Protocol agreement both celebrated, and rejected

A protocol agreement was signed between the province and an organization representing coastal First Nations on Vancouver Island, and deals with forestry, tourism and clean energy concerns. But while some leaders are applauding the agreement, one chief is considering legal action against British Columbia for its lack of consultation in the negotiation process.

Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation Minister Mary Polak, and Pat Bell, minister of Jobs, Tourism and Innovation, joined members of the Nanwakolas First Nations Nov. 28 to announce three significant milestones in the growing relationship with the Nanwakolas Council Society: a reconciliation protocol, a forestry agreement and an addition to the Strategic Engagement Agreement.
The province said it plans to work closely with First Nations regarding non-treaty agreements.

“In the BC Jobs Plan, we committed to 10 new non-treaty agreements by 2015,” said Polak. “These are the type of agreements we need more of –ones that build strong, workable partnerships with First Nations,” she stated.

“Strategic engagement agreements and reconciliation protocols create economic certainty, increase investor confidence and unleash major economic benefits in First Nations communities. They are already creating an environment in the region, in which B.C. and Nanwakolas are working together achieving mutual goals, while continuing to build trust,” Polak concluded.

The new protocol agreement will discuss revenue-sharing opportunities for tourism, mines and clean-power projects that may be developed.

The Nanwakolas Council Society is a group of eight Kwakwaka’wakw First Nations on northern Vancouver Island and the mid-coast, which have worked collaboratively on land and marine resource use, management and planning issues and responses to provincial government resource development referrals.
The five nations to sign the reconciliation protocol are: Tlowitsis, Mamalilikulla-Qwe’Qwa’Sot’Em, Da’naxda’xw Awaetlala, Gwa’sala-‘Nakwaxda’xw and K’omoks First Nations.

The Nanwakolas Council, on behalf of the five signatory First Nations, received $250,000 on signing the protocol and receives two separate sums of $200,000 per year, in the second and third year of the agreement, upon achieving progress in implementing this protocol.

Bob Chamberlin, chief of the Kwikwasut’inuxw Haxwa’mis First Nation of Gilford Island, said he opposes the agreement, however, citing lack of consultation by the government and an ongoing land claim debate with one partner First Nation within the Nanwakolas Society.

“The Kwikwasut’inuxw Haxwa’mis First Nation completely reject the components of the agreement signed by the Nanwakolas Council Society and the provincial government on Nov. 28, 2011 as it relates to our First Nation’s traditional territories,” Chamberlin said in a statement.

“It is completely offensive and with utter disregard for the hereditary leadership and elected council of the Kwikwasut’inuxw Haxwa’mis First Nation of the Musgamagw-Tsawataineuk peoples that members of the Nanwakolas Council Society assert authority from urban settings while our First Nations reside in the home village (Gwa-yas-dums) on Gilford Island,” he stated.

”The remarks in The Province newspaper [which wrote about the Nanwakolas agreement] that state the Nanwakolas Council Society have ... put aside arguments between First Nations about overlapping claims.... Couldn’t be further from the truth,” he added.

Chamberlin said there has been an ongoing battle regarding land use and resources between his band and the Mamalilikulla-Qwe’Qwa’Sot’Em. He claims that the Mamalilikulla-Qwe’Qwa’Sot’Em have continuously expressed ownership over the rights and title of resources in and around the Gilford Island territory.

Chamberlin says that in the late 19th century the members of the Mamalilikulla-Qwe’Qwa’Sot’Em relocated their community from Gilford and now primarily reside in urban settings, particularly in Campbell River, B.C. Chamberlin insists that they are now attempting to assert their control over Gilford Island.

The Kwikwasut’inuxw Haxwa’mis First Nation “is exploring all avenues of protecting our title, rights and interests, either through the courts or in direct action in our traditional territories,” said Chamberlin. “We will no longer accept the provincial government’s approach of pretending to acknowledge our title and rights while running roughshod over them in the very next breath,” he stated.

“We will be convening a meeting with our hereditary leadership to discuss ways and means to address the false and self-serving assertions by certain members of the Nanwakolas Council Society,” stated Chamberlin. “We fully expect Premier Christy Clark and Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation Minister Mary Polak to meet with us and ensure the proper titleholders are given the respect they deserve,” he said.

Attempts to contact Chief Harold Sewid of the Mamalilikulla Qwe’Qwa’Sot’em First Nation were unsuccessful by press time.

But the province maintains that the new partnership on Vancouver Island and the mid-coast will strengthen the relationship between First Nations and the provincial government and create economic opportunities.

First Nation supporters say they are confident that the Nanwakolas deal will be successful.

“This protocol is an opportunity for lasting and comprehensive reconciliation between the Nanwakolas First Nations and British Columbia that will help the First Nations achieve progress toward their social and economic goals,” said Assembly of First Nations National Chief, Shawn Atleo. He said the protocol “will help provide increased certainty for business and a stronger economic base, with economic and employment benefits for the Nanwakolas First Nations and neighbouring communities.”

“People and businesses in our communities are able to better pursue economic opportunities; and companies who want to do business in our traditional territory will have clear expectations and certainty,” said Dallas Smith, president of the Nanwakolas Society.

“We definitely feel it’s fair. Is it the end? No,” Smith added. “But we’ve raised the existing floor [and] we are taking incremental steps toward the issues at the treaty table.”

Smith said he has more faith in this agreement framework than the current BC treaty process.

“I don’t envision the existing treaty process delivering the resources that this agreement could,” he said.

Asked about Chamberlin’s opposition to the agreement, Smith assured that the Nanwakolas Society is not about to steal resources from his territory.

“In no way are we taking anything away from Bob [Chamberlin] or his nation,” said Smith.

“It’s unfortunate that he has that concern,” he added.
Smith said it is also ironic that Chamberlin would be opposing the agreement since he dropped out of discussions with the Nanwakolas Society in 2008.

“We removed ourselves from the discussions because they simply had no resources for our nation to do land-use planning,” Chamberlin explained.

He maintains that he has no personal dispute with the Nanwakolas Society explaining that he takes “issue with the game and not the players.”

For now Chamberlin said his band is considering legal action against British Columbia for its lack of consultation with his band regarding the initiative. Chamberlin said he will remain vigilant in his opposition to the agreement.

“We are not going to give up our land,” he promised. The government has made mountains of money and we have not benefited,” he said.