Ontario government refuses to pay KI court costs protecting traditional lands
From the LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO Hansard (May 29) during question period
ABORIGINAL RIGHTS
Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora–Rainy River): My question is for the minister responsible for native affairs. Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation has a $650,000 legal bill because it was forced to go to court to defend its constitutional and legal rights against a $10-billion lawsuit by a mining exploration company. The First Nation was forced to go to court to defend its rights because the McGuinty government failed to fulfill its constitutional obligations to consult with the First Nation before handing out mineral exploration permits to the mining company. Since it was the failure of the McGuinty government to fulfill its constitutional obligations and consult with the First Nation about its rights and interests that forced the First Nation to go to court, will the McGuinty government do the right thing and pay the $650,000 legal bill, which rightfully belongs to the McGuinty government?
Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources, minister responsible for aboriginal affairs): Let’s give him the direct answer right off the bat—the answer is no—and then let’s talk about consultation and the attempt of the McGuinty government to engage First Nations of this province in a consultation exercise that we launched over a year ago.
We are working with the Chiefs of Ontario and other native organizations right across the province to get that engagement so that we can have a clear understanding of what our obligation is and what, in a sort of class sense, we’ll be required to do in regard to consultation for each sort of government activity. I have worked with all my fellow ministers and have had them look at their ministries and at what their obligation is for all the activities they engage in, and we’re actively pursuing that discussion with aboriginal people right across this province so that we’ll have a clear-cut set of the consultation guidelines over the next year.
Mr. Hampton: Minister, you might want to read what the judge said about the McGuinty government when he handed down his judgment: “Despite repeated judicial messages delivered over the course of 16 years, the evidentiary record available in this case sadly reveals that the provincial crown”—the McGuinty government—“has not heard or comprehended this message and has failed in fulfilling this obligation.”
“The Ontario government was not present ... and the evidentiary record indicates that it has been almost entirely absent from the consultation process” with Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug.
“The crown (Ontario) ... [has] chosen to ignore ... the concerns and ignore the perspective of the First Nations band in question.”
It’s very clear, when you read the judge’s decision, that the First Nation was forced to go to court to defend its rights because the McGuinty government failed.
This is a poor community. The unemployment rate is 85%. Don’t you think it’s fair that you finally meet your obligation and pay the legal bill instead of foisting it off on a poor—
The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked.
Hon. Mr. Ramsay: Speaker, I refer the question to the Minister of Northern Development and Mines.
Hon. Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): I wish the leader of the third party would quote from the May 22 decision. However, let me tell you that Ontario has consistently presented solutions that are fair and reasonable as a way to keep all parties in this case moving forward to a resolution. Justice Smith has now adopted some of these provisions and timelines in his latest decision.
Our immediate priority isn’t about division, the way the third party’s is. Ours is to meet the timelines for information disclosure and to ensure that both parties move on in a collaborative, constructive manner.