors on Feb. 25th 2009 at 18:56 pm. BCMANR has had little to no involvement (not invited to MNGA, late invite to Enbridge meeting). MNBC has not followed our own Policies. The Métis Consultation Project Team did not even come close to fulfilling their mandate. Why was this process bypassed, essentially by-passing BCMANR and the Métis Chartered Communities directly impacted? The MTK interviews that have been done but have not been processed and a proper Traditional Land-Use Study Report have not been completed, we do not even know the impacts on our rights, yet we are supporting and signing documents? The Board and the MNBC staff are hiding behind the guise that this is not a consultation deal but instead a commercial venture, if that is the case why isn’t Enbridge doing these types of deals with other non-aboriginal groups or organizations? Because, it has a responsibility to deal with aboriginal peoples due to the Taku/Haida Guaii and Mikesew Cree SCC decisions around the Duty to Consult and ACCOMMODATE. This is a smoke and screen tactic to chase money and by-pass the laws that the Métis people in BC empowered via the MNBC Natural Resource Act Article 11. The Northern Gateway Pipeline is a major project that will affect multiple Regions and Communities and our own Consultation Guidelines are quite clear on who can approve them. Here is an excerpt that applies to this situation:
- 188.8.131.52 Métis Nation Governing Assembly The Métis Nation Governing Assembly (MNGA) can be used for approval authority on medium to largescale projects that affect multiple MNBC regions and/or Métis Chartered Communities. In addition, high profile projects that have multiple potential impacts with long-term implications will also fall to this level of approval authority. This institution consists of the MNBC Board of Directors and all MNBC Métis Chartered Community Presidents or Vice- Presidents (if the President cannot attend). Seventy-five percent of this body must vote in favour to approve any document that is presented. The approval will be recorded as an official motion and documented in the MNGA minutes.
- 184.108.40.206 MNBC Annual General Meeting The MNBC Annual General Meeting can be used for approval authority on large-scale projects that affect multiple MNBC regions and/or Métis Chartered Communities. In addition, high profile projects that have multiple potential impacts with long-term implications will also fall to this level of approval authority. This is the highest and most complex level of approval authority that MNBC can implement. This institution consists of the MNBC Board of Directors, two Métis Community delegates from each of the MNBC Métis Chartered Communities and any other Métis citizens that choose to attend the event. Usually there are over 500 Métis citizens in attendance of this annual event. The approval (50% +1) will be recorded as an official motion and documented in the MNBC Annual General Meeting minutes.
President Dumont informed BCMANR on our conference call that he didn’t feel there was a need for a vote of the MNGA on this as it was a commercial venture and will be proceeding on his own with just the direction he received at the Enbridge meeting. Another note, where were the Métis experts that were requested at the 2011 AGM, it was a one sided presentation. MNA had a review done by Métis lawyer Jason Madden who claimed that the deal was a “toothless tiger”. BCMANR will always be open to meaningful consultation and will engage with Enbridge or any other proponents if we are called to deal with as long as it is done according to our laws and guidelines. However, in BCMANR’s opinion, President Dumont and this agreement have been done illegally according to the laws of the MNBC. The decision should be brought forward by the MCPT and presented to the MNGA or AGM, which is the law.
Kootenay Regional Captain,
Chair, BCMANR Captains Assembly